Most Evil Person in American History

[OldRegular]

Now the number is 10 million ?

Apparently Van does not realize the Americas includes North and South America and all the islands in the Caribbean!

Again Van, the only mention in the short article about slavery in the United States is THIS:

Slaves in the United States saw many reasons to rise up, and they did so on several memorable occasions. What is remarkable about slavery in the United States, however, is that slave revolts were relatively rare and never successful. That fact has engendered considerable debate among historians, and it has led (or misled) some scholars to talk of a "Sambo" slave personality-the stereotypical, happy-go-lucky slave. Simply put, the Sambo theory maintains that slaves were "infantilized" by systematic oppression and selective brutality and that, more often than not, they were psychological accomplices in their own subjugation. In recent years this theory has prompted sharp dissents from scholars who argue that slaves fought back in myriad subtle ways. "Slave resistance included carelessness, feigned stupidity, insolence, satire, deliberate evasion and refusal to work," says historian David Barry Gaspar of Duke University. "Slaves handled some of these forms with such finesse that whites tended to accept them as part of the black stereotype. "

 

[OldRegular]

Folks, slavery caused the civil war, with the north trying to end it, and the south trying to preserve it. But slavery was like the holocaust, with its deniers. Those of the south to this day are unwilling to man up and plead guilty to trying to preserve slavery, which is to say beatings, abuse, rape, castration, and murder. Where it was against the law to teach slaves to read, so they were prevented from reading the bible.

How many slaves were captive in the Seceding states? About 3 million. Had they been beaten. Yes, but do we know all 3 million had been beaten? No. But it is likely that a great many had been beaten, and left with scared backs.

How many had been chained? All who were first generation slaves brought in ships. Do we know that all had been chained? No, but it is likely that a great many had been chained.

Do we know all the teenage girls were abused? No, but it is likely a great many were sexually abused and raped.

Today we have some people who deny that the Holocaust, that 6 million Jews were beaten, chained, abused, and murdered. They would say how many Jews were chained? Today we have some people who deny that Abortion murders millions of children. They say abortion is simply a form of women's health care.

The deniers of the south pick and pick at details, no evidence, your numbers are questionable, and on and on, as they run from the monstrosity of slavery imposed by southerns on 3 million slaves. The north wanted to end it, just as today, Christians want to end abortion as a form of birth control.

Van, you are simply in denial as the head doctors would say. You have lost the debate and continue to spin your wheels. I would also note that all the deniers are not in the South!

 

[OldRegular]

The economics of slavery was probably the primary driving point that led to the civil war. Other issues, such as states rights, whether new states would be slave states or free states. The Kansas-Nebraska Act inflamed many. Of note, Lincoln spoke against this bill and thus is on record as opposing slavery. The Dred Scott case also increased tensions between pro-slavery and anti-slavery folk.

Slavery ... the slave economy was the driving force leading to the War Between the States.

First, the "slave economy" was a failure. Second, as someone has already noted, only ~6% of the people in the South owned slaves. Third, the South was being shafted by the Yankees in tariffs. Fourth, the Yankees continued to shaft the South, black and white, for the next 100 years. Fifth, the South is being invaded again; caused by Mr. carrier! Sixth, you are as far off the mark as Van!

 

[Crabtownboy]

First, the "slave economy" was a failure. Second, as someone has already noted, only ~6% of the people in the South owned slaves. Third, the South was being shafted by the Yankees in tariffs. Fourth, the Yankees continued to shaft the South, black and white, for the next 100 years. Fifth, the South is being invaded again; caused by Mr. carrier! Sixth, you are as far off the mark as Van!

I believe you are incorrect in your comment on the slave economy. I do not have time to follow this with research, but will tomorrow. However here is a beginning on the success of the slave economy:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0131_030203_jubilee2_2.html

If it was a failure then you are in essence saying the 6% were stupid to have slaves and even more stupid to push for more slave states. Not logical my friend.

 

[Salty]

I think that Crabby has much more insight that Van does.

 

[Van]

Thanks Salty for the gratuitous insult.

Slavery was the cause of the civil war.

Old R, the deniers challenged that 3 million slaves in the south had been chained. I demonstrated that over 10 million slaves had been brought to America (the New World) in chains, thus many of the first generation slaves in the south had been brought in chains. For you to claim you could not comprehend me, and therefore mistakenly misrepresented my argument is simply another shuck and jive, as you run from the evidence in abundance, and shout, I won, I won, whoopee.

CTB, thanks for demonstrating your integrity.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Hi Thisnumbersdisconnected,

Hi, Van. :wavey:

1) You do not know what I have read and what I have skipped. For you to claim you are a mind reader is typical of twaddlers.

I don't know what you've read primarily because you refuse to post links to your sources.

2) You have not provided any proofs that slavery was not the cause of the civil war.

That's laughable.

Some have selectively quoted Lincoln, but I provided the quotes that demonstrate Lincoln opposed slavery.

You are the one who has selectively quoted. You posted a partial quote from Lincoln which stated he opposed slavery, but you deliberately left out the next sentence from the same speech which said he would do whatever he could to preserve the Union, including leaving slavery alone, and you never managed to refute the quote I posted, and another by OR, showing Lincoln to believe the black man is inferior to the white.

3) Lots of people on both sides decided to go to War. Were they all in agreement as to the reason for war? Nope. But the primary cause was slavery, as shown in their statements of secession.

I posted Georgia's Declaration of Secession which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that slavery was not their primary concern, and you haven't been able to show otherwise.

They wanted to continue slavery and those in the North who elected Lincoln wanted to prevent its spread.

That's your interpretation, accurate within its confines, but not accurate to the extend of being the only reason, as you want to claim. You are wrong.

4) It is not an exaggeration to say Slavery was like the Holocaust, with millions of a particular race (black Africans) being put in the holds of ships, like Jews in box cars, and up to 50% dying before they ever enjoyed the kindness of their eventual slave masters.

From that aspect of the slave trade, I agree. But that isn't the segment of the slave trade you cited. You tried to show that there were 10 million slaves -- there weren't -- and that millions died in their slavery on the Southern plantations -- a lie.

5) And more "the north is just as bad" baloney.

You need to grow up and study all of history. Ever hear the term "waving the bloody shirt"? I suggest you swallow that pride and hubris in order to become teachable.

The South seceded, the south fired on Fort Sumter, and the south kept 3 million slaves. The issue is not that both sides were made up of wretched sinners. The issue is the cause of the civil war, with its hundreds of thousands of American's killed.

Your steadfast refusal to see the North as culpable, and that attitude as having stemmed from the earliest stirrings of socialism in this country, doesn't change that reality. You yammer, yammer, yammer about "the South seceded ... fired on Ft. Sumter ... 3 million slaves" but won't look beyond your nose at the rest of the truth.

6) Yes, my view is that all slave owners (including Washington and Jefferson) were evil, heartless and cruel.

All men are evil. That's the natural man. But if you think all were "heartless and cruel" you are being willfully ignorant.

7) One of us does need to learn the facts.

"When Douglass was hired out to William Freeland, he taught other slaves on the plantation to read the New Testament at a weekly Sunday school. As word spread, the interest among slaves in learning to read was so great that in any week, more than 40 slaves would attend lessons.

n 1833, Thomas Auld took Douglass back from Hugh after a dispute ("[a]s a means of punishing Hugh," Douglass wrote). Dissatisfied with Douglass, Thomas Auld sent him to work for Edward Covey, a poor farmer who had a reputation as a "slave-breaker." He whipped Douglass regularly. The sixteen-year-old Douglass was nearly broken psychologically by his ordeal under Covey, but he finally rebelled against the beatings and fought back."​

And ... ? That disproves nothing I've said, but it does disprove your contention about illiteracy.

I truthfully don't know why I bother with someone who wants to hold to his ignorant prejudices. So I won't. Continue in them, brother, and God bless you.

 

[OldRegular]

I believe you are incorrect in your comment on the slave economy. I do not have time to follow this with research, but will tomorrow. However here is a beginning on the success of the slave economy:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0131_030203_jubilee2_2.html

If it was a failure then you are in essence saying the 6% were stupid to have slaves and even more stupid to push for more slave states. Not logical my friend.

I have no problem at all saying that slavery is stupid! Do you?

Just as I say those who support the slaughter of the unborn are stupid and worse.

 

[Revmitchell]

I have no problem at all saying that slavery is stupid! Do you?

Just as I say those who support the slaughter of the unborn are stupid and worse.

And the organizations that do it.

 

[OldRegular]

Thanks Salty for the gratuitous insult.

Slavery was the cause of the civil war.

Old R, the deniers challenged that 3 million slaves in the south had been chained. I demonstrated that over 10 million slaves had been brought to America (the New World) in chains, thus many of the first generation slaves in the south had been brought in chains. For you to claim you could not comprehend me, and therefore mistakenly misrepresented my argument is simply another shuck and jive, as you run from the evidence in abundance, and shout, I won, I won, whoopee.

CTB, thanks for demonstrating your integrity.

I never said I could not comprehend you. You simply parrot the same nonsense. I used facts from a link you posted to show that your claim regarding slavery in the South:

Here it is folks, those that deny slavery caused the civil war deny that 3 million slaves were beaten, chained, sexually abused, castrated, and murdered. How many slaves were brought to the New World in chains. Answer all of them. Was the number transported, 3 million, 9 million or more. How many died in Africa, in transport, in "slave forts" waiting to be sold, and under the kind care of the southern slave masters. More than 3 million.

The monstrosity of slavery caused the civil war.

Was totally false!

You did not get that garbage you have been posting from this: http://www.ops.org/high/burke/Portals/0/STAFF_FOLDERS/T_McNair_Abbey/Slavery.pdf

The only mention in the short article about slavery in the United States is THIS:

Slaves in the United States saw many reasons to rise up, and they did so on several memorable occasions. What is remarkable about slavery in the United States, however, is that slave revolts were relatively rare and never successful. That fact has engendered considerable debate among historians, and it has led (or misled) some scholars to talk of a "Sambo" slave personality-the stereotypical, happy-go-lucky slave. Simply put, the Sambo theory maintains that slaves were "infantilized" by systematic oppression and selective brutality and that, more often than not, they were psychological accomplices in their own subjugation. In recent years this theory has prompted sharp dissents from scholars who argue that slaves fought back in myriad subtle ways. "Slave resistance included carelessness, feigned stupidity, insolence, satire, deliberate evasion and refusal to work," says historian David Barry Gaspar of Duke University. "Slaves handled some of these forms with such finesse that whites tended to accept them as part of the black stereotype."

 

[Salty]

Hi, Van. :wavey:
I don't know what you've read primarily because you refuse to post links to your sources..

and as you said - he only selectvely chose the quotes to use.

I truthfully don't know why I bother with someone who wants to hold to his ignorant prejudices. So I won't. Continue in them, brother, and God bless you.

Well, TND -some folks just get confused when confronted with the facts

Thing is, I pertty much believed the way Van did, until I learned the entire story of the War of the Northern Agression. You see I grew up in the North and only heard one side - the side of the victors.

and like you, I will be going to other threads. do you have a good one in mind

 

[Van]

Folks, slavery was the cause of the civil war. Those who deny this fact offer nothing but shuck and jive.

Is it contested that the south seceded? Nope

Is it contested that the south seceded over the issue of preserving slavery? Nope.

What about the claim the issue was not slavery in the Georgia statement? " For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery." The deniers simply post blatant falsehoods.

What about primary concern? Weasel words. As I said, other issues were often raised, but the underlying issue is slavery. States Rights revolves around the right of states to continue slavery. Economy, its the slave economy at issue. On and on folks, shuck and jive to avoid the obvious truth, slavery caused the civil war.

Did I try to show there were 10 million slaves brought out of Africa in chains. Yes. Was any evidence shown that 10 million slaves were not brought out of Africa? No. The denier argument is a farce.

Was the north culpable? They wanted to end slavery. They wanted to preserve the Union as a non-slave state union. But the north did not secede and the north did not fire on Fort Sumter. Therefore the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans can be laid at the feet of the southern leaders who took us into war over slavery.

At the end of the day, all they have is shuck and jive. I have walked the fields of Gettysburg. I have visited the tomb of the Unknown soldier.

These deniers seem to have no idea what kind of man would castrate another. The slave owners were obscene butchers, rapists, and killers.
And the south wanted to continue the holocaust like monstrosity.

American history has many black marks, like Wounded Knee and the Jap Concentration Camps. Sitting on the kitchen counter in a home in California is a vase with paper flowers. It is colorful and pretty. It was made by elderly ladies at a church I attended occasionally. The rest of the story is that those elderly ladies leaned to make those paper flowers while in a concentration camp in California. But the treatment they received was nothing like the slave ships and slave forts, and slave auctions of the antebellum south. That dear friends is second darkest stain of all, after abortion.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

and as you said - he only selectvely chose the quotes to use.

Well, TND -some folks just get confused when confronted with the facts

Thing is, I pertty much believed the way Van did, until I learned the entire story of the War of the Northern Agression. You see I grew up in the North and only heard one side - the side of the victors.

and like you, I will be going to other threads. do you have a good one in mind

Thanks for the kind words, Salty, and right now I don't have a good thread in mind for this segment of the forum, but I'm thinking of looking at the Vietnam War. Scary thought, huh?

 

[Van]

I have listened to the "slavery was not the issue" arguments since childhood. Slavery was the issue, not the only issue but the primary issue.

1) The south had said it would secede if Lincoln was elected and he was.
2) In a master stroke of triangulation, Lincoln promised to preserve the Union. This was code for ending slavery.
3) The south attacked Fort Sumter, branding the south as the aggressors.

More than 200,000 young men died to continue slavery. What a waste. The leaders of this blood bath are among the most
evil leaders in American history.

 

[ktn4eg]

An interesting side note to this discussion is the fact that President Franklin Pierce (p. 1854 - 1857) received a cost-cutting recommendation from his Secretary of War that all of the U.S. Army's coastal forts be handed over to the state militia of whatever state that fort happened to be located.

Had such a recommendation been approved, South Carolina's Fort Sumter would not have been a federally manned fort; instead it would have been under the control of the South Carolina militia.

Who was President Pierce's Secretary of War?

Jefferson Davis! :smilewinkgrin:

 

[OldRegular]

Folks, slavery was the cause of the civil war. Those who deny this fact offer nothing but shuck and jive.

You are the one shucking and jiving on this thread. You have offered no real discussion only repeated your mantra:

Originally Posted by Van
Here it is folks, those that deny slavery caused the civil war deny that 3 million slaves were beaten, chained, sexually abused, castrated, and murdered. How many slaves were brought to the New World in chains. Answer all of them. Was the number transported, 3 million, 9 million or more. How many died in Africa, in transport, in "slave forts" waiting to be sold, and under the kind care of the southern slave masters. More than 3 million.

It is an outright lie. to claim that "3 million slaves were beaten, chained, sexually abused, castrated, and murdered."

Is it contested that the south seceded? Nope

Yes and they had the right to secede but Lincoln on his own decided they did not and invaded the South. Your current president claims to be Lincolnesque. Now I know why!

Is it contested that the south seceded over the issue of preserving slavery? Nope.

Yes, and Van, you are like a child having a temper tantrum!

What about the claim the issue was not slavery in the Georgia statement? " For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery." The deniers simply post blatant falsehoods.

We posted historical fact!

What about primary concern? Weasel words. As I said, other issues were often raised, but the underlying issue is slavery. States Rights revolves around the right of states to continue slavery. Economy, its the slave economy at issue. On and on folks, shuck and jive to avoid the obvious truth, slavery caused the civil war.

States rights revolved around the Constitution.

Did I try to show there were 10 million slaves brought out of Africa in chains. Yes. Was any evidence shown that 10 million slaves were not brought out of Africa? No. The denier argument is a farce.

No one denied that slaves were brought from Africa but the fact is that most went elsewhere in this hemisphere!

Was the north culpable?

Yes

They wanted to end slavery. They wanted to preserve the Union as a non-slave state union. But the north did not secede and the north did not fire on Fort Sumter. Therefore the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans can be laid at the feet of the southern leaders who took us into war over slavery.

That is bull! Lincoln wanted to preserve the Union. The first race riots were in New York protesting the draft!

At the end of the day, all they have is shuck and jive.

:sleep:

I have walked the fields of Gettysburg. I have visited the tomb of the Unknown soldier.

What in the world does your walking have to do with anything? I walked the decks of a ship. That doesn't make me John Paul Jones.

These deniers seem to have no idea what kind of man would castrate another.

And you do?:tear: T

he slave owners were obscene butchers, rapists, and killers.

I suppose in another life you witnessed all this!:smilewinkgrin:

And the south wanted to continue the holocaust like monstrosity.

White eyes speak with forked tongue!

American history has many black marks, like Wounded Knee and the Jap Concentration Camps.

Jap is now considered a racist remark!

Sitting on the kitchen counter in a home in California is a vase with paper flowers. It is colorful and pretty. It was made by elderly ladies at a church I attended occasionally. The rest of the story is that those elderly ladies leaned to make those paper flowers while in a concentration camp in California.

:tear:

But the treatment they received was nothing like the slave ships and slave forts, and slave auctions of the antebellum south. That dear friends is second darkest stain of all, after abortion.

The slave ships were Yankee. Slave forts? What are those? There were slave auctions!

Now post your mantra one more time Van!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Now post your mantra one more time Van!

PLEASE!! He posts that ninnyhammer nonsense often enough without encouragement.

:BangHead:

 

[OldRegular]

PLEASE!! He posts that ninnyhammer nonsense often enough without encouragement.

:BangHead:

I am making it my mission in the time I have left to help folks like Van!:tonofbricks:

 

[Van]

Folks, the nonsense continues unabated. Slavery caused the civil war, and nothing has been offered to contradict that conclusion. Other reasons have been cited, i.e. states rights or economics, but these disputes arose from the desire to preserve slavery and the slave labor economy.

Falsehoods presented by the deniers that slavery caused the civil war:
1) Lincoln did not want to end slavery. He did and several quotes demonstrated this fact.

2) The South secession statements did not indicate the primary cause of secession was over preserving slavery. They did and several quotes demonstrated this fact.

3) The south did not start the hostilities by firing on Fort Sumter. They did and several quotes documented they did on April 12, 1861.

So having nothing to offer, we get "ninny-hammer", "white eyes speak with forked tongue", "temper tantrum" and other efforts to insult and disparage. ROFLOL

 

[agedman]

The actual "start" of hostilities was when John Brown (a Union man) took the supply depot at Harper's Ferry.

It was the Union that started the conflicts by raising armed conflict to the Southern state's rights.

It was the Union that refused to release Fort Sumter and reinforced it rather than surrender it to the sovereign and separated government of South Carolina. The Confederate South Carolina had legal right to the fort, and the Union folks were typical stupid Yankee belligerent and defiant.

It was the Union that attacked the South and spent the vast majority fighting in the South.

It was the Union who started the war. All claims to the contrary are merely stupid Yankee belligerence and modification of the true history by liberal Yankee sympathizers.

The Union could easily have allowed the South to secede, withdraw their troops, and leave the South alone.

But no, they had to invade the sovereign confederate state of Virginia, over and over. They had to run up Look out Mountain, and scurry down the Mississippi to Vicksburg.

Who in Chattanooga hurt the Union first.

What Southern gentleman in Vicksburg would rather not have had the Union show up.

The North was ALWAYS the aggressors until Lee took the battle to the Yankee fields of Pennsylvania. Even then He had enough Southern Hospitality to keep the battle in the fields and hills.

He had enough character to realize he should have stayed home.

But not the Yankee's.

Sherman - That ugly Yankee took the battle to defenseless Godly women and children of the South for the sole purpose to demoralize them. But, all he did was light the fire of bitterness that the carpetbagging Yankee feed the flames with the support and approval of Yankee heathens that still are trying to this day to push wrong down the throats of tender Southern lasses.

The South was defending itself from the aggression by the blue bellied Yankee, and had the South been forward looking, it would never have joined the union in the first place.

Bunch of hot headed Yankees started the Revolutionary war, and the 1812 war, and the Southern gentlemen had to rescue them both times.

But leave it up to the sorry Yankee to demand the Southerners conform to their thinking.

Of course, the Yankee has such a long history of doing right, and holding the Yankee presidents accountable. NOT!

Look at the history of the US.

From the beginning, nearly every time the US has thrived it has been under the leadership of good Godly Southern gentlemen. The most corrupt leadership of the US has always been and includes to this day the Yankees.

From the beginning, nearly every major evil has fomented with the Yankee. The most viscous, ungodly, perverted have been Yankees.

Why if it weren't for the quality and high principled Southerner, God would have allowed the Yankees to be speaking French.