There seems to be confusion on the reason for why we fought

>>138185384
Fake News. We all know it was a vast disagreement about trying to end slavery. A black communist professor said so on NPR just the other day.

>>138185384

http://www.teachingushistory.org/pdfs/DecImmCauses.pdf

Page 7, 4th Paragraph: “No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.”

South Carolina is protesting the fact that escaped slaves are being forgiven by Northern non-slave holding States and are not being arrested and delivered back to their Slave-Owners.

Page 8, 1st Paragraph, 6th Line: “In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from the service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution.”

South Carolina is upset because escaped Slaves are not being returned, and the Slave Owners are not given monetary reimbursement.

>>138185520

http://www.teachingushistory.org/pdfs/DecImmCauses.pdf

Page 8, 1st Paragraph, 14th Line: “In the state of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the states of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia.”

South Carolina is protesting New York’s policy of not allowing a slave-owner to travel with their slave. In addition, Ohio and Iowa are refusing to extradite slaves that have been charged with murder and for encouraging other slaves to escape.

Page 8, 3rd Paragraph: “The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor. We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States.”

South Carolina asserts that slave-ownership is granted by the US Constitution through by implying that slave owners are to pay taxes on slaves, by allowing slave-ownership to import new slaves for up to 20 years. South Carolina announces in this document that the Federal Government has broken its promise to the South in encroaching on its rights to own slaves.

>>138185583

http://www.teachingushistory.org/pdfs/DecImmCauses.pdf

Page 9, 2nd Paragraph, 4th Line: “Those states have assumed the right of deciding upon the proprietary of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; THEY HAVE DENOUNCED AS SINFUL THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY; they have permitted the open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books, and pictures to servile insurrection.”

South Carolina announces is upset because the non-slaveholding States are limiting South Carolina’s rights to Slaves, labelling it a sin to own slaves, and defended and encouraged abolitionists.

Page 9, 3rd Paragraph, 7th Line: “A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery”

South Carolina is upset because Lincoln won and he is not in agreement with slave-ownership.

>>138185653

This is why the Left is gutting you on the take down of these monuments. It is because justification for them is justification for Black Slavery. It is a fool's folly to try to stop this, especially when the Confederacy lost the Civil War.

>>138185465

Where's the sauce?

>>138185807
It was last Monday afternoon. I think it was All Things Considered, but there was something on before that what made me so angry I had to turn it off, so it could have been one of their early afternoon programs.

But said professor clearly stated that "we all know" that the Civil War was predicated on the issue of black slavery. That's how you know it's true.

>>138186077
>predicated

Exactly.

>>138186222
It's only predicated if slavery was the pre-existing contention that triggered it. It was predicated after the fact (Lincoln was a lawyer, remember) as an issue around which to solidify an end to the war.

>>138186466
You seem to have missed reading the Declaration of Cessation. Go ahead and read it, it tells you the reason was Slavery.

>>138186761
Yeah man, scads of white people freaked out and undertook drawn out savagry against their own people and in some cases their own family because they THAT WAS FUCKING IT when somebody wrote some shit on a piece of paper about negro slavery.

>>138186889
Imagine their ancestors now fighting over stupid statutes. Take those motherfuckers down and put up some Grant, and Lincoln statutes up in their place.

While we're at it, also take down the Communist's statutes down as well.

>>138187127
I once had the pleasure of listening to some old dude from Hungary recount his experiences of being a youth in Hungary at the time the Soviets came in. It was interesting how much they relied on symbolism.

As you know, the Soviet state religion was atheism, which required forcing all the Christians to hide or stop as a form of mass slavery. So one of the things they did was topple a big statue in his town of Mary. But they didn't just break it and drag it away. They left it toppled in a ditch. And the system was sufficiently effective that the people of the town when they walked by it had to avert their gazes and pretend it wasn't there for fear they might be ratted out and punished.

Modern commies are lightweights.

>>138187399

>Modern commies are lightweights.

Some of these current Nazis and Libertarians would be out supporting them I am sure. This would give them that edge.

>>138189065
I don't know. The idea men seem to be a bit few and far between compared with the useful idiots, regardless of which group you consider.

In another incident, one of the first things the Soviets did to maximize impact when they swarmed in was to bust in to the schools of little children (you always want to target the children). In this guy's case, his teacher happened to be a priest. So they literally picked him up and threw him out the 3rd story classroom window in order to establish the fact that there wasn't going to be Christianity anymore, and installed a Soviet teacher to take his place.

Children often learn well through symbolism and allegory.