Jump to content

160 years ago, the Civil War got under way

Recommended Posts

Technically it was on April 12, but I forgot I was going to post something about it and I've been working 2 jobs for the last couple months


In substitution of making a post of my own about the lost cause, I will post a series of videos that makes my own point better than I ever could, and I highly recommend that you check them out if you have the time:





^In this one I like the quote "these long-dead racists were not your friends. You have nothing in common with them. What they stood for was evil and everybody seems to know it but you."










  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."


Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. 
-Alexander Stephens, VP of the Confederate States of America

Durrrr it was about states rights not slavery srsly durrrr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

It's also good to ask Confederate apologists what would the status of slavery be in the CSA, if it had won the war (or I guess caused the USA to cease hostilities)?



Most don't realize or care that the CSA constitution expressly forbid states from abolishing slavery so this is a fun one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In one of the videos, he goes into the whole "slavery was on its way out, anyway" angle (I think it's the Tariffs and Taxes one). You get into a lot of what-ifs, but yeah, generally the South, if they successfully seceded, would have been under tremendous international pressure to abolish slavery within a few decades. In a lot of ways, doesn't that make them even worse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...