- Jan 9, 2004
- 32,648
- 1,608
- 68
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Higgaion said:Well, no. That is a rather discredited idea, as the races generally enjoyed pretty good relations in the South, while in the North blacks were looked down upon every bit as much, if not more so. This included many Abolitionists, who were for freeing the slaves not so much out of Christian/humanitarian principle, but because they had an interest in economically crippling the South. The whole thing is more complex than most textbooks issued in government run public schools would have you believe. I therefore refer you to Tom DiLorenzos book The Real Lincoln or even better, R.L. Dabneys A Defense of Virginia, which I believe can be purchased for a nominal price from Reformation Heritage books.
I have no objections to their being free, but to the way it was accomplished, and to the idea that it was the principal reason for the South's secession and the North's motivation for prosecuting the War. [/font][/color]
You are kidding correct, a good relationship, please do explain to poor little misinformed, misdirected me what is so good about a slave and master relationship?
I agree that in both the North and South Africans were looked down on, but it was in the South that we as people were owned, some northern states had slavery early on but that was abolished long before the civil war.
Without a doubt it was tied to economics and the issue of slavery was secondary to the North however that does not jusitfy or validate owning slaves.
I can see where you are coming from now though with your reference "I have no objections to their being free, but to the way it was accomplished
They, them, those people, those pronouns when used usually is not a good thing. I am glad you have no objection to our freedom, and how that was accomplished is irrelavent to me.
Upvote
0