Bummed about that UVA waitlist? Forum

[Vincent Vega]

Just an anecdote, but not all areas even of the south are very racist. I live in North Carolina, and honestly it seems like there's less racism (both implicit and explicit) here than when I lived in Illinois. I think the south gets a bad reputation about race relation, probably because people still associate it with slavery.

[Kohinoor]

ITT: People apparently unaware of Lynchburg, VA.

[thickfreakness]

ITT: People apparently unaware of Lynchburg, VA.

threadwin

[rayiner]

thanks for the history lesson rayiner! i guess i was confused about slavery being such a big issue during this time period. i thought that the fact that the southern economy was entirely built upon slave labor meant they would fight to the death to protect the institution. i thought that the south in particular was deathly afraid of abolition and felt that blacks were totally inferior, but you're right that they probably had other things on their minds. i also thought that northerners were major proponents of abolition (didn't lincoln run on a platform of abolition?), but thanks for letting me know they didn't put their money where their mouths were!

1) The southern economy was not built entirely upon slave labor. Largely, it was the elite plantation owners, consisting of a few percent of the population who owned slaves. Of course, the elite pull the strings and they were perfectly willing to send everybody else's kids to fight in a war to protect their lucrative institution.

2) Everybody felt blacks were totally inferior, even most abolitionists.

3) Lincoln wasn't an abolitionist. He was morally opposed to slavery, but believed that slavery was protected by the Constitution in the states in which it existed, and acknowledged the rights of slave owners repeatedly during his run for President.

If you think the North would've spent and risked so much just to improve the lot of african slaves, you're egregiously miseducated. Slavery was a major bone of contention between the North and the South, but it was a piece of a much bigger puzzle.

[rayiner]

Imagine you're from the UK and whenever you put out a statement honoring British soldiers that died in the American Revolution, every news outlet in the US puts out a statement saying how evil your soldiers were for fighting to put down the revolution and how they shouldn't be honored because of the dastardly political system they were obviously supporting by serving in England's army. Also, all Britains should be ashamed of everything that happened between the Boston Tea Party and the War of 1812. Even that time the king's mom made tea on Sunday afternoon in 1806.

This is pretty much the gist of the whole thing. From the actual text:

WHEREAS, this defining chapter in Virginia’s history should not be forgotten, but instead should be studied, understood and remembered by all Virginians, both in the context of the time in which it took place, but also in the context of the time in which we live, and this study and remembrance takes on particular importance as the Commonwealth prepares to welcome the nation and the world to visit Virginia for the Sesquicentennial Anniversary of the Civil War, a four-year period in which the exploration of our history can benefit all;

Doesn't sound like "oh, damn, I wish we'd won the war so we could still have slaves" as "this was a major historical event in our history and we should remember it."

[Kohinoor]

thanks for the history lesson rayiner! i guess i was confused about slavery being such a big issue during this time period. i thought that the fact that the southern economy was entirely built upon slave labor meant they would fight to the death to protect the institution. i thought that the south in particular was deathly afraid of abolition and felt that blacks were totally inferior, but you're right that they probably had other things on their minds. i also thought that northerners were major proponents of abolition (didn't lincoln run on a platform of abolition?), but thanks for letting me know they didn't put their money where their mouths were!

1) The southern economy was not built entirely upon slave labor. Largely, it was the elite plantation owners, consisting of a few percent of the population who owned slaves. Of course, the elite pull the strings and they were perfectly willing to send everybody else's kids to fight in a war to protect their lucrative institution.

2) Everybody felt blacks were totally inferior, even most abolitionists.

3) Lincoln wasn't an abolitionist. He was morally opposed to slavery, but believed that slavery was protected by the Constitution in the states in which it existed, and acknowledged the rights of slave owners repeatedly during his run for President.

If you think the North would've spent and risked so much just to improve the lot of african slaves, you're egregiously miseducated. Slavery was a major bone of contention between the North and the South, but it was a piece of a much bigger puzzle.

PREACH!

[pinkzeppelin]

thanks for the history lesson rayiner! i guess i was confused about slavery being such a big issue during this time period. i thought that the fact that the southern economy was entirely built upon slave labor meant they would fight to the death to protect the institution. i thought that the south in particular was deathly afraid of abolition and felt that blacks were totally inferior, but you're right that they probably had other things on their minds. i also thought that northerners were major proponents of abolition (didn't lincoln run on a platform of abolition?), but thanks for letting me know they didn't put their money where their mouths were!

1) The southern economy was not built entirely upon slave labor. Largely, it was the elite plantation owners, consisting of a few percent of the population who owned slaves. Of course, the elite pull the strings and they were perfectly willing to send everybody else's kids to fight in a war to protect their lucrative institution.

2) Everybody felt blacks were totally inferior, even most abolitionists.

3) Lincoln wasn't an abolitionist. He was morally opposed to slavery, but believed that slavery was protected by the Constitution in the states in which it existed, and acknowledged the rights of slave owners repeatedly during his run for President.

If you think the North would've spent and risked so much just to improve the lot of african slaves, you're egregiously miseducated. Slavery was a major bone of contention between the North and the South, but it was a piece of a much bigger puzzle.

If anyone has questions regarding the origins of the civil war, please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Civil_War

The first explanation is slavary, but as Rayiner has noted, a deeper reading will show that it was less about a noble north and evil south fighting about slavery than it was about two very different societies fighting for their way of life.

People are arguing that the confederate soldiers should not be commemorated because of the morals they were fighting for, but judging historical figures based on our contemporary moral structure is just ignorant.

[Kohinoor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee-Jackson-King_Day

[pinkzeppelin]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee-Jackson-King_Day

lol!

[clintonius]

It's all in good fun. Sometimes you need to poke fun at the various states in our fine union. I'll be the first to admit that my home state of California needs to be ridiculed regularly.

Virginia's a commonwealth.

hth

http://geography.about.com/b/2006/12/09 ... -state.htm

[pollaclc]

Umm, if I recall correctly from my history classes, the "sacrifices" made by Confederates were done so to perpetuate the institution of slavery. Seems like a good thing to celebrate.

Out of all the southerners who fought and died for the Confederacy, very few owned slaves. The civil war was partially about slavery, yes. But let's be frank, the north wouldn't have fought the civil war if it was *just* about slavery. Northerners didn't care *that much* about the slaves. The war was in large part about a federal government dominated by northern economic interests, and a union in which the south felt it was getting the short end of the stick. Such circumstances are typical reasons for successful and unsuccessful civil wars.

thanks for the history lesson rayiner! i guess i was confused about slavery being such a big issue during this time period. i thought that the fact that the southern economy was entirely built upon slave labor meant they would fight to the death to protect the institution. i thought that the south in particular was deathly afraid of abolition and felt that blacks were totally inferior, but you're right that they probably had other things on their minds. i also thought that northerners were major proponents of abolition (didn't lincoln run on a platform of abolition?), but thanks for letting me know they didn't put their money where their mouths were!

the north was just as racist as the south.

[soullesswonder]

thanks for the history lesson rayiner! i guess i was confused about slavery being such a big issue during this time period. i thought that the fact that the southern economy was entirely built upon slave labor meant they would fight to the death to protect the institution. i thought that the south in particular was deathly afraid of abolition and felt that blacks were totally inferior, but you're right that they probably had other things on their minds. i also thought that northerners were major proponents of abolition (didn't lincoln run on a platform of abolition?), but thanks for letting me know they didn't put their money where their mouths were!

1) The southern economy was not built entirely upon slave labor. Largely, it was the elite plantation owners, consisting of a few percent of the population who owned slaves. Of course, the elite pull the strings and they were perfectly willing to send everybody else's kids to fight in a war to protect their lucrative institution.

2) Everybody felt blacks were totally inferior, even most abolitionists.

3) Lincoln wasn't an abolitionist. He was morally opposed to slavery, but believed that slavery was protected by the Constitution in the states in which it existed, and acknowledged the rights of slave owners repeatedly during his run for President.

If you think the North would've spent and risked so much just to improve the lot of african slaves, you're egregiously miseducated. Slavery was a major bone of contention between the North and the South, but it was a piece of a much bigger puzzle.

1. the South's economy was almost completely built on a mode of agriculture and a social hierarchy that was underpinned by slavery. While it is true that only a small percentage of Southern whites actually owned slaves, those slaves accounted for about 3.5 million out of 9 million people in the Confederacy, so their economic and social impact cannot be underestimated. Even in areas where slavery was not as economical (mostly above the thousand-foot line where the prospects of large scale agriculture sharply declined), the lower class whites who made up a large percentage of the Southern population took comfort in the fact that their race alone put them ahead of a third of the region's population AND limited competition for semi-skilled labor.

2. "Everyone" overstates a bit, but I generally agree.

3. True, but besides the point. Lincoln's actual intentions aside, Southerners believed their "peculiar institution" was under threat. Secession was motivated by a fear that the North would subvert the Southern economic and social order. Even most Confederate apologists (and I currently work for one) will acknowledge that fear existed.

[rayiner]

3. True, but besides the point. Lincoln's actual intentions aside, Southerners believed their "peculiar institution" was under threat. Secession was motivated by a fear that the North would subvert the Southern economic and social order. Even most Confederate apologists (and I currently work for one) will acknowledge that fear existed.

No, it's not besides the point. Yes, the southern elite motivated secession to protect the institution of slavery. However, unlike what toaster2 claimed, the north didn't fight to war because they were morally upstanding and wanted to help those poor black people.

[Jay-Electronica]

I hear Alabama is going to announce a Eugene “Bull” Connor month.

[soullesswonder]

3. True, but besides the point. Lincoln's actual intentions aside, Southerners believed their "peculiar institution" was under threat. Secession was motivated by a fear that the North would subvert the Southern economic and social order. Even most Confederate apologists (and I currently work for one) will acknowledge that fear existed.

No, it's not besides the point. Yes, the southern elite motivated secession to protect the institution of slavery. However, unlike what toaster2 claimed, the north didn't fight to war because they were morally upstanding and wanted to help those poor black people.

I was speaking more generally to the idea that the war wasn't about slavery. I think, though, that as the war progressed you do find a change in attitudes within some parts of the union, particularly among the troops, that abolition was a cause worth fighting for. In the specific case of free black units, the experience of fighting and dying alongside colored men had a profound impact among the white troops who fought with them and the white officers who led them. So while abolition was definitely not the Northern population's goal in 1861, it was probably a significant motivation by 1864

[20121109]

I hear Alabama is going to announce a Eugene “Bull” Connor month.

Serious?

[hellokitty]

I hear Alabama is going to announce a Eugene “Bull” Connor month.

Really?? Ugh, that is so depressing. I've been gone for a while, but I never heard about this.

[Jay-Electronica]

Serious?

Really?? Ugh, that is so depressing. I've been gone for a while, but I never heard about this.

Sorry, I was being facetious, they are not planning that. At least I hope not.

[holydonkey]

thanks for the history lesson rayiner! i guess i was confused about slavery being such a big issue during this time period. i thought that the fact that the southern economy was entirely built upon slave labor meant they would fight to the death to protect the institution. i thought that the south in particular was deathly afraid of abolition and felt that blacks were totally inferior, but you're right that they probably had other things on their minds. i also thought that northerners were major proponents of abolition (didn't lincoln run on a platform of abolition?), but thanks for letting me know they didn't put their money where their mouths were!

1) The southern economy was not built entirely upon slave labor. Largely, it was the elite plantation owners, consisting of a few percent of the population who owned slaves. Of course, the elite pull the strings and they were perfectly willing to send everybody else's kids to fight in a war to protect their lucrative institution.
If you think the North would've spent and risked so much just to improve the lot of african slaves, you're egregiously miseducated. Slavery was a major bone of contention between the North and the South, but it was a piece of a much bigger puzzle.

1. Even in areas where slavery was not as economical (mostly above the thousand-foot line where the prospects of large scale agriculture sharply declined), the lower class whites who made up a large percentage of the Southern population took comfort in the fact that their race alone put them ahead of a third of the region's population AND limited competition for semi-skilled labor.

This is not true. Read this book - "A Separate Civil War: Communities in Conflict in the Mountain South"
--LinkRemoved--

[soullesswonder]

[quote="holydonkey] 1. Even in areas where slavery was not as economical (mostly above the thousand-foot line where the prospects of large scale agriculture sharply declined), the lower class whites who made up a large percentage of the Southern population took comfort in the fact that their race alone put them ahead of a third of the region's population AND limited competition for semi-skilled labor.[/quote]
This is not true. Read this book - "A Separate Civil War: Communities in Conflict in the Mountain South"
--LinkRemoved--[/quote]

I grew up in Appalachia, so I know that support for secession was hardly universal (in fact, my home county was the only one in the area that actually supported secession). Many people in the mountain regions didn't like the idea of fighting for the elites farther South (since they did not see as many economic benefits from the institution of slavery), but nonetheless there were certain social advantages to the system. Obviously, though, being white matters more in an area where half the pop are black slaves rather than someplace like far NE Georgia or Western North Carolina where blacks are more prevalent.

[beef wellington]

Serious?

Really?? Ugh, that is so depressing. I've been gone for a while, but I never heard about this.

Sorry, I was being facetious, they are not planning that. At least I hope not.

the sad part is that Alabama is shitty enough that everyone believed you

I just wish the flame had been kept up long enough for a Southerner to come in and defend it as merely being a celebration of their heritage.

[fortissimo]

Fact of the matter is, the VAST majority of poeple today are not racist

I'm gonna disagree with that statement, at least in certain regions. Sure people may not be that open with their racism but I live in the South and I have for my entire life. I'm not sure if I can agree with using the VAST designation for non-racists in my area. It's very segregated here and there definitely more than a few racists, black and white.

Fair enough. I can't argue with what you've observed and experienced.

I guess I've found that most people, if you are polite to them, are open to the goodness of the person regardless of their skin. However, I am looking through different eyes than you and I fully realize there are other factors that play into my experience.

...how do you even know what people are thinking or say behind closed doors?

[YCrevolution]

..