Catholics supporting the Confederacy

[Tis_Bearself]

Let’s hop in the Wayback Machine and ask a priest from back then!

 

[Cruciferi]

Very good idea! Maybe he’s on the Ancient CAF

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

The improvements in AA’s lives after the ACW is often also overstated.

Might amend that to “immediately after the ACW” because they are considerably much better off in the present day.

 

[Maximilian75]

edited. Thanks!

 

[mrsdizzyd]

I understand your point 1.

I’m having a hard time with your point 2.

The fact of the matter is that the lives of AAs ON THE WHOLE were objectively better than under slavery. Yes, there was slavery by another name under the penal system, sharecropping, rise of the KKK, lynching, disenfranchisement, etc. BUT, there was still opportunity to escape this that did not exist before the civil war and many many AAs took advantage of that.

It is a long and complicated history. As MLK said, “Let us realize the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

 

[1Lord1Faith]

The fact of the matter is that the lives of AAs ON THE WHOLE were objectively better than under slavery.

Are you sure about that? I’ve seen many depictions of “happy darkies” from the south. Apparently the Civil War ruined this idyllic life of singing and dancing in the warm southern evening breeze.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[1Lord1Faith]

I do. What do you think the invasion of Iraq was about?

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

Enforcing UN sanctions, seeking out the WMD’s that did in fact exist despite the media narrative they didn’t, and ousting a regime hostile to American interests.

 

[ajg]

How about states rights? Taxation issues? Tariffs? Representation in Congress?

Some of the main issues was the federal government expanding their authority over what the southern states deemed were their rights. All of these factors were part of the problem. The best way to show that is look how the confederacy set up their government. The federal government over the confederacy had almost no power to make states do anything.

 

[Maxirad]

People might want to check this article out.

 

[guanophore]

That’s funny, black people are still angry about slavery.

White people should be also.

The war didn’t stop the mistreatment.

Since this was not the cause or purpose of the war, that is not too surprising.

Nope. That took another 100 years

I think there might be a significant number of people of color that can offer a cogent dispute that mistreatment still takes place.

On “blacks were no better off after the Civil War” consider the following:

Their labor was no longer stolen

This seems to reflect a lack of knowledge about sharecropping. It also does not account for how blacks were forced into incarceration, from which their labor was still stolen.

They could leave if they had the means and inclination

Poor people today of every race are trapped in socioeconomic disadvantage because they don’t have "means’.

Their family members could no longer be legally kidnapped.

And this disregards the “illegal” kidnapping? Bounty hunters kidnapping free blacks, burning their manumission papers?

I’m Texan born and raised, but it still baffles me as to why anyone feels the need to glamorize the CSA and make excuses for them.

One has to wonder what is taught for American History in Texas!

I think you can go read history for yourself.

Don’t hold your breath!

And you know this…how?

Reading histories and biographies.

What prevented them from just leaving?

As you accurately pointed out - “means”.

Perhaps you have never been trapped by poverty and a lack of support to change your situation.

Surely you are familiar with the practice of splitting up slave families by selling members to distant locations.

How does this offset charging blacks with minor offenses and incarcerating them for years - sometimes the rest of their lives, and using them for slave labor?

but which state would you have preferred for yourself?

I think this is a good question for you to ask yourself, or better, listen to the stories of those who lived it. For many, it was worse. The point is that neither of these conditions was “preferable”, and the Civil war did not improve the lot of most.

 

[guanophore]

Actually it wasn’t, but unless you study the period extensively you’ll never understand it.

Again, don’t hold your breath!

Feel free to list any issues that had nothing to do with slavery.

Would that be related to the thread topic?

Sorry, i paid for that college degree, you can do the same yourself.

Actually that is not even necessary. There are plenty of materials in the public domain that a person can be educated about basic American History - unless one wishes to persist in their prejudice.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

seeking out the WMD’s that did in fact exist despite the media narrative they didn’t

Credible and verifiable sources please.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

Please just start a new thread about how the southern states demanded their rights to keep slaves and demanded that northern states give back runaway slaves. So that’s states rights for southern states only, who want slavery.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

The only source I have is a good friend of mine who was a chemical weapons specialist in the Marine Corps who saw them first hand during his first of 3 tours in Iraq. He was part of a team that found a warehouse that was used to store them. He also watched with his own eyes as a convoy loaded with chemical weapons went into Syria, his unit was told not to pursue.

I understand that is not going to convince anyone else, nor should it. But it’s enough for me.

 

[HolySpirit]

What on earth are you talking about? They had to fight or die? No one knew what was happening? Sure, whatever.

The average farmer who was 250 miles from the nearest city whose only transportation was a mule and may have never stepped in a school didn’t have a cell phone with Facesnap on it.

If he was lucky he owned a bible that had been in his family for 100 years.

Have you ever been to an Amish or Mennonite farm? They were city slickers compared to someone in the sticks during the civil war.

They probably felt the same way about the civil war as the guy in Northern Vermont who joined the army because he wanted to impress Sally May.

I’m guessing you must be a millennial since your views on reality aren’t very much based in reality.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

I understand that is not going to convince anyone else, nor should it. But it’s enough for me.

So why even bring it up let alone criticize the “mainstream media” for not telling the rest of us? That is intellectually dishonest.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

How’s it dishonest? The other poster asked what I believed the reason for invading Iraq was, I gave my opinion.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

The attack in the “mainstream media” is the part I’m referring to as intellectually dishonest.

Your source is one guy you know. Even if the “mainstream media” hears the same story from that one guy they cannot publish it unless they can find some sort of corroborating evidence.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

Okie doke.