# Know Your History before you make a judgement



## Caseyboy (Feb 13, 2012)

Caseyboy submitted a new Article:

Know Your History before you make a judgement



> *Just in case some of the people want to know about history before attempting to rewrite it.*​
> Here is some food for thought in these troubling times. All of this is fact and is a matter of public record. *THE CIVIL WAR WAS NEVER ABOUT SLAVERY.* It was a ruse. A ploy. To make the North look better in the court of public opinion. I got an A+++++++ in Mr. Marcos 8th grade Social Studies essay contest where he told me it was the best essay he'd ever read. Based...


Read more about this article here...


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

Good job!

Someone ought to write up a good summary of what really happened in Kenosha too.


----------



## jdege (Dec 7, 2012)

The Southerners who actually seceded disagree with you.

To them, it was all about slavery.

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp


----------



## Caseyboy (Feb 13, 2012)

The records show throughout historical background through letters, comments recorded in the Congressional Record, and much more that it was about state's rights. The taxation that was being levied on the south was lopsided, and since there was no other alternative for the south, they got out of the original contract entered into during the 1776 convention. That original contract gave them specifics rights to leave it anytime they wanted to. They were negotiating this agreement for nearly 20 years before they finally did secede.

The average man went to war because the North invaded their homeland with guns and cannons. Most men who fought in the Civil War did not own any slaves. Slaves cost a lot of money and most farmers couldn't afford them. History has been manipulated by many people who want to attribute the Civil War to slavery but when Lincoln wrote the Executive Order called the Emancipation Proclamation, it ended slavery in the south but nowhere else. It also stipulated "If the south would cease hostilities against the Union Army, the proclamation would be null and void. Lincoln wanted to round up all of the descendants of African and put them on boats to relocate them to Central America, the Caribbean, and back to Africa but he was killed before he could get it done. It is not a well-known fact but, the slave trade of importation of blacks from Africa to the US ended around 1810. Most slaves after 1810 were bred for sale right there in the US.

Caseyboy


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2010)

No Republican ever owned a slave.

No one can name a single Republican who ever owned a slave.

All slaves were owned by Democrats.


----------



## Caseyboy (Feb 13, 2012)

I never said any Republicans owned slaves. The Democrats are the party that started the KKK and fought to keep slavery going. They also stood in opposition to the Civil Rights Act that was passed a hundred years after the Civil War ended giving blacks full rights to the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Are you challenging me or agreeing with me? It's hard to figure out when you take things that aren't said out of context. I'm usually very specific in what I say.
Caseyboy


----------



## prepare_survive_thrive (May 7, 2012)

The civil war was only about slavery. It was expressly stated in letters submitted by every state that seceded from the Union. While state rights were technically supressed, the suppression was directly in relation to slavery. If it were not about slavery then why would that be the grievance sited in the letters of secession?


----------



## Caseyboy (Feb 13, 2012)

It was about States Rights. Slavery was used as a political club to justify the war. The south had the right to succeed. That's why there were no trials for treason or sedition when the war was over. Nobody was tried except Wiez who was the Andersonville camp commander. He was hanged. People today love to use the term it was "about slavery". There are plenty of people who opposed slavery but the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the south not elsewhere. I don't want to argue the point, if that's what you believe, it's okay with me but it isn't what I believe after thirty years of research on the subject.


----------



## fedorthedog (Apr 14, 2011)

If the war was about slavery, why did Lincoln only free the Confederate slaves in the Emancipation proclamation? The slave held in the non succession states were not freed until the passage of the 13th amendment. Facts suck


----------



## Caseyboy (Feb 13, 2012)

fedorthedog said:


> If the war was about slavery, why did Lincoln only free the Confederate slaves in the Emancipation proclamation? The slave held in the non succession states were not freed until the passage of the 13th amendment. Facts suck


I agree with this statement. People like to edit history to suit an agenda. I think I said the same thing earlier. Only the slaves in the south were freed by Lincoln.

It was a club used by the politicians in the north to force the south to bend to their will. Research into the subject proves the south went to war because of political pressure placed on it by a lopsided House of Representatives.

Although the south had great wealth because of their cotton, sugar, rice, and produce production on huge plantations, the north had it outnumbered in terms of people who could vote, The more people in a state the more representatives in the house. When a series of states want to get an issue passed into law, they get together and form a conglomerate to push a bill through to the senate.

It's in the senate where a bill becomes a law. The house also holds the purse strings to all money distributed throughout the states.


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

Happy to see this thread is still going strong.


----------



## BillS (May 30, 2011)

Caseyboy said:


> It was about States Rights. Slavery was used as a political club to justify the war. The south had the right to succeed. That's why there were no trials for treason or sedition when the war was over. Nobody was tried except Wiez who was the Andersonville camp commander. He was hanged. People today love to use the term it was "about slavery". There are plenty of people who opposed slavery but the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the south not elsewhere. I don't want to argue the point, if that's what you believe, it's okay with me but it isn't what I believe after thirty years of research on the subject.


The south seceded because a president was elected that openly opposed slavery. I don't why you bother to argue the matter.


----------

