I've never thought twice about it until just now.:idunno:

 

It just seems to be an assumption that anyone associated with the confederacy and its symbols is an ignorant, redneck racist...I thought it might bother you that your name had been tarnished by your elementary school basketball uniform.

 

Sarcasm intended.

For the record, the civil war was less about overt racism, as it was about being able to continue conducting business in their industry standard. Racism, specifically, was a contributing factor, but it was economics. The souhtern states needed slavery to continue to thrive in cotton, tobacco and sugar industries. Slavery wasn't ONLY Africans. The majority..yes. But there was a significant amount of white slaves, and indentured servants as well.

 

I don't personally have an issue with the symbols and trappings of the historical southern past. It would be as silly as being upset at seeing the Union Jack somewhere, etc.

Also there was plenty of slavery going on in the North at the time, though through the lens of history it is portrayed that the civil war was only fought because the South believed in slavery, and the North did not. That is the furthest thing from the truth.

Edited April 23, 201016 yr by bugatti

It just seems to be an assumption that anyone associated with the confederacy and its symbols is an ignorant, redneck racist...I thought it might bother you that your name had been tarnished by your elementary school basketball uniform.

 

Sarcasm intended.

 

I mean, I've literally never thought anything about it. There was a big Confederate flag hanging beside the scoreboard in our gym, actually.

Also there was plenty of slavery going on in the North at the time, though through the lens of history it is portrayed that the civil war was only fought because the South believed in slavery, and the North did not. That is the furthest thing from the truth.

 

Yeah...it's not like the great northern liberators rolled out the red carpet to welcome the freed slaves into their fold. Racism extended throughout America, not just the south.

Edited April 23, 201016 yr by bugatti

I mean, I've literally never thought anything about it. There was a big Confederate flag hanging beside the scoreboard in our gym, actually.

 

:thumb:

 

I remember playing against a team called the Rebels in BYF basketball. I think they had the same mascot.

 

My posts were tongue-in-cheek. I'm just being sarcastic. Finding something to get offended by and painting everyone with a broad brush has become somewhat of a sport in America. I find it "offensive".

Would it make everyone happy if we pretended the Civil War never existed? While we're at it, let's pretend that not wearing a confederate suit, or getting rid of all confederate flags will end racism today.

Also there was plenty of slavery going on in the North at the time, though through the lens of history it is portrayed that the civil war was only fought because the South believed in slavery, and the North did not. That is the furthest thing from the truth.

 

While the North wasn't an angel, as you point out, and as many like to point out the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in Confederate states while full abolition had to wait, slavery and its enabling was very much the central issue of the war. From Lincoln's debates with Steven Douglas to the presidential campaign of 1860 to Lincoln's assassination, slavery and the fear of its demise leading to equality reigned. To push slavery to an almost tangential issue as part of the Civil War is impossible.

The reason why I posted it was what we have now, discussion.

 

If you think the KA's wore that because they are racist then I don't know what or how to reply to that..............

While the North wasn't an angel, as you point out, and as many like to point out the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in Confederate states while full abolition had to wait, slavery and its enabling was very much the central issue of the war. From Lincoln's debates with Steven Douglas to the presidential campaign of 1860 to Lincoln's assassination, slavery and the fear of its demise leading to equality reigned. To push slavery to an almost tangential issue as part of the Civil War is impossible.

 

wrong.

 

Lincoln once wrote," My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery." Lincoln's war aim was to preserve the Union not necessarily by ending slavery or keeping slavery. As the war continued, Lincoln became more of an abolitionist. Lincoln stated that he would save the Union while freeing no slaves, some slaves, or all slaves. The Union was his first priority.

Boone County Rebels....

 

Our mascot used to be pictured with a confederate flag and sword...both have been removed. There were even talks of completely changing the the mascot back when I was a senior.

^ I think we should just go ahead and change all of history and hope that it will push us into a utopian society full of princesses and 4 leaf clovers.

wrong.

 

Lincoln once wrote," My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery." Lincoln's war aim was to preserve the Union not necessarily by ending slavery or keeping slavery. As the war continued, Lincoln became more of an abolitionist. Lincoln stated that he would save the Union while freeing no slaves, some slaves, or all slaves. The Union was his first priority.

 

 

Lincoln's war aim was the preservation of the union and you state the case very well.

 

However to say slavery was not the issue is even more untrue. It wasn't just about the current slavery in the states that formed the Confederacy. It was every bit as tied to the expansion of slavery in new territories and states as they were added. It was the underlying tension of the entire 19th century in the US until the war. (and after it if the truth be known)

 

Every compromise that prevented the war got tougher to make between the two factions and eventually the southern states seceeded because they had lost the power of an equal number of slave states and free states. Slavery was at the heart of everything done in those years, especially among the southern states.

For the record, the civil war was less about overt racism, as it was about being able to continue conducting business in their industry standard. Racism, specifically, was a contributing factor, but it was economics. The souhtern states needed slavery to continue to thrive in cotton, tobacco and sugar industries. Slavery wasn't ONLY Africans. The majority..yes. But there was a significant amount of white slaves, and indentured servants as well.

 

I don't personally have an issue with the symbols and trappings of the historical southern past. It would be as silly as being upset at seeing the Union Jack somewhere, etc.

 

My dad and I were discussing this and it let to a thought and this seems to be a perfect place to throw that thought out there in a world whose debate and discussion I respect.

 

Now that I have sucked up enough....

 

Rather than this being a Southern way of life to protect wasn't it more of a RICH Southern person trying to protect their way of life?

 

I mean did poor people have slaves? RM would you and I have been a Southern person that would have economically had the opportunity to own a slave?

 

I wondered if this wasn't more of rich Southerners trying to protect their pocketbooks than anything. And the point is being hidden by the argument of Southern way of life?

I mean, I've literally never thought anything about it. There was a big Confederate flag hanging beside the scoreboard in our gym, actually.

 

Had a similar discussion in class once. The young African American man in my class indicated that he thought about it.

Lincoln's war aim was the preservation of the union and you state the case very well.

 

However to say slavery was not the issue is even more untrue. It wasn't just about the current slavery in the states that formed the Confederacy. It was every bit as tied to the expansion of slavery in new territories and states as they were added. It was the underlying tension of the entire 19th century in the US until the war. (and after it if the truth be known)

 

Every compromise that prevented the war got tougher to make between the two factions and eventually the southern states seceeded because they had lost the power of an equal number of slave states and free states. Slavery was at the heart of everything done in those years, especially among the southern states.

 

Well stated, Hatz. I would add the transcript of Lincoln's "House Divided" speech as support, delivered two years before the 1860 election where he did not win a single southern state and where those states began secession almost immediately after his victory. The thrust of his speech here was to convince his listeners that those who favored slavery would not be content until it was permanent and irrevocable, and that if they were to win in their conquest, slavery would be embedded forever.

 

If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth year since apolicy was initiated with the avowed object and confident promise of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved; I do not expect the house to fall; but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North as well as South.

 

Have we no tendency to the latter condition?

 

Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete legal combination -- pieces of machinery, so to speak -- compounded of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott decision. Let him consider, not only what work the machinery is adapted to do, and how well adapted, but also let him study the history of its construction, and trace, if he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidence of design, and concert of action, among its chief architects, from the beginning.

 

I would also add the remarks of Stephen Douglas, Lincoln's famous rival, proponent of slavery, and the architect of the "machinery" Lincoln described in the previous quote.

 

We are told by Lincoln that he is utterly opposed to the Dred Scott decision, and will not submit to it, for the reason that he says it deprives the negro of the rights and privileges of citizenship. (Laughter and applause.) That is the first and main reason which he assigns for his warfare on the Supreme Court of the United Sates and its decision. I ask you, are you in favor of conferring upon the negro the rights and privileges of citizenship? ("No, no.") Do you desire to strike out of our State Constitution that clause which keeps slaves and free negroes out of the State, and allow the free negroes to flow in, ("never,") and cover your prairies with black settlements? Do you desire to turn this beautiful State into a free negro colony, ("no, no,") in order that when Missouri abolishes slavery she can send one hundred thousand emancipated slaves into Illinois, to become citizens and voters, on an equality with yourselves? ("Never," "no.") If you desire negro citizenship, if you desire to allow them to come into the State and settle with the white man, if you desire them to vote on an equality with yourselves, and to make them eligible to office, to serve on juries, and to adjudge your rights, then support Mr. Lincoln and the Black Republican party, who are in favor of the citizenship of the negro. ("Never, never.") For one, I am opposed to negro citizenship in any and every form. (Cheers.) I believe this Government was made on the white basis. ("Good.") I believe it was made by white men for the benefit of white men and their posterity for ever, and I am in favor of confining citizenship to white men, men of European birth and descent, instead of conferring it upon negroes, Indians, and other inferior races. ("Good for you." "Douglas forever.")

 

Mr. Lincoln, following the example and lead of all the little Abolition orators, who go around and lecture in the basements of schools and churches, reads from the Declaration of Independence, that all men were created equal, and then asks, how can you deprive a negro of that equality which God and the Declaration of Independence awards to him? He and they maintain that negro equality is guarantied by the laws of God,and that it is asserted in the Declaration of Independence. If they think so, of course they have a right to say so, and so vote. I do not question Mr. Lincoln's conscientious belief that the negro was made his equal, and hence is his brother, (laughter,) but for my own part, I do not regard the negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother or any kin to me whatever. ("Never." "Hit him again," and cheers.) Lincoln has evidently learned by heart Parson Lovejoy's catechism. (Laughter and applause.) He can repeat it as well as Farnsworth, and he is worthy of a medal from Father Giddings and Fred Douglass for his Abolitionism. (Laughter.) He holds that the negro was born his equal and yours, and that he was endowed with equality by the Almighty, and that no human law can deprive him of these rights which were guarantied to him by the Supreme ruler of the Universe. Now, I do not believe that the Almighty ever intended the negro to be the equal of the white man. ("Never, never.") If he did, he has been a long time demonstrating the fact. (Cheers.)