What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening? • Hacker News Board

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#211

Post by emodendroket » Sat, May 21, 2022, 5:59 AM UTC

qiskit wrote: post #119

skibble wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry but this is profoundly and aggressively incorrect. The civil war was not reframed after the fact to be about slavery, quite the opposite in fact. The ‘reframing’ is in fact what you’ve tried to assert, in that it was supposedly a matter of economics rather than slavery (though of course other factors were certainly at play). It’s part of the ‘lost cause’ narrative furthered by the southern states after the…

> The civil war was not reframed after the fact to be about slavery, quite the opposite in fact. Should I believe you or lincoln? '...My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery...' https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greele... If the civil war was about freeing slaves, why did lincoln wait so long to end slavery? Why didn't he do it imm…

This is another thing Lincoln said: "One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves not distributed generally over the union but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen perpetuate and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. [...] Fondly do we hope ~ fervently do we pray ~ that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword as was said three thousand years ago so still it must be said 'the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.'" (https://www.nps.gov/linc/learn/historyculture/lincoln-second...)

But hey, the Union wasn't the party who forced the conflict. Let's hear from Alexander Stephens, VP of the CSA, instead:

> 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.

(https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/cornersto...)

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#212

Post by piethesailorman » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:02 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #208

piethesailorman wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

... of white slave owners raping Black slaves? That's your comeback? Are you sure you want to keep talking about this?

No post body was provided.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#213

Post by piethesailorman » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:07 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #207

piethesailorman wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

It happened so often that Alabama had a law forbidding the sale of children before the age of 5.

Give me a literal number. It's a Class B misdemeanor to sell, barter, or offer the fur of a domestic dog or cat. Does that happen regularly? Your conflating that it happened. A law was put in the books. And so it must happen every day? Or maybe it happens enough to make you ucomfortable? I agreed that it happened. I nnever said that its not possible it happened multiple times. Your implicitly suggesting that this was a regular and normal occurance. Show me litteral numbers

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#214

Post by tptacek » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:10 AM UTC

piethesailorman wrote: post #213

tptacek wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It happened so often that Alabama had a law forbidding the sale of children before the age of 5.

Give me a literal number. It's a Class B misdemeanor to sell, barter, or offer the fur of a domestic dog or cat. Does that happen regularly? Your conflating that it happened. A law was put in the books. And so it must happen every day? Or maybe it happens enough to make you ucomfortable? I agreed that it happened. I nnever said that its not possible it happened multiple times. Your implicitly suggesting that this was…

Unfortunately, hard numbers are impossible to quantify, although rough estimates can be made based on what records do exist, as well as memoirs, diaries, and other such sources. Much of the most compelling evidence comes from recollections offered after slavery, when the formerly enslaved were able to give some voice. In Mississippi, for example, former enslaved persons registering marriages with the Union authorities in 1864-65 provides information to the clergy about their previous marital status. Over 8,000 black persons registered marriages in the period, and 17.4 percent of them included that they had been married before, and had it broken up by sale. Specifically of those who had been previously married, 40.8 percent stated that force has been the reason for its end. Other similar records bear out similar numbers, reflecting roughly ⅓ of enslaved marriages ended forcibly by white owners breaking apart the couple.

But sure. Family stability. A virtue of slavery.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#215

Post by dragonwriter » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:14 AM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #165

myko wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly one of the reasons the south began their war over the right to own people was indeed because they were mad they couldn't force other states in the union to treat Black folks as slaves. Read up on the Fugitive Slave Act ( https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/fugitive-... ) Ironic considering the modern lost cause argument of the war being over "states' rights". There was one right they were…

> they were mad they couldn't force other states in the union to treat Black folks as slaves Meaning, I take it, that the couldn't trust northern states to actually obey the Fugitive Slave Act? Even though there was an explicit provision in the Constitution about it? > Ironic considering the modern lost cause argument of the war being over "states rights" That's not a "modern" argument. It's the argument the south ac…

> Meaning, I take it, that the couldn't trust northern states to actually obey the Fugitive Slave Act?

You mean the one (either the 1793 or the 1850 one, though the latter was both worse in this regard and—ironically given the common argument that the Confederacy was motivated by “states rights”—also violated federalism by commandeering state officers for enforcement rather than relying federal resources to enforce federal law) that unconstitutionally presumptively denied habeas rights to anyone alleged by a private person to be an escaped slave?

> But the north was also wrong because it was undermining the very institution of law

No, that was also the South.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#216

Post by joshuamorton » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:21 AM UTC

piethesailorman wrote: post #178

joshuamorton wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lincoln, then, decided he should call on the remaining states to build one of the largest armies assembled by the federal goverment to forcibly take back south carolina. This extereme overreaction to the situation is the well known historical reason why the rest of the states promptly left the union in its fear of the clear millitary power grab that was occuring before their eyes. Interesting claim, but it doesn't…

Fair! My mistake, a little less than half of the states seceded due to the problem I addressed of excessive force which you have not discredited or properly justified. Again your second paragraph attacks a small technicality. Your saying destroying a run down building on a sandbar is the same as conquering a 32000 square miles? Or are you saying that ignoring the definitions found in all english dictionaries is null…

I suggest you read something as basic as the Wikipedia article on sumpter, basically everything you've said about it is wrong, and I'm wholly uninterested in discussing this with someone from an alternate timeline.

What I will say is first, that trying to equate families and countries is rarely valid, and this case is no exception (declaring yourself divorced, for example, does not make it so, and if you take certain actions after unilaterally claiming your union is solved, your partner would be within their rights to invite state force against you!). And second, that yes, firing cannons on soldiers is usually considered an act of war. Everyone involved knew that, the confederacy was already gearing up for war and some think that SC's intent was specifically to provoke a war. So your argument that it was just friendly ribbing doesn't really stand to scrutiny.

Your just pushing transparent confederate propaganda at this point. Stop apologizing for traitors and insurrectionists.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#217

Post by piethesailorman » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:21 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #214

piethesailorman wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give me a literal number. It's a Class B misdemeanor to sell, barter, or offer the fur of a domestic dog or cat. Does that happen regularly? Your conflating that it happened. A law was put in the books. And so it must happen every day? Or maybe it happens enough to make you ucomfortable? I agreed that it happened. I nnever said that its not possible it happened multiple times. Your implicitly suggesting that this was…

Unfortunately, hard numbers are impossible to quantify, although rough estimates can be made based on what records do exist, as well as memoirs, diaries, and other such sources. Much of the most compelling evidence comes from recollections offered after slavery, when the formerly enslaved were able to give some voice. In Mississippi, for example, former enslaved persons registering marriages with the Union authoritie…

No post body was provided.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#218

Post by piethesailorman » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:26 AM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #216

piethesailorman wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair! My mistake, a little less than half of the states seceded due to the problem I addressed of excessive force which you have not discredited or properly justified. Again your second paragraph attacks a small technicality. Your saying destroying a run down building on a sandbar is the same as conquering a 32000 square miles? Or are you saying that ignoring the definitions found in all english dictionaries is null…

I suggest you read something as basic as the Wikipedia article on sumpter, basically everything you've said about it is wrong, and I'm wholly uninterested in discussing this with someone from an alternate timeline. What I will say is first, that trying to equate families and countries is rarely valid, and this case is no exception (declaring yourself divorced, for example, does not make it so, and if you take certain…

No post body was provided.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#219

Post by nl » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:29 AM UTC

piethesailorman wrote: post #217

tptacek wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, hard numbers are impossible to quantify, although rough estimates can be made based on what records do exist, as well as memoirs, diaries, and other such sources. Much of the most compelling evidence comes from recollections offered after slavery, when the formerly enslaved were able to give some voice. In Mississippi, for example, former enslaved persons registering marriages with the Union authoritie…

Quoted post unavailable.

You realise that single parenthood is a choice (I'm a single parent by choice), whereas having your family separated under slavery is not, right?

The comparison should be prevalence of kidnapping in modern times vs family separation under slavery.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#220

Post by ruined » Sat, May 21, 2022, 6:30 AM UTC

qiskit wrote: post #119

skibble wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry but this is profoundly and aggressively incorrect. The civil war was not reframed after the fact to be about slavery, quite the opposite in fact. The ‘reframing’ is in fact what you’ve tried to assert, in that it was supposedly a matter of economics rather than slavery (though of course other factors were certainly at play). It’s part of the ‘lost cause’ narrative furthered by the southern states after the…

> The civil war was not reframed after the fact to be about slavery, quite the opposite in fact. Should I believe you or lincoln? '...My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery...' https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greele... If the civil war was about freeing slaves, why did lincoln wait so long to end slavery? Why didn't he do it imm…

This document was simultaneously published by the very committee that issued the initial ordinance of secession in South Carolina, and it explains the decision to secede at great length. It is all about slavery:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Address_of_the_People_of_...

Additionally, articles of secession from other states also explicitly mention slavery in the actual text of the law, including Alabama's ordinance that proposed the Montgomery Convention at which the Confederacy was founded. Even more states explain it in similar justifying documents.

The vice president of the Confederacy delivered a speech establishing slavery as the primary motivator of secession: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornerstone_Speech

Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederacy, is on record before the war explaining slavery as cause, and after the war claiming it was about states' rights (to practice slavery).