Teaching about the Civil War

[Tanker]

KenH,

A few comments about size of government. It seems to me that you would have to agree that some government is necessary, the only question is how much. The attacks on New York should convince anyone, if previous history has not, that a strong central government is necessary and a strong military is necessary. These are not cheap and therefore taxation at about the present rate is necessary in order to remain strong. This provides security that helps everyone maintain a very high standard of living compared to the rest of the world. It won't help to have a low tax rate as suggested by Libertarians, if one's property and home is not secure from bandits or the Saddaam Husseins of this world. I vote for a strong security system even if it means high taxes.

Besides, as a practical matter, Libertarian ideas are not selling in the market place. The party has been around a long time and still has elected hardly anyone to state or national office. The vast bulk of the population wants taxes and the size of government to stay much as it is, or they would be voting for Libertarians. Libertarians are ignored - that should tell you something.

 

[LadyEagle]

Originally posted by KenH:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tanker:
I agree with you that the war started because the Federal government did not want to allow the Confederacy to go out of the union.

Thank you for finally admitting to the truth. I feel I have finally achieved something with all of these debates.

</font>[/QUOTE]Methinks I hear the Hallelujah Chorus! LOL!

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Tanker:
It seems to me that you would have to agree that some government is necessary, the only question is how much.

Wow! We agree on something again.

And we agree on spending on national defense as it is one of the few constitutional functions delegated to the federal government.

But I am opposed to foreign adventurism.

By the way, I don't pick my views based on whether they are popular or not. I pick them because I believe they are truly the best for people generally.

By the way, libertarian philosophy(as differentiated from the Libertarian Party which was started about 1972) was the philosophy of many of our Founding Fathers, such as Thomas Jefferson.

 

[Frogman]

It is interesting the title of this thread is "Teaching about the Civil War". Much of what is taught is painted and especially in our time of political correctedness.

The truth is the Civil War erupted because the Federal Government was overstepping its bounds and prohibiting the right of new territories to determine their direction. Was slavery a portion of this? Yes, I think so. However, a study of economic conditions will reveal that slavery would have been proven an unsound practice. It is nearly comparable to the nation of Texas which ultimately joined the union of states.

To think slavery would still be practiced today if not for the bloodshed is astounding.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Tanker]

&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;However, a study of economic conditions will reveal that slavery would have been proven an unsound practice. &lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;

That may or may not be true, I think it is obvious that it was sound enough to last 200 years and then it did not end because it was economically unsound. But whether that is true or not, the southern slave holders thought it was not true and acted on the basis that it was sound economic practices, so it makes little difference that possibly it might ultimately have gone extinct due to economics. I think it is correct that the number of slaves in 1860 was the largest number ever in American history, so if the practice was not profitable, one has to wonder why it was increasing. I think you would have a stronger case if you could show that the number of slaves was decreasing from 1840 to 1860. In spite of the often repeated claims that slavery would have died out, the people who repeat such claims never provide any numeric data to support their claim.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Tanker:
1) I think it is correct that the number of slaves in 1860 was the largest number ever in American history

2)the people who repeat such claims never provide any numeric data to support their claim.

1) Well, yes. Have you ever been taught about the birds and the bees?

2) See answer 1) above. Also, since the Yankees intervened it is kinda difficult to give numeric data. Slavery would have gone bye-bye due to economics, not due to nature. The strongest evidence is that just about everywhere else slavery ended without violence being used by the government against slave owners.

 

[Tanker]

Dr. Bob writes:
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;I have simply quit beating my head against a wall against an abolitionist that defies logic and redefines truth.&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;

It seems that you have abandoned the field without providing any support for your original claims. For instance, when you say that the south was motivated not by slavery but by States Rights, you could provide some quotes from the southern leadership to support your position. I have done so to support my position, and it has gone unrefuted.

When you say that there were thousands of black soldiers who fought for the south and if that is a fact, then it should be possible to support it with solid data. You have not done so. I have posted an article by a historian which directly contradicts your claim.

Of course you could simply admit that you were mistaken about both of these important topics. What do you do? You simply resort to name calling *yankeescum* or to attacks on the character of Abraham Lincoln. These are so obviously low and disreputable tactics, that I found it hard to believe that they are coming from a Baptist Pastor who thinks of himself as a scholar. You only hurt your own reputation by behaving this way.

 

[Dr. Bob]

(Tanker - Contrasted to the efforts of the Union in recruiting and supplying freed negroes for actual combat duty, the efforts of the CSA were too little, too late, grasping at straws. Old prejudices die hard, and arming a black is most certainly a sign of emancipation.)

An estimated 40,000 blacks served the CSA in military function, but these were NOT as armed soldiers, but basically doing manual (slave) labor. But arming freed negroes or "dedicated" (by their masters) slaves to fight for the CSA?

In December 1864, General Ewell asked for 15,000 black soldiers to serve in the trenches of Richmond and Petersburg, allowing 15,000 white soldiers to be used elsewhere in direct battle with the Federals.

After great debate, it was not until March 1865 that a bill was passed to allow arming negroes for combat service in the CSA. Two regiments [a regiment had 1000 negroes with 120 white line and field officers] were raised in Richmond alone, with other recruitment efforts spread across the dwindling Confederacy.

South Carolina vowed to withdraw from the war if a single negroe was armed and serving in the military.

The first "action" seen by Company A and Company B was at Libby Prison as guards and musicians, and in Capitol Square for recruitment purposes.

When congress adjourned on March 18, 1865, they had failed to enact any effective measure for mobilization or financing of the negroes being enlisted outside of Richmond to serve in the CSA army and doomed any efforts to failure.

A Southern History, Edward Pollard, 1866

 

[Frogman]

I think you would have a stronger case if you could show that the number of slaves was decreasing from 1840 to 1860. In spite of the often repeated claims that slavery would have died out, the people who repeat such claims never provide any numeric data to support their claim.

Ok.

This was a slave state too. [and still is].

Dallas

 

[Tanker]

&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;After great debate, it was not until March 1865 that a bill was passed to allow arming negroes for combat service in the CSA. Two regiments [a regiment had 1000 negroes with 120 white line and field officers] were raised in Richmond alone, with other recruitment efforts spread across the dwindling Confederacy.&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;

And I suppose you know that in March, 1865, the confederacy was only a few short weeks away from total collapse. So the attempt to recruit blacks in March, 1865 was simply a frantic effort to stave off the collapse.