War Room Lounge V36: Liquor in the rear, too

[Islam Imamate]

There is no question that the Southern planters wanted to preserve slavery. I’ve never said slavery wasn’t a major issue. It just wasn’t the only issue. And it wasn’t the main reason that the soldiers were motivated to fight. The planters and politicians certainly wanted to preserve it. However, remember that the Northern economy utilized the money made by those Southern planters. They had no intent to end slavery where it existed. They didn’t want the new territories being added to include slavery because it would get in the way of their own business interests.

And yet in the end it was the North that ultimately abolished slavery against the will of the South. When it comes to talking about the Confederacy the opinion of the rank and file soldier matters little since it was the political and economic elite of the South driving the Confederacy. Slavery was the key question and its preservation the key motivation for the political and economic elites of the South and the primary reason for the existence of the Confederacy. Sugarcoat it all you want but that's the truth.

 

[Fawlty]

What about the fact that the Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded as an idealistic religious settlement and the New England that arose around it (the first region in the entire world to have mandatory public education) had the highest literacy rate in the world...

... While the South was founded as a commercial venture on the back of slavery and indentured servitude where education was limited to personal tutors and private school for the children of the elite?

Despite the caveats, we can generalize about patterns of literacy. In 1974, University of Montana scholar Kenneth Lockridge’s groundbreaking book, Literacy in Colonial New England, surveyed evidence from legal records and offered provisional conclusions—“The exercise is bound to be tentative, as it uses a biased sample and an ambiguous measure”—but he made the case that, among white New England men, about 60 percent of the population was literate between 1650 and 1670, a figure that rose to 85 percent between 1758 and 1762, and to 90 percent between 1787 and 1795. In cities such as Boston, the rate had come close to 100 percent by century’s end. Lockridge and his successors showed that literacy was higher in New England and the mid-Atlantic colonies than in the South [...] Perhaps it should have been no surprise, because literacy had been an American obsession since the beginning. As early as 1642, Massachusetts passed a law ordering the selectmen to monitor children’s ability “to read & understand the principles of religion & the capitall lawes of this country.”
https://www.history.org/foundation/journal/winter11/literacy.cfm

@Jack V Savage "City on a Hill" Nationalism

That's a great point about education. Slavery was introduced very early but there was a major "steel" element there too (as in guns, germs, and steel), which happens around the introduction of slavery. One side exploded in agriculture and human misery, while the other side exploded in technology and cultural exchange. The main reason for the introduction of slaves was the success and physical hardship of tobacco farming. It was easier for the North to go in another direction. Taking the morality out of the equation, of course. The pressures were different.

 

[Jack V Savage]

And yet in the end it was the North that ultimately abolished slavery against the will of the South. When it comes to talking about the Confederacy the opinion of the rank and file soldier matters little since it was the political and economic elite of the South driving the Confederacy. Slavery was the key question and its preservation the key motivation for the political and economic elites of the South and the primary reason for the existence of the Confederacy. Sugarcoat it all you want but that's the truth.

And note that one of the biggest myths you see in these discussions is that slave ownership was rare in the Confederate states. In fact, about a third of households in the traitor states owned slaves, and in some, it was close to half. Soldiers were probably poorer on average, but still, for a good chunk of the rank and file, they were fighting for the personal benefits of slavery.

 

[Fawlty]

New fred time gimme a few

 

[Sketch]

New fred time gimme a few

Take your time dude. No worries.

 

[Prokofievian]

And note that one of the biggest myths you see in these discussions is that slave ownership was rare in the Confederate states. In fact, about a third of households in the traitor states owned slaves, and in some, it was close to half. Soldiers were probably poorer on average, but still, for a good chunk of the rank and file, they were fighting for the personal benefits of slavery.

Say it ain't so, @Captain Davis

 

[Jack V Savage]

Say it ain't so, @Captain Davis

Here's a source:

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html.

 

[Prokofievian]

Here's a source:

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html.

 

[Prokofievian]

I don't know what all this sudden moral panic about gulags is about. Just take a look at that ''Alaskans shoot bear cubs'' thread. Clearly, there are people who need a gulagin'.

 

[Fawlty]

https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/war-room-lounge-v37-wheres-waldek-the-fake-poll-pole.3937057/

 

[Captain Davis]

Indeed that much is beyond debate given declaration of causes.

Now, what things could we not connect to slavery that were reasons for secession?

Tariffs and overreaching government.

 

[Captain Davis]

Cap, i'm gonna make this as simple as I can.
That question makes no actual sense. It's basically two shades away from a fallacy.
And i'm not "talking down" to you. I just understand exactly where the cracks in your foundational understanding are. That "question" is a good example.

Thanks.

 

[Captain Davis]

Say it ain't so, @Captain Davis

Simply not true.

Ulysses S. Grant
Personal Memoirs. 1885–86
Chapter 16

“The great bulk of the legal voters of the South were men who owned no slaves; their homes were generally in the hills and poor country; their facilities for educating their children, even up to the point of reading and writing, were very limited; their interest in the contest was very meagre”

 

[Captain Davis]

Here's a source:

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html.

Keep googling. You will find 10 sources with 10 different answers.