|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2015 : 12:30:23
|
The idea that the southern states' secession from the U.S.A., leading to the American Civil War, was not in defense of slavery is making the rounds again. Let's see what the states themselves said about it:
South Carolina's Declaration of Secession complained that the Federal Government refused to enforce the third paragraph of section two of Article IV of the U.S. Constitution, which basically says that slaves cannot be made free by running to another state, and must be returned (later mooted by the 13th Amendment). There's a ton of history in the document, too, but it's all about the obligations of government, leading up to the Article IV argument.
Mississippi's Declaration of Secession states, in the first clause of the first sentence of the second paragraph, "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery..." Enough said.
Florida's Ordinance of Secession says nothing about its reasons. A draft declaration was later written, but never published, and basically says (after getting through the vagueness and passive-voice nastiness), "Lincoln and the Republicans are being mean to us by trying to abolish slavery."
Alabama's Ordinance of Secession claims that the election of Lincoln and unspecified unconstitutional actions by the northern states led it to split.
Georgia's Declaration of Secession is all about the politics of slavery and abolition, and goes so far as to claim that the northern states "have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property" (meaning slaves, of course).
Louisiana's Ordinance of Secession doesn't mention the reasons for it, and I can't find any documents with them.
Texas' Declaration of Causes was exceptionally detailed in its racism:We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations... (So don't let anyone tell you that the defenders of U.S. slavery were never god-fearing Christians, either...)
Virginia's Ordinance of Secession only mentions the Federal Government's perverting its powers, "not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern slaveholding States." And according to this description,First, not a single Virginia delegate criticized slavery. Indeed, many of the western delegates were slaveholders and those that did not spoke in support of the institution. No delegate wanted to be branded an abolitionist. Delegates outdid one another to voice their commitment to slavery. Slavery and its protection was clearly in the forefront of their motivations. Lincoln's response to the new Confederacy's attack on Fort Sumter - with the idea that Virginia troops would be ordered to help put down the rebellion in South Carolina - prompted those slavery-loving delegates to vote to secede. But even then, people in the western portion of the state decided to secede from Virginia and remain with the Union, forming the state of West Virginia.
Arkansas' Ordinance of Secession mentions "the well-founded causes of complaint" in prior resolutions, but itself only says that war to maintain the Union was unacceptable. However, those prior resolutions were entirely about defending slavery from the nasty folks up north.
Tennessee's Ordinance of Secession included no discussion of why.
Neither did North Carolina's.
So of the 11 states that seceded, seven of them did so obviously in defense of slavery. The last nail in the coffin is the CSA's VP, Alexander H. Stephens', Cornerstone Speech:...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... He later tried to walk that back, calling it "metaphorical," but I don't see how it could be.
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2015 : 15:06:10 [Permalink]
|
Thanks for the research - will be useful |
by Filthy The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2015 : 12:11:14 [Permalink]
|
By the way, here's Jefferson Davis in his own words:In the meantime, under the mild and genial climate of the Southern States and the increasing care and attention for the wellbeing and comfort of the laboring class, dictated alike by interest and humanity, the African slaves had augmented in number from about 600,000, at the date of the adoption of the constitutional compact, to upward of 4,000,000. In moral and social condition they had been elevated from brutal savages into docile, intelligent, and civilized agricultural laborers, and supplied not only with bodily comforts but with careful religious instruction. Under the supervision of a superior race their labor had been so directed as not only to allow a gradual and marked amelioration of their own condition, but to convert hundreds of thousands of square miles of the wilderness into cultivated lands covered with a prosperous people; towns and cities had sprung into existence, and had rapidly increased in wealth and population under the social system of the South; the white population of the Southern slaveholding States had augmented from about 1,250,000 at the date of the adoption of the Constitution to more than 8,500,000 in 1860; and the productions of the South in cotton, rice, sugar, and tobacco, for the full development and continuance of which the labor of African slaves was and is indispensable, had swollen to an amount which formed nearly three-fourths of the exports of the whole United States and had become absolutely necessary to the wants of civilized man. With interests of such overwhelming magnitude imperiled, the people of the Southern States were driven by the conduct of the North to the adoption of some course of action to avert the danger with which they were openly menaced... He also blamed a rather nasty tariff dispute between north and south, but I wanted to highlight the racism here. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2015 : 12:32:59 [Permalink]
|
I'd like to think that Ed Brayton reads SFN, but this post is probably purely coincidental. He did, however, find Louisiana's stated reasons for secession. They come from a speech made by George Williamson (Commissioner of the State of Louisiana) to the Texas Secession Convention:Louisiana looks to the formation of a Southern confederacy to preserve the blessings of African slavery...
... The people of the slaveholding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery...
...we hope to form a slave-holding confederacy that will secure to us and our remotest posterity the great blessings its authors designed in the Federal Union. With the social balance wheel of slavery to regulate its machinery, we may fondly indulge the hope that our Southern government will be perpetual. A commenter on Brayton's post also points out that paragraph three of section three of Article IV of the CSA's Constitution mandated that slavery be legal in every state (current or future) of the CSA, thus putting the lie to the idea that these states seceded because of "States' Rights." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2015 : 17:13:17 [Permalink]
|
I linked to this thread from facebook in a thread discussing the confederate flag. Too many people were saying wasn't about slavery. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/27/2015 : 20:57:10 [Permalink]
|
Oh, geez. The "heritage" that the Confederate flags (all of them) commemorate is violence and treason in defense of slavery. Full stop.
I de-friended someone on Facebook a few years ago because he posted a remembrance of traitor Robert E. Lee on Martin Luther King Day. Sadly, Alabama, Arkansas and Mississippi still all celebrate Lee's and King's birthdays together. Here in Virginia, we had "Lee-Jackson-King Day" from 1983 to 2000, when the legislature wised up and moved Lee-Jackson Day to the Friday before MLK Day. Of course, they should have just dropped commemorating the two asshats altogether, but at least my county and five others refuse to celebrate Lee-Jackson Day.
And Wikipedia tells me that Virginia even had a Confederate History Month for nine years. Cripes. Alabama still does, but (for those who still deny the reality of the causes of the Civil War) in 2010 their proclamation included this:our recognition of Confederate history also recognizes that slavery was one of the causes of the war, an issue in the war, was ended by the war and slavery is hereby condemned. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2015 : 19:20:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Snopes.com is running a multi-part series titled "The Truth about Confederate History."
Part 1 Part 2
| Oh good! Thanks! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|