Random thoughts my brain throws out to keep me from sleeping

vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
gemma_rae said:
I once learned African slaves were slaves because they were the losers in tribal warfare. Their choice was slavery or death at the hands of their captors. They were sold in Africa, brought to America, and resold.

Repatriating them would have been certain death or re-enslavement.

Then, the white Democrats learned they could cut out the middleman and capture their own.
Click to expand...

FIFY

Other than that, spot on. The uneducated triggered crowd hates reality and fact, so they reject the notion of Africans capturing and selling other Africans into slavery. They also hate the reality that the Democrat Party is doing pretty much the exact same thing today.
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
vraiblonde said:
We have simply to look at the Revolutionary War for the answer. A handful of people were fighting for what is now historically accepted as "the cause", and a couple handfuls more were merely rabble who got roused. Pretty much like today where a large segment of the population has no idea who's even running in an election, but they vote anyway and choose the person they're told to choose, and go to figurative war with their friends and family over any differences of opinion.

Fed: Give runaway slaves back to their masters because it's their rightful property.
A tiny handful of northerers: No.
Slave owners: MFers, give us back our property!
Northern handful: No. In fact we're going help them run away.
Fed: Ahmmmm.....dahhhhh....ermigerd....
Population in general: Whuh?
Southerners: Our newspaper says we need to kick your ass!
Northerers: Well OUR newspaper says we need to kick YOUR ass!
(commence war that most people don't even know why they're fighting)
Click to expand...
The most abbreviated version evah! Who the fawk needs history books? LMAO...
 
Kyle

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
Merlin99

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
vraiblonde said:
...completely ignoring the rights of other humans to be free and not slaves, indeed not even recognizing them as human....

Which is the most Democrat thing EVER.

Historians like to blahblah and cite all these catalysts, but what you posted above nails it right on the head. Southerners (Democrats) thought they had the God given right to own human beings as slaves and saw anything that curtailed that as an infringement on their rights. That is the crux of the whole thing, and everything else stemmed from that.

All those acts and decisions and provisos and what have you were just a dipshit government (much like what we have today) being indifferent to a problem, slapping a bandaid on a severed limb and making it worse. You think our Congress today are a pack of ignorant savages, they're Little Lord Fauntleroy compared to the douchebags back in the 1800s.

So absent slavery, there would be no reason for the southern states to secede. If they wanted to secede for some other reason, Lincoln would have surely still wanted to preserve the Union because he was quite clear that that was his main interest. Freeing the slaves was just a bonus.
Click to expand...
But the federal government had already given their blessing to slavery with the Dredd Scott decision. So was the Federal government going to ignore the SC decision? That's why I took slavery off the table. So who were the bad guys here, North or South?
 
Merlin99

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
SamSpade said:
I think we were still a young enough and vulnerable enough nation that splitting up the union would have invited invasion, especially the South. As a consequence of the conflict, all of the world's powers with interests in the region were sending fleets, aiding the Confederacy. France was looking at Mexico, Spain the Caribbean and Britain the South. We'd already established the Monroe Doctrine saying to Europe, hey - keep ya mitt's off!

All of that went to hell when the fighting started.

And Americans knew that, not just the North.

And the union of the states wasn't meant to be like a marriage, where divorce is possible. I don't think the North fighting to keep the South in the Union is a good guy/bad guy thing.

EDITED TO ADD - A South WITHOUT slavery would have been a very POOR part of the nation. Their entire economy depended on it. I don't know what the South would have been like without it.
Click to expand...
Pretty much as it is now, instead of slaves to harvest the crops we have illegal migrants who come in and do it for a pittance. What would be the cheaper alternative feeding and housing enough slaves to work a large farm or just hiring the same number of illegals for the time required to bring in the crops?
 
Merlin99

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
And the next question would have to be "If the civil war hadn't been fought, how long would slavery have lasted?"
 
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Merlin99 said:
But the federal government had already given their blessing to slavery with the Dredd Scott decision.
Click to expand...

They hadn't really, though. It was just a typical lazy government not wanting to make a real decision, just slapping a bandaid on it, and making it worse. Saying humans born in the US weren't citizens and not entitled to legal protection or rights under the Constitution was just asking for it.

Northern abolitionists and some others: Oh no, MFer, you do not!
Slave owners: Ha!
North: Ha, my ass....
South: Come and get some!
North: Your invitation is cordially accepted...

We went through something similar a few years ago when deciding on same-sex marriage. Do ALL Americans get the same rights and protections under the Constitution, or only some of them? In the Obergefell decision the Supremes decided (barely) that yes, ALL Americans have rights under the Constitution. The Taney court, otoh, was like, "Mmmmm....no...only white people. Sorry." Of course the anti-slavery crowd wasn't going to stand for that, nor should they have.
 
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Gilligan said:
Hells yeah. You could cover the Middle Pleistocene through Early 21st Century all in one semester. That'd leave a lot more time for the kiddies to learn about woke stuff.
Click to expand...

You mock me :smack: but really this stuff isn't that complicated. It's when historians get into the minutia - which goes back to the beginning of time - that people's eyes start to glaze over.
 
SamSpade

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
vraiblonde said:
See? I should have been a history teacher :diva:
Click to expand...
I used to go to this place, years ago, that did "Movie In a Minute" and "Books In a Minute". Hasn't been updated in years, but a lot of them are pretty funny.

E.G.
"Little Women"

Thomas Niles
Write a book for girls.
Click to expand...
Louisa May Alcott
Okay, but writing this is boring, and I hate it.
Click to expand...
Thomas Niles
It sold millions.
Click to expand...
Louisa May Alcott
Here are some sequels.
Click to expand...

Or Movies

The Lion King


Scar
You killed your father.
Click to expand...
Simba
(runs away)
Click to expand...
Nala
We need you.
Click to expand...
Simba
(runs back)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top