False history marginalizes African Americans and makes us all dumber.
That is what the Confederacy and its flag stand for, in their own words.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.
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
As a people we are fighting maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause. —William T. Thompson (April 23, 1863. Creator of the 2nd confederate flag.)
I'm not sure if you're being facetious or not.
The article asserts that people are being taught, wrongly, exactly what you say here. Any opinion on that? From the article :Yet when each state left the Union, its leaders made clear that they were seceding because they were for slavery and against states’ rights.
No, flagamuffin is not serious. Yes, flagamuffin is making a joke.
Thanks for that.
I hear people assert this all the time, and I believed it myself when I was younger.
Wow. I'm surprised a 21 year old knew that phrase, to be honest. That she had a misshaped view of Civil War history is par for the course, but calling it the war of northern aggression implies a certain involvement or extraordinary bitterness.
Ok... Look, I am not going to argue this point too awful much here, but this is a singular viewpoint, and to play the devil's advocate... the last slaves were not freed till two YEARS after the Emancipation Proclamation, which only freed the slaves in the "Rebel States." This means it was solely a political move meant to engender rebellion and sow chaos on the opposing side of the conflict by inciting riots among the slave populationsm. Lincoln actually wrote in a letter to Horace Greely in August of 1862, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union." Slavery was not his concern in this, he didn't care if the slaves were free or still slaves hence why slavery continued in the northern states unabaited for two years after the ened of the war, and effectively the nation continued slavery through Jim Crow laws involving property, voiting rights, legal rights and other unfair treatments of black people, till 1902! Also don't forget that Blacks were not the only "slaves" in America at the time, Irish Americans were coming over on the boats as indentured servants, and the Chinese/japanese workers were often taken by force into such a life from the ports of Shang Hai, and Tokyo. I do agree that the impact of slavery in the war has been marginalized by groups such as the sons and daughters of the confederacy, however, such organizations as the NAACP and things like BET television can be just as divisive and damaging. If you want a truely homogenous melting pot them we need to all accept that we have Heritage, and that we have race, and that it is OK to have pride in that, no matter which one that you happen to belong too. White people are still the majority, but that isn't going to be the case much longer. The last year saw the percentages in the census drop to 61%, the lowest ever measureed in the USA. Unfortunately, and I hate to say this, the 1960s white supremacist had a point. If one group is discouraged from having a racial identity and the others encouraged to embrace their own, then which group is going to have an identity when it is all said and done.
Here's the thing, I think that most people still take pride in their ethnicity, more so than their race. However, with many African American's this was stolen from them. They're not sure where in Africa or otherwise their lineage hails from. It was stolen. I can pay homage to my ethnicity, my father's side is 100% german and my moms is 100% mexican. I have the ability to learn about my ethnic history. White people, by and large have this ability too. But when you lump everyone together based on a lack of pigment and start celebrating that alone, well that's kind of messed up. African Americans have a unique history, unto themselves in the US. Therefore, their solidarity makes sense. White's in the US have no shared identity, it would have to be fabricated and forced via something like white supremacy.
You're focusing on why Lincoln waged war to prevent secession. That's secondary. The south's leaders stated that one of the main reasons they seceded was to keep blacks in slavery. That's what revisionists are trying to change.
yikes... if you're siding with white supremacists at all... you should probably take a step back.