Skip to main content

View Diary: Lincoln's Folly: Let the States Secede (73 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You, and the commenter above, seem (0+ / 0-)

    to be under the mistaken belief that the civil war was about  slavery,

    No, not really.

    But whatever, the current day USA is built on a multitude of historical fantasies.    So either way, I'm happy to let this one slide . . .

    •  No, I'm not a moron and I know damned well that (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skohayes, sfinx, IndieGuy, trumpeter

      the civil war wasn't "about slavery." However, from the point of view of the present, we know that the end of slavery was one of the consequences of the Civil War and I don't think it's unreasonable to speculated that slavery would have lasted longer in a separate Confederate Country - but now I'm looking at the comment you responded to and I can't find where I said I thought the "Civil War was about slavery."

      I don't need you to let anything "slide" and am highly angered by your condescending attitude.

      You mentioned Quebec. I lived there. I was married to a fucking Quebecois Nationalist and probably know more about that subject than most Americans. You made a comment about Americans' attitude to Quebec separation. I'm under the impression that most Americans are opposed to it when they think about it at all. The treatment of minorities in Quebec is in fact something that comes up when people discuss that subject. Actually, my own opinion at the time was that there would be no significant change. One reason they had the referendum the year they did is because the non-French Canadian population was growing at a rate that they knew that the chance of voting to separate would decline as their percentage of the population declined.

      Why my knowing something about Canadian politics leads you to think I know nothing about American history is beyond me.

      •  OK, good clarification (0+ / 0-)

        clearly you are much superior to me in intellect (for example, before you said it, I DID think that Quebec had slavery - so thanks for setting me straight on that!).

        But, I might add, instead of being highly angered, I am tickled pink that you deigned to ease my ignorance just a little bit!

    •  There are essentially NO serious historians (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      swampyankee

      who would agree with your opening statement, and in fact, if you read the secession documents written by, um, the seceeding parties, they pretty much all refer explicitly to slavery as their motivation for doing what they did, as does the Confederate Constitution.

      There are many other statements from the course of the war made by participants, the most famous probably being those of Alexander Stevens, the Confederate VP, and Howell Cobb, sometime Confederate cabinet member, and sometime general all claiming that the war was about, um, slavery.

      I recall a recent lecture on CSPAN history in which a bunch of important historians - moderated by David Blight of Yale as I recall - all were aghast at the fallacious claims by some subset of Americans that the Civil War was about something other than slavery.

      Most considered the claim to the contrary to be a pernicious myth.    They didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

      However, over the years, one learns that the purveyors of historical fantasies are generally oblivious to what they are.

      I can imagine Blight et al rolling their eyes at this one.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site