blackduckdog2 wrote:The fact that you can't see the pin point doesn't change the fact that it's right in your eyeball
It amazes me how you fail to comprehend and/or acknowledge facts......
You're a decomocrat, of course you don't believe in facts if it disagrees with your personal opinions or what is told to you. This is commonplace of most democrats I've come across, and the gentlemen on this site are no different; if something disagrees with a belief or opinion they just close their ears, and yell "Nananana, I'm not listening! I'm not listening!".....that or they just argue it with nothing more than repetition of loose facts and opinionated
statements. And this is my quarrel with you, BDD2, as with many other gentlemen on this site, and in reality. You have complete disregard for the facts, however compelling they may be. Of course, slavery had a HUGE role in the shaping of pre-civil war American politics, and played a pivotal part in the events leading to secession, but this seems to be where you cease belief in anything else. History is history. The facts aren't regurgitated numbers or stats factcheckers blog about during debates, their FACTS. THEY HAPPENED. Why don't you believe?! Simply because it goes against what you were taught to believe? Why?
Documentation from South Carolina to the US Government regarding its secession from the Union talks mostly of the US Constitution and how the government was infringing on their rights as a state; but later on the Fugitive Slave Act is clearly mentioned. So if you were to just skim the documentation, BDD2, you would be satisfied to see nothing mentioned of economics; and this is where you would end your studies. However, this is poor scholarly practice. One must peel the information back layer by layer, retaining as much as you can as you go until reaching the core, the heart of it all, before you can truly form an opinion based on fact
(again, I must laugh aloud because I realize this probably seldom happens
). Instead, you go about things more like a scratch'n'sniff, you're a scratch'n'sniff kinda guy. Your own, personal research
goes about as far as you scratching the surface of the information, retaining all of about 5 seconds worth of information, then "DONE! I know everything there is to know on this topic!"
But since it is late, and I realize that there is a good likelihood that I am just arguing with a wall built sideways (that one may go above your head), I will stop here and just give you a few key points to base your studies on:
+You say that the south fought the war for the sole purpose of slavery, yet over 90% of fightin' men (not ranking officers) were not slave owners. And only 30% of confederate soldiers listed pro-slavery convictions as to why they were fighting in the war. What were they fighting for? Slaves they don't own? Beneficial cheap/free labor that leads to wealth they won't achieve, and jobs they won't have?
+The South felt the need to own slaves was stronger than ever after a few key tariffs and taxes were levied preventing business overseas, primarily in the cotton market. Do you feel this is just a coincidence? Why or why not?
+Lastly, this one may be difficult to grasp, if slavery was so beneficial to economics in the South, why didn't the North exploit slavery in factories, mills, etc on a large-scale like the South? (i.e. Why was there a need
for slavery in the South that wasn't exhibited in the North? Was the economy of the North just THAT strong? Or was the economy of the South just THAT crippled?)
*Although it may be an appealing answer for the narrow-minded to latch onto, try to stray away from moral beliefs of the South vs. that of the North in the response to this question. The South wasn't full of god-hating, immoral people; nor was the North full of perfect, moral citizens. Also noteworthy, keep in mind only ~10% of white southerners were slave owners (some sources would argue less).*
Sources:General Lee's Army
, Joseph T. GlatthaarFor Cause and Comrades
, James M. McPherson
For those nay-sayers, which I know there are to be many, I read these books because they were recommended to me by my grandfather, prior to the men of the family taking a cross-country two week trip visiting civil war battlefields, museums, etc. Don't believe me? That's an opinion you're allowed to have. (But only if the left-wing higher ups say it's okay