VP of the Confederacy told the full truth on the inauguration of the Confederacy. I provide the relevant full portion of his speech below:

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. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

Alexander H. Stephens, March 21, 1861.

Given our discussion on what can be taught and not taught in FL, we should not be unmindful the real cause of trying to break the Constitution. The Political Power in the South did not hide their intentions were to undue the perceived falsehood of the Constitution.

"It would have been well for us, if the seemingly pompous inanities of the Declaration of Independence, of the Virginia Bill of Rights and the Act of Religious Toleration had remained dead letters ... Their charlatanic half-learned, pedantic authors [believed that] 'all men are created equal' ... This is an infidel doctrine.
- George Fitzhugh, November 1863

We can provide more sources from probated to generals given the same rationale.

There is even historical records of the need to set aside the “States Rights” justification for a central government strong enough to:

"Let us adopt a stable and centralized system; adjusted to preserve the personal respect of every citizen, and free from the fluctuations of popular caprice."
- John Etin,

A central government strong enough to:

"This new Confederacy . . . has already, to some extent, rectified the error of the old Constitution, but not so distinctly and clearly as the Christian people of these states desire to see done. We venture respectfully to suggest, that it is not enough for a state which enjoys the light of divine revelation to acknowledge in general terms the supremacy of God…it must also acknowledge the supremacy of His Son, whom He hath appointed heir to all things, by whom also He made the worlds. To Jesus Christ all power in heaven and earth is committed. To Him every knee shall bow."
- James Henley Thornwell, 1861.

We see with their own words the repulsion they have for natural liberty.

There is a civil war brewing right now!

Please. Slavery had nothing to do with it because that would mean that the states' rights advocates would have to admit that it was about slavery, not states' rights.

This one has been done to death on here.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
There is a civil war brewing right now!

How come I only see boxes now and not emoji's? Do I need to update my drivers or something?

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Please. Slavery had nothing to do with it because that would mean that the states' rights advocates would have to admit that it was about slavery, not states' rights.

This one has been done to death on here.

I would have thought so. However, recent discussions and the prevalence of the Lost Cause Myth have me thinking otherwise.


Might as well so then the quotes from the horses mouth.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Please. Slavery had nothing to do with it because that would mean that the states' rights advocates would have to admit that it was about slavery, not states' rights.

This one has been done to death on here.

Then let them admit, thus ending the argument.

In most part, IMO, the OP is not so much about slavery vs states rights, but about how close we came to the destruction of the Founder's Dream by ideological and religious fanatics.

We have a resurgence.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Please. Slavery had nothing to do with it because that would mean that the states' rights advocates would have to admit that it was about slavery, not states' rights.

This one has been done to death on here.

Then let them admit, thus ending the argument.

In most part, IMO, the OP is not so much about slavery vs states rights, but about how close we came to the destruction of the Founder's Dream by ideological and religious fanatics.

We have a resurgence.

You must have been around here long enough to have endured one of these discussions about the cause of the civil war previously. No?

The Lost Cause Myth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...e_of_the_Confederacy

https://www.theatlantic.com/id...-long-legacy/613288/

I find it needed to highlight the ones who profess the virtues of secession claim to be real Americans.

Thus, the need to show the designers own words demonstrating contempt for the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, rule of law, religious toleration, John Locke principles, and the Revolution.

Principles we should hold second only to the sacred.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
You must have been around here long enough to have endured one of these discussions about the cause of the civil war previously. No?

Yes, of course. And being from the South, I've endured it all my life.

Being of firm conviction about something like the civil war, like I am, never subsides. The culture in the South, especially when I was a child, rode on the shoulders of the memory of the cause and the defeat. I despised it then and more so now. I saw, and participated in the share-cropper era. No avoiding it.

I see the thread of it all in the fabric of today, and much of what's happening.

This nation is fixated on myths and martyrs. Look at all the monuments - South Dakota and Stone Mountain disfiguring mountains. It's a symbol of stone wall ideology.

When we, some of us, think we are on a path beyond all that, then Trump happens, to shock us into reality.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...t0&ab_channel=GBNews

Donald Trump will become a 'MARTYR' even if he ends up in prison

They will carve a monument to him, defacing some mountain, forever.

Thank God for the GOP Republicans having the balls face down the Democrats. We need more of this today. Great post.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
Thank God for the GOP Republicans having the balls face down the Democrats. We need more of this today. Great post.

I think I get your point.

If so, it's sick. And invoking GOD into it makes it sicker.

You are intentionally skipping some critical and defining history, the shift.

The fact is that the republican party is no longer the party of Lincoln, nor inherited his balls.

quote:

They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man.

What did I miss?

Maybe you missed the part in another document that says "All men are created equal, and endowed by their creator---"

In a modern political context it is not Dems who speak of the virtues is secession, how just it was, and Patriot the Bernstein of being great patriots while endorsing the express repudiation of the American Experiment.

Those words about the Constitution are no different than President Trump calling for the suspension of the Constitution.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Maybe you missed the part in another document where "All men are created equal, and endowed by their creator---"

Nope, Democrats chose to ignore that.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Maybe you missed the part in another document where "All men are created equal, and endowed by their creator---"

Nope, Democrats chose to ignore that.

I presume you mean that Democrats and their ideology caused the secession, leading to the civil war?

I think you are not stupid. I have given you the benefit of doubt so far.

I do not feel the need to educate you, nor argue with your premise - much.

If you think Democrats today are equivalent to those of the era before and during the CW, then you are beyond ignorant, well into intentional ignorant, and thus not worthy of debate.

Your argument is trollish.

If you wish to move beyond intentional ignorance, then I offer you some reading for your edification:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...nism#In_the_Americas

It took 100 years after the civil war for the shift in the South:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...in%20their%20support.

The phrase "Southern Strategy" refers primarily to "top down" narratives of the political realignment of the South which suggest that Republican leaders consciously appealed to many white Southerners' racial grievances to gain their support.[5

Another aspect why this debate is timely is states like FL think they can pass slavery had benefits standard because their public education system does not teach this truth demonstrated by the above. Slavery is seen as benign at worst. The Confederacy as just, if not righteous.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Another aspect why this debate is timely is states like FL think they can pass slavery had benefits standard because their public education system does not teach this truth demonstrated by the above. Slavery is seen as benign at worst. The Confederacy as just, if not righteous.

Slavery never had benefits.

Then.

But all blacks living in America today are most definitely better off if they were left in there.

And don’t start the race card.

I never liked slavery, or any firm of abusing people.

But be realistic.

Enough of this stupid nonsense of demanding payment from people who never owned slaves!

And those demanding it were never slaves!

Let’s be honest.

While slavery was the leading issue and the popular rallying cry on both sides, it was hardly the only issue. Slavery was on the decline economically even in the south at the time of the civil war.

Economic development control, populism vs. elitism, and public morality were all part of it.

Patriotism and nationalism were large parts of it as well.

It’s too simplistic to say it was slavery alone. Was it the biggest issue? Yes. Only one? Not hardly.

No Dr. You are not being honest. It was the issue see above. Or go read the Crittenden Amendment that recognized a guaranteed right to “ African Slavery” and “African Slavery” in all territories below the 36,30 parallel.

That public morality toy speak of frontage Southern point of view was preserving the racial, class structure ordained by God. See the above.

You don’t think the northern control of taxes, in particular import and export duties had anything to do with the states rights complaints?

The expansion of non slavery to new territories was seen as meaning that the south as a bloc was beingbmarginalized?

I don’t disagree that it was the biggest issue and the one most used, particularly in public discourse in the south.

The northern view was preserve the Union until Gettysburg when it started being all men should be free.

I’m not minimizing slavery as an issue, it was the most prominent one, but mainly because arguing tax policy and protectionism doesn’t resonate with people.

Add it that in those days many people identified themselves as citizens of a state, rather than citizens of a nation.

only an idiot would believe ANY war had a single cause. and only the most self-centered egomaniac would consider his favorite cause was THE reason.

slavery is bad - mayhaps we should try to free the world-wide record number of slaves TODAY.

Man, it sure would be nice if slavery didn't exist today

The thing is, which some people have difficulty with:

“When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” Maya Angelou

The OP is a direct quote, in their own words. It just doesn't get any clearer than that.

All the rest is a diffusion of clarity.

Weird -- this thread made me think and go challenge some of my assumptions -

Mr Lincoln himslef has views on this - does anyone have contradicting evidence? CUNY isn't exactly a confederate sympathizer org

https://shec.ashp.cuny.edu/exh...r%20in%20the%20North.

quote:

Executive Mansion
Washington, August 22, 1862

Hon. Horace Greeley
Dear Sir

As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt…

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that….

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free. Yours,

A. LINCOLN

I've seen that letter before. It sets out Lincoln's official stance to preserve the Union as well as his "oft-expressed" personal wish to free the slaves.

Lincoln's motives are clear.

What was the secession state's motives?

It wasn't to divide the nation. That was a means to an end.

What was the "end" they wanted?

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Let’s be honest.

While slavery was the leading issue and the popular rallying cry on both sides, it was hardly the only issue. Slavery was on the decline economically even in the south at the time of the civil war.

Economic development control, populism vs. elitism, and public morality were all part of it.

Patriotism and nationalism were large parts of it as well.

It’s too simplistic to say it was slavery alone. Was it the biggest issue? Yes. Only one? Not hardly.

Slavery as an economic tool was being obsoleted by the mechanization of industry and the availability of cheap energy.
There is a race on now, between mechanization and the end of cheap energy. Hide and watch...

America is on the brink of another civil war, fueled by Donald Trump
Opinion by Jason Opal
•
2h

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...6d3ec1e5963006&ei=51

quote:

“When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” Maya Angelou

Republicans fought to end slavery. Democrats fought to save it. It’s all in the op. And Maya Angelou knows that.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

quote:

“When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” Maya Angelou

Republicans fought to end slavery. Democrats fought to save it. It’s all in the op. And Maya Angelou knows that.

She's dead, physically, but her words are immortal.

Your words are dead while you are still alive.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

quote:

“When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” Maya Angelou

Republicans fought to end slavery. Democrats fought to save it. It’s all in the op. And Maya Angelou knows that.

Oh, come on! The Republican Party then was the progressive party of the time. The D party consisted mainly of conservatives, those who wanted to preserve the old ways, including slavery.

The polarities of the two parties today are reversed from Lincoln's time. If he were alive today, and he didn't start his own party, he would be a Democrat.

I answered him once, politely, and gave him the information, even though at the time his post looked like a troll post. I linked the information for the benefit of others and for him just in case I was wrong about him.

It did no good. He either didn't read it or ignored it. Besides, there's plenty of history just waiting for research.

So, I figure he's posting stuff like that to troll. Few people are that ignorant.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

quote:

“When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” Maya Angelou

Republicans fought to end slavery. Democrats fought to save it. It’s all in the op. And Maya Angelou knows that.

And the dems are still doing all they can to keep the blacks on the plantation.....



.

I can't say I know for certain why the South seceded.

But I believe the words of Southerners themselves. The South's state and federal representatives, politicians, and newspapers[of the time all said it was to preserve slavery.

Jim

Re the Civil War - words are insufficient - tragedy, unnecessary, bull headed, what were they thinking - wasted loss of life and energy.

It's very sad to rehash it. When I was a kid, I knew of several graves where some of my kin were buried. Those days no permit required, just a hole and a grave stone. Those sites were grown up with vines and bushes, with crop fields surrounding. As time went on, the farmers blocked off access to those fields, and with the new irrigation systems, the grave sites were in the way. The old homesteads vanished. Some farmers just cleared the site with a bulldozer and plowed right over the graves, and now the irrigation systems run right over it. The graves thus vanished.

The South wanted to preserve the economic situation using slavery. The North deemed preserving the Union worth it.

This wasn't political, it was ideological. The zealots, IMO, were the South.

Even after the war ended, the hardship, the mourning, and hard feeling, etc. lasted over 100 years. There are effects even today.

Why do the lessons not resonate with the zealots today? It's obvious that a civil war is not the way to solve problems, but instead makes problems in itself that even time will not solve.

This time in history is probably the most written about. There is no need to repeat it here.

I’ll wager you couldn’t convince former slaves it wasn’t a way to solve a problem. Do you think about what you type?

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

quote:

“When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” Maya Angelou

Republicans fought to end slavery. Democrats fought to save it. It’s all in the op. And Maya Angelou knows that.

And you know damn well that the politics have done a complete 180 since them. Stop professing stupidity.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
I’ll wager you couldn’t convince former slaves it wasn’t a way to solve a problem. Do you think about what you type?

The slaves were helpless. They had no influence, either way, except their condition of being slaves.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...117574ac6385ed&ei=17

A Second American Civil War?
Story by Peter Suciu •
9h