All Comments on 'The South will Rise Again'

i think that nearly every human, if able to trace the family tree back far enuff, would find an ancestor who was a slave. The industrial revolution essentially started the end of slavery. (not of the sexual variety) As long as greed and the other 7 sins exist, there will always be some kind of slavery. extortion is another form in my opinion. and don't discount how people like to feel self righteous.

Everything you said is true, so why would anyone want to deny facts? It always amazes me that people live on lies, just look at the political situation in this country. If you repeat a lie often enough it becomes reality for some. Sad, but true. Oh, yes people throw rocks just because it makes them feel better. They want to live in a world of fantasy rather then admit their own shortcomings. Author you're becoming one of my favorite writers. I always enjoy your stories. They entertain, and that's what reading on this site is all about, at least to me. Thank you for your efforts.(ML)

I have many friends and relatives that live in places other than the South and invariably when we visit them, we encounter those who think that all white Southerners condoned slavery or even perpetuate it today. Those poor deluded and ignorant souls are a product of a historical bias enforced by the media and even our own goverment. Again, Bravo to an excellent writer. Looking forward to your future postings.

as one 'good ole boy' said; "iffin we knew then, what we knneow now, we woulda picked our own damn cotton." As far as rising goes, the South now has manufactoring, dirty cities, corrupt politics, pollution and exploding populations. We still like BBQ, long necks, pretty girls and the weather is a whole lot better than in the Nawth. Can I get a Hell Yeah!!

No, I have never been a slave, owned a slave, nor know anyone who has been or owned one. That "Peculiar Institution" is gladly gone, yet the remnants sadly remain.

Thanks for all your writing (even tho I do not enjoy your Hogue series.)

Qhm1, History is studied for a reason. Those who ignore historical fact pay the price at some point for their ignorance, and certainly look like total fools to anyone with a clue. Giving background historical information in a story is a great thing. Don't pay attention to the ignorant knee jerk idiots -- they are always around to plague us just like our ignorant moronic politicians...

As a student of history, I acknowledge that you have penned an accurate, albeit, sparse, history of slavery. However, you have failed to acknowledge that there were numerous Europeans who held sway over the Africans who assisted with the slave trade, because they promised that in exchange, those tribes who assisted would not be treated to the same brutality as their brethren. European encroachment upon the African continent decimated tribes through war and disease. Why did they invade that vast continent? So that they could steal its wealth of knowledge and natural resources, just as they often continue to do today. Who controls the diamond mines, the gold mines, much of the oil that is produced in countries such as Ghana? Westerners. Who benefits from this production? Westerners. Whenever a country's government makes an attempt to stop the blatant exploitation of its people and its wealth, what happens? Westerners intervene, and arm a greedy "rebel" who is willing to take his country to hell for the sake of lining his pockets.

The southerners were not mere "end users." They were evil despots who embarked upon an unprecedented and systematic brainwashing scheme designed to rob the slaves of their families and their identities for the purpose of ensuring that they would become a permanent underclass. This scheme was brutally enforced as they ripped babies from the arms of their mothers, raped wives in front of their husbands and children, sold entire families apart from one another and turned even the institution of marriage into an unenforceable matter of convenience for the "master." They used slaves like breeding cattle, forcing them to have intercourse so that they could breed larger, stronger slaves, and then used brutality to enslave their minds so that they could tamp down their own fears of their bodies. They imposed ignorance upon a people that has been the most inventive upon the earth. Read about Willie Lynch. Maybe it will open your mind.

In addition, westerners have usurped African culture and invention, claiming to have fathered modern medicine when Hippocrates wrote that he was a "child of Imhotep," a royal black African architect who oversaw construction in Egypt and cared for the resulting wounds of the workers there (including some slaves). Who, then, was Hippocrates? A translator. They also claim to have fathered mathematics, when disciplines such as Algebra and Calculus were invented, again, by black Africans. Africans of the Kush Empire founded Greek culture. Africans of the Nubian and Kush Kingdoms founded China. Africans of the Nubian Kingdom founded the cultures of Japan, Pakistan and India. This is just to name a few.

White southern slaveholders had the temerity to use Christianity to tell the sons and daughters of Africa that God wished for them to be enslaved, when they were God's first people. They claim to have fathered Christianity, when the Roman Catacombs clearly show that both Jesus and the disciples were black Africans. The tribe of Israel? Black Africans. Adam and Eve, Moses, Abraham, Joseph, etc., etc.? Black Africans. The oldest and most pure-blooded Jews in the world were found in Ethiopia and India. The rest mixed with Europeans, to create the hue with which you are more familiar today, but African hair still defines their history. By the way, Semite means biracial. Why do I know these things? Science and Anthropology show that there were no white people at those times and in those places. Contemporaneous art shows that these historical figures were not white.

The greatest shame of all? Whites are albino black Africans, who would still have a stake in each of these discoveries, even if they allowed the rest of the world's population to take part in them. Yet, they would rather hoard these things for themselves, and tell black Africans (among other people) that they have no place in history, and that they invented nothing, when Europeans were cave dwellers at a time when Africa was teeming with large and wealthy cities that were the center of learning and culture. Where are those places today? Europeans attacked and burned them, killing intelligent leaders and stealing whatever knowledge they could and setting those people back for generations.

By the way, I don't care whether your people were sharecroppers. They still received benefits through the mere lack of competition by the descendants of slaves due to the imposition of Jim Crow laws, institutional racism and substandard schools.

Yes, slavery is found throughout history. Yet, I challenge you to find another time in history when slaves were treated with the same measure of brutality, and kept in ignorance with the same willful determination as that which occurred in the United States. Slaves were upwardly mobile in other societies, often freed after a certain amount of service or allowed to marry to a non-slave and end their servitude. They were given positions of trust (think Joseph in the Bible) and could, through their service, expect to better their position in life. You see, kingdoms such as Rome may have been brutal, but they did not forget that their slaves were human. That was non the case, here.

I know that you meant well by publishing this essay, but truly your perspective has shown me that you have very little knowledge of true diversity. Please take the time to stop by a site called diversityinc.com. It was founded by a white male baby boomer who had to learn diversity to perform his function in the military. He has made it his mission in life to help all people to understand that diversity and inclusion help us all to profit and to flourish. Perhaps then you will better understand topics such as slavery and white privilege, as even in your learned dissertation, you have displayed a profound ignorance of these subjects, among others.

QHML1 as a big fan of your stories (except for the last one!!). I really didn't even notice your comments about the south and slavery. As a northerner now living in Central Virginia.... who had three ancestor that fought for the union... I am familiar with both sides of the argument and the cultural differences and the perceptions behind the civil war. I belong to three civil war round tables.. CWPT.. the CIVIL WAR SOCIETY .. and I am a founding member of NORTH AND SOUTH MAGAZINE which over the last several years has become the leading historical and intellectual magazine on the US civil war in American history.

I would not say that you are a apologist for the south or that you are an neo confederate which is very common among the ignorant tea party hacks which seem to dominate much of the Deep south these days. But you come close.

That being said let's take a couple of other facts which often get left out from the southern redneck revision KOOKS which dominate the conservative and republican party and these days.

The confederate states of America was a vile disgusting and deeply repulsive 'thing".

I am extremely proud and happy that guys like William Sherman George Meade and Sam Grant did everything they could to crush destroy and rip up the Deep south . The act of secession was and is unconstitutional and the CSA acts were traitors and unAmerican and in my view essentially crypto fascist.

Your points about child labor and sweatshops in northern factories in the late 1800s is all very true and very accurate. It is also completely irrelevant and just a red herring for people like you to divert us from the reality.

The historical record of the speeches given by Jeff Davis as well as the confederate vice president and all of the state resolutions on secession clearly state the primary reason why the relieving the union was because of the issue of slavery. They believed that because they lost the election of 1860 that the only way to preserve their institution and the economic system-- which is what slavery was-- was to leave the union.

In fact he only way to destroy slavery was for the slave states to leave the union. If they had stayed in the union they had enough political power certainly within the senate to block any sort of abolitionist legislation for the next 30 to 50 years.

The distance from Western Texas to Washington, DC is greater than the distance from Paris to Moscow and if Napoleon had not been able to win and conquer that sort a distance with his great military genius... Surely no one could conquer the CSA.

ENTER SAM GRANT.

In this day and age with most of the conservative movement filled with deep race hatred against the first African American president... it common for tea party hacks and the libertarian kooks to assert that the CSA was a glorious thing... And since the civil war the country has been losing its soul and marching towards a socialist state which has arrived now with Obama. I would NOT go that far but I am NOT going to deny that there are certain aspects of American history since world war two and with the current president which are the essence of big government . And I am NOT going to deny the wearing a way of certain civil liberties by both republicans and democrats.

But the South did not try to leave the union because as they " just wanted to be left alone". Holding onto institution such as slavery given the declaration of independence and what the words were supposed to mean... is a inherent contradiction.

You may have the right to look the Porn in your own home without the government knowing . You have the right to smoke marijuana in your own home without anybody knowing .

You do not have the right to be left alone and own people.

Here is a real kicker. Do you know that most Senators drive by a house of slavery to get to work everyday? That's right! In the middle of Washington DC there is a KNOWN house of slavery... sexual slaves from all over the world. In one state, one of the old Govenor's Resedence's is now a house of slavery... Nope, not in the south, but the enlightend West. Do you realize that there are over a thousand Slaves captured every year off American streets? Don't believe me? Look at the news. Look for a college co-ed that disipears into thin air. Look at the laws being passed in states that"Allow for sexual slaves to have all past charges dropped if the can prove thier sexual slavery." These are not isolated cases. You can find them in every state, every city... yes, even in your city. Yes, there were thousands of Black Slaves, but... let us not forget the millions of WHITE slaves, Mexican Slaves, Europian Slaves, Aisian Slaves.... I think I've made my point. Oh, and as a matter of fact, neither side in the "War of Aggression" hands were clean. Both were wrong and both were right, depending on the individual issue.

Myhands316 Chattanooga TN.

Like Harry write responses longer than the article, drivel as usual from that source.

Too bad we can't post a "1" for the commentors.

The pure hypocrisy of some of your readers never fails to amuse me - Harry's comments and those of the Anonymous before him immediately come to mind. They're very quick to point out the "despotism" of the West, quickly shifting to scapegoat the Southern USA and ONLY the Southern USA, but the simple fact is that every single country on the planet has indulged in it, some on a scale that makes the freaking South look like a bunch of puling naughty choirboys. Let's recall exactly which slaving nations colonized the USA and had continental reknown shipping industries built on stolen lives. The only true innocents were the slaves, not their white owners, and not their black sellers.

Let's also remember that it wasn't just the south that indulged in slavery but the north as well, and the north that directly profited from the national financial mega-boom that was King Cotton in those early days. The founding fathers certainly had their failings - they drafted this lovely document about the rights of men... yet somehow those rights did not include THEIR VERY OWN SLAVES. OR THEIR WOMEN.

Yeah, so keep on making excuses, Anon & Harry. Blame it all on the South. Claim that anyone who acknowledges reality is a crypto-fascist or some other idiotic labeled designed solely to make you feel better about your enlightened state. As someone whose history is Northern, whose heritage lies partly among the slaughtered natives of this country, and who sees hypocrisy for what it is, I have nothing but fuck yous for your scapegoating.

Two Cents Plus

The way things are going now the South may very well rise again. This time most of the mid-western states will join. Have you seen the red state map lately? People are getting more fed up by the day.

As another comment mentioned, industrial child abuse was @ 30 years after the Civil War. Likewise, Vanderbilt and Morgan made their fortunes long after this war. So when you string together 'facts' they don't necessarily support your argument.

Again, another comment went into interesting detail regarding what the southern plantation owning class did to slaves. The bullet point here is that Southern slavery was harsher than any slavery in history. No other historical slavery sucessfully tore away the slaves existing culture so thoroughly. Most historical slavery was for a finite number of years, and at least held out hope that your children would not be slaves.

The one place in the South that, a little bit, escaped this harshness was New Orleans, where a substantial pre-war class of non-slave blacks existed. Where a tiny amount of African culture survived, in New Orleans, it led to the only Amercian musical form,... jazz.

And here's the kicker that the, "I'm colorblind; pat me on the back; we don't need to talk about race" folks won't acknowledge: This slavery harshness has consequences even today, that still require public policy to address. Disproportionately larger than average visits to Mickey D's is the absence of culture, not a culture. The criminal justice system remains the biggest example of institutional racism.

This is not some acient history book issue. I was raised in Atlanta. I can take you to a forgotten corner of that modern source of civic pride, the huge Lenox Square mall, and show you boarded up, covered over, former Colored Bathrooms.

the south declared war on the u.s.a.too protect their slavery.and still try to fight the war.

Harry you are the dumbest person on here. States entered the union voluntarily and they can leave voluntarily. Read the book: the south was right. It sheds some light on the facts. History is only written by the winners.

What utter garbage---it was okay for Southerners to have millions of slaves because other people had slaves, too? Really? Anti-Semitism has existed for centuries---does that excuse Hitler and the Holocaust? Murder has existed since Cain and Abel---does that justify every murder today? "Little Timmy punched his sister in the face, so I can do it too!!!" is little-kid logic. Slavery is wrong, and indefensible.

why is there so much feminist, anti-racist, and working class history around?

Quote from qhml1

"So, while the South gets belittled, they were ultimately only the end users in a long chain of misery"

ONLY the end users???? Without the end users (buyers) imported slavery into the US colonies would have been almost non existent. That "long chain of misery" would have been almost non existent in my opinion.

Imagine, if you will, if no one purchased drugs in this country (imported cocaine, heroine, etc.).

The end user/buyer is the reason why the market exists in the first place.

And again we have a bunch of people who can read but fail to comprehend. If you take a look at what the author wrote, and look at it objectively, you'll see he was saying the South shouldn't be the ONLY ones being blamed for slavery. There was more than enough blame to go around, but everyone focuses on the South as this 'superevil'. And the funny part is how people are claiming slaves had it worse during this time period than any other time period. Wow, what a bold claim! I know I'm not a big history buff, but wasn't there a time when slaves were routinely put in a coliseum to fight each other or vicious animals for the mere amusement of their captors?

And we can't forget how it was the Europeans who introduced slavery to the African people....oh wait, they already did that. When one tribe was beaten by another, weren't the survivors taken as slaves?

Sigh, slavery isn't new, or something 'white' people made up to help keep all the other races down. If you truly believe that, you're doing more to keep your race down than any 'white' person ever could.

So next time you think of how bad slavery is and want to jump up and proclaim how bad the South was, take some time and think about all the different parts that made up the system that allowed slavery to exist and remember. If not for the entire system; from the collectors, to transporters, to the end users; slavery wouldn't have been the huge thing it was, in this country at least. So spread that hate for it around to all the parts, not just one segment of the whole atrocious system.

I've been doing research on early ferries across the mid Hudson, primarily in the era of the horse powered ferry (roughly 1815-1840). As I investigate ferry service on various crossings, I find over and over that before the introduction of the horse ferry there were ferries on these crossings rowed by slaves. Slavery was not abolished in New York until 1827, about 34 years before the outbreak of the Civil War.

As with most things, there are a lot of folks who will not want to be confused with the facts!!

But I think we should still speak out against it, treatment of Native Americans, company towns, Nazis, sweat shops, etc.. This stuff tends to creep back once you lay off. In a early draft of the Declaration of Independence, there was a line about British introduction of slavery to the colonies. By that time most nations knew it was wring. We may of had reasons, but no excuses. BTW, love your writing.

You didn't mention "human trafficking". Out here in CA it is big business today, as it is in many parts of the world. I thought your comments were right no the mark.

Thanks

and pick out which ones were written by dumb as shit s southern red neck mother fuckers

and I think that you were right in pointing out, for example, that the triangle trade was a big money maker for northerners, northern ship captains brought the slaves back from Africa, they transported the rum that slaves created down in the caribbean, it was all tied in, northern woolen mills used southern cotton, and so forth. And the fact is that northerners were not majority abolitionist, abolitionism only really gained fire when the fugitive slave acts came into being, and northerners were angry at their sovereignty being violated, in part thanks to the Senate giving the south a lot of sway (there were more southern senators then northern ones, thanks to the 2 senators per state).

However, there is also a lot to be said about slavery you didn't get into. One of the reasons the southern states seceded was not because of abolition (they knew it wouldn't happen, not with the power they had in the senate), it came about because they wanted slavery to expand. It is all great and good to talk about 'king cotton', but a lot of wealth was made in selling slaves into new territories, the 'old south' , virginia, the carolinas, georgia, made a lot more money selling slaves as product to new territories then it did in cash crops (Macpherson and others talk extensively about this). They seceded because they had been stymied in selling slaves into new territories, and felt that if they seceded, new territories could be established as slave states under the confederacy. Keep in mind that bringing new slaves from Africa had been banned since about 1809 or thereabouts, so what was here was a self replicating supply.

What made the slavery so bad was as others said, because slaves were a product to be sold, that farmers weren't just using them on their plantations, slave families could be and were broken up (which has some part of the blame of the problems with black families to this day), slavery elsewhere did not take chattel slavery to the levels it was in the south in the US. The north had slaves, and most places didn't outlaw it until not that long before the civil war, but it was rare, there were only a tiny number of slaveholders or slaves up north, in part, because northern farmers and industrialists didn't want to compete with slave labor.

The major difference? In the south, if you were a slave, you were a slave for life, and so were your kids, you grandkids, and so forth. In most states down south, you couldn't even legally be freed after about 1815, they had banned that (not in all areas)......that kind of slavery, where it was passed down from parents to children, was unique to the south. Someone mentioned indentured servants, what that left out is that indentured servitude lasted only a specified period of time, it was not lifetime, and in many cases it was arranged because the person wanted to emigrate,and made the deal to be a servant for 7 years or whatever, to pay off the cost of passage. Others, like Scots after the war with england in the mid 18th century, were sent here in exile as indentured servants.

The other problem with the antebellum south was it was not a democracy, it was an outright aristocracy. Among other things, the rules down south were such that to vote you needed a certain level of property, and it was not small, so in effect, only the well of planters and larger independant farmers could vote (little known fact: the secession and the war itself was never put to a plebiscite, the legislators voted it, not the people) You had a small group of well off people, and most others were pretty darn poor. Slavery probably hurt most people in the south, no yeoman farmer could compete against slave labor, and given they had slave labor, and could easily trade for what they needed with the north, the south never developed any real industrial base, that might have provided jobs and economic benefits outside king cotton and slavery, that would have benefitted a much larger base. When southerners glorify the CSA, they are ignoring the fact that chances are, as with your ancestors, QHM1, that they probably were pretty poor, given they didn't own slaves, and that what the CSA represented was maintaining what made them poor (the poor bastards who fought in the civil war believed they were doing the right thing, and if you ever read Shelby Foote, you would appreciate the sacrifice those men made, how valiantly they fought, for a system that hurt them. And as in all wars, the people they were fighting for, the plantation class, themselves didn't fight all that much...).

There also is the post civil war Jim Crow, but that is another topic.

History is rarely black and white, and the north had its own problems with race and such, still do, but the reality of slavery in the south meant that comparing it to other forms, or even that the north had slavery, is not an even comparison, that southern slavery, 'their peculiar institution', was very, very different then what had come before, in its scope and yes, brutality, because slaves were property, to be sold like a cow, and because it was an inherited thing. Keep in mind the sheer number of slaves, there were more slaves in the confederacy then free people (ever wonder why a slave counted as 3/5 of a person in the census? Now you know why, there were more slaves).

The New Mind of the South by Tracy Thompson

review: http://www.alternet.org/culture/what-everyone-should-know-about-south

Indentured servants DID in fact want to come America. The indentured period of servitude paid for their transport to the "New" World. Their servitude may have been — and was often — unpleasant but there was a light at the end. Not true for slaves. For them, there was no light.

Take a look at the Emancipation Proclamation you folks from the North and South. Especially as to who was "freed" from the bonds of slavery. If you see that only the slaves in the rebellious states where freed, than what of those in the North. That's right, they remained slaves.

"Despite this expansive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the Union, leaving slavery untouched in the loyal border states. It also expressly exempted parts of the Confederacy that had already come under Northern control. Most important, the freedom it promised depended upon Union military victory." (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation)

This brings up a different aspect of the Bill of Rights. Specifically the taking of property without just compensation. Can the descendants of the persons who slaves were freed now sue to the federal government for this compensation? And what measure of damages would be used? The price at the slave block auction or the economic loss that is associated with a loss of use. i.e. The taking of an viable business is not that of just the block and mortar of the building, but can also include loss profits.

Just saying, that you should think and research before you mimic the teachings of your schools. The Emancipation Proclamation did not free all the slaves in the United States, even though that is the impression that is being served to the masses.

As an aside, but could be the thought process of the people living at that time. Some 100 years earlier, these people forefathers penned the following thoughts:

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." Hmmm, the right to alter or abolish a government. Kind of radical don't you think. The quote is from the Declarations of Independence. Yes, that document that purports to allow the "Colonies" to succeed from Great Britain, but which we latter learn from the Civil War that succession is not allowed.

Thanks.

Hello again, and to answer those who asked or sent me feedback about the "House" I meantioned in Washington DC.

1. I don't know the name of the house. As far as I know it doesn't have a name.

2. I don't know the address of the house, I just know it is there. So do the police and the newspapers who raided and reported on the story.

3. It is just that... a House; a dwelling, a resedence. a place where one is supposed to live. It's not a titty bar or club.

The pictures you will find show a brick faced upper middle class house on a main street. When raided, they found fifteen undocumented women from east aisa and former soviet block countries.

But... that isn't the point. The point is, that it, and many others like it exist, are known by the powers that be, and can do a successful business in human sexual SLAVERY in the capital of this nation that proponets FREEDOM!

Thank you

Myhands316

EXCELLENT!!!! Only the near sighted will not agree with your examples.

Your reasoning is also highly flawed. The "Everybody is doing it excuse"? Puh-leeze! By your own admission, every atrocity EVER committed is okay. The bit about your folks never owning any Slaves DID NOT lessen the point they fought tooth and nail for others to do so. But thanks for the heads up! I can now skip your stuff. Yeah, the South shall rise again because, for the most part, shit floats!

. . . for the well-written piece. I'm not a historian, so I don't vouch for the accuracy of your historic summary. I nonetheless appreciate that you care enough to write and post it, and I very much appreciate the fact that it will continue to stimulate thought and conversation. From my point of view, we are all slaves; we are all oppressors; we are all thieves; we are all victims and survivors. There is no reason for any of us to disown any part of our collective history. Thanks for adding to the conversation.

Didn't this open a debate, and for me personally touched on something that has been niggling away at me recently, so I'm going to air my views just a little. Britain (and others in Europe) have a glorious history that we now seem to be increasingly ashamed of. I won't go into extensive details, but will recount a recent visit to Greenwich in South east London, which apart from being the centre of the earth (OK, so that's where the zero meridian is) is also where I was born quite a few years ago. I visited the Maritime museum, which I remember from my youth as being THE place to go and find out about the glories and wonders of 'our' (and we share a lot of that with 'you' lot over there) naval history and all it's wonderful and memorable victories, that made the great in Great Britain. Think of Nelson, Trafalgar, Drake and if you want, more recently, the sinking of the Bismark and even more recently the successful retaking of the Falkirk islands, the longest ranging invasion force ever to be attempted, and possibly the last of any size.

I was astonished at the museum, and very disappointed, to find that the glorious museum of my childhood had been turned into, by the current custodians, to a mass apology for all that we see in todays eyes, that our ancestors did wrong. RUBBISH!

Ok, so times were hard and awful things happened, but to judge what happened in years gone by, by todays standards is stupid beyond belief, but that is what we seem to be intent on doing these days throughout the western world, and that's why this story (from an author that I follow) touched a cord with me.

I've said enough -finished! Well done anyway.

I don't have a problem with your reasoning. Shango I do have a problem with.

QHML1 don't use verifiable facts it just angers and confuses people that have already made up their mind. You have to laugh at the sheer lunacy of it.

I have a mixed opinion of your description and view of slavery. On one hand, you are absolutely correct that slavery is one of the most pervasive aspects of human society in history. Virtually all cultures, at one time or another, practiced slavery in some form. It is also true that slavery, even in the America's, existed primarily to meet an economic need. It is also true that slave traders were not primarily from the South (although the importing of slaves had been banned nation-wide early in the 19th century, so most slave traders at the time of the Civil War were a) not Americans and b) smugglers).

It is also true that that the majority of slaves were sold to European's by other Africans, which brings me to my chief criticism. In your paper (and by most people when discussing slavery), there is no distinction made between slavery in different cultures. All slaves were not treated equally. You mention Moses, who was a slave in ancient Egypt. Egyptian slavery, though, was a considerably different parctice that slavery in the US. Egyptian slaves had numerous legal rights, were allowed to own property, and were considered to be just as human as their owners. The biblical account of Moses killing an Egyptian for beating a Hebrew is suspect, as beating a slave (even your own) was a serious crime in Egypt.

Slaves in the South, on ther hand, enjoyed no legal protections of any kind. This is much more like Roman slavery than Egyptian, and it is the latter that was practised by Africans in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, and is more prevalent in history. American slavery was by no means the only slave system in history, but it was among the most brutal and oppressive, and existed in a time when slavery was not only relativly uncommon, but in a society that viewed itself as being exceptionally just and compassionate.

The South is frequently criticized for slavery, frequently to excess. But the fact remains that the South practiced a system of oppression that was, even by the standards of the time, cruel, opressive, and amoral, and fought tooth and nail to preserve that system. That is something that Southerners cannot forget. It is a stain that can never be erased.

Trust me. I'm German.

I don't think you are a racist.

I knew a guy in college that insisted his home was in Atlanta, O.G. as in 'Occupied Georgia'. He would argue endlessly that 'The War Between the States' was about State's Rights, not slavery. You didn't dare call it 'The Civil War' unless you wanted to set off another rant (which we frequently did). I appreciate what you're trying to do, but facts aren't going to sway this crowd.

When I was born I didn't get to choose my great great grandfather, the one buried in Elmira NY, at the Yankee prison camp. I didn't get to choose my grandfather who baked bread in Mobile and made special loafs to give away in the depression. I didn't get to choose my father who help integrate the schools in Georgia.

What I hear from people is that I have to bear their collective scorn because I was born a son of the south. Well, scorn away, I'm pretty sure I will live.

In fact I live rather well on your scorn and superior attitude. The minute I realize a yankee is taking a superior attitude with me my whole diction and selection of words changes. My wife thinks its a hoot, she is a yankee by the way, I talk slower and drag out my words and make them feel like they are gonna skin this old stupid redneck. It never works out the way they expected.

I'm sorry that the south had slaves, but on the other had I had no choice in the matter, didn't get a vote any more the the people that were brought over. I suppose that Lincoln had the best solution and we should have returned all the black folks to Africa, but I didn't get a vote in that either.

Just sayin, I am only feeling guilty for the things I do and did. Tired of people finding excuses to hate for things that weren't done to them, and certainly by me. The time for crying is over, pick yourself up, brush yourself off and get back in the game.

The vast majority of Americans are racists. (Black, White, North and South)

This country was founded on the premise that non-White people have no rights that White people are bound to respect. Europeans came to someone elses country, moved in, took over, and murdered anyone who resisted. Their behavior was acceptable because they believed that non-White people lived beyond the grace of god. (like the other lower animals) They attempted to enslave the Native Americans. But it is difficult to enslave someone on their home turf, in a isolated and hostile environment. So they imported Africans. Our founding fathers are murders and rapists and child traffickers. The average American is simply not civilized enough to be embarrassed or ashamed. In fact they are proud. They believe they can compare themselves favorably with the worst that humanity has to offer. There is a reason why so many Americans (particularly Southerners) believe in capital punishment, just like other brutal people around the world. We emprison a larger percentage of our population than other industrialized nations. We spend more on the military than all other nations. We are a barbaric people.

Europeans/Americans proved to be the consumate predators. They turned oppression and exploitation into "high art". Like all predators, they have no honor, or integrity. They simply prey on the weak and helpless. There is a reason why predators go after the young, the old and the infirm. The only thing predators respect is larger predators. Non-White people around the would do well to arm themselves, or Americans are guaranteed to attempt to intimidate, butalize and murder them for their land, resources, and/or cheap labor. (without an ounce of remorse)

The "Southern way of life", isn't just about economic exploitation. It's about a culture of brutality and dehumanization. It's a predatory culture adopted by all who grow up here, or are influenced by the good old U S of A. People who live with predators learn to think like predators or prey or both. (smaller predator are often the prey of larger predators). And Southerners attempt to perpetuate the image of gentility, by ignoring the underpinnings of the culture. They focus on the benefits to the white economic elite, and ignore the cost to both Blacks people, and poor White people. Even today, White Southerners are trying to convince everyone to honor their White Southern ancestors, who fought for the right to enslave and oppress the ancestors of their Black neighbors. Now that's true "Southern hospitality and graciousness"! Southerners are the kind of people that will spit in your face, on a regular basis, but they do it with a "warm" smile.

Robert

The facts you've laid out, Q, are pretty much accurate. I don't know about the Irish village, I never came across that one in my studies, but I don't doubt for a minute that it could have happened.

As far as native American tribes were concerned they did practice a form of slavery too. The real crime of the European conquerors, to my mind even worse than slavery of Africans to work the land, was the genocide of the entirety of the extant native population to steal their land. If it happened today the press would cause a popular uprising against all involved. As it occurred, from 1620 until 1900, the press was trumpet cheering on.

If my math is correct less than 160 years ago a US Court in St Louis ruled that Dred Scott had no standing to sue to retain his freedom because he was black and could never be a citizen. Essentially the court ruled he was not even a person. You are right Q that racism abounded North and South up to, and after, the Civil War.

Stating facts is not racism!

If you were born and raised in the U.S., then you ARE a racist. Doesn't matter what race, what age, or what gender you may be, you're going to be making decisions based on data that is influenced by your race. You're going to be influenced by cultural values learned early and reinforced often. You're always going to be viewing your world thru that filter. This doesn't mean you have to 'act' racist, but even defining what is or is not a racist action will tend to vary depending on your race. Back when I was a younger fella (circa the Bronze Age), I worked in a fast food restaurant. One day, a couple (of race A) complained that the young lady (of race B) serving them was treating them in a racist manner. Specifically, she was obviously trying to avoid even touching them (when counting change or handing them their order). She claimed the hand cleanser we were supposed to use was oily and she was only trying not to spread it to the customers. Racist behavior? Maybe, but on who's part?

Eight years AFTER the END of the war of aggression Delaware ended their own slavery. EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION was for the SOUTH ONLY.

" ... and whenever any form of governmemt becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government."

Very well written by a patriot and ratified by every colony in the want-to-be-a-country, mostly north-eastern. I can't imagine anyone honestly being confused by these words. The south exercised their right, but the north won the war, and then raped the south. The comments pretend to care about the plight of opressed people. BULLSHIT! Did you ever read about the new northern plantation owners and their sharecroppers? Guess not. Oppose slavery in public, embrase it in private; or is that "in profit"? The war was over who should own the wealth of the south; just like every war. Wealth. Power. Not right and wrong. I'm a northern boy with a southern heart. Get over the past. We got present enemies in this world.

people like you are why we havce wars all over the world brought on by hate passed down for decades and centuries. i do not own a slave. never have. i am part native american. mosly white. all of my ancestors got robbed raped and exploited at one point or another. the native american part was just more recent. deal with today. deal with the problems we have now. quit hating because you ancestors did.

As a student of history, I think I have a moderately blasé vie of the historical flow of secessionists. Their predecessors were traitors a hundred and fifty years ago. They are traitors today. Their successors will be traitors a hundred and fifty years from now. Ho hum, what else is new?

I actually find myself emotionally detached. Once you understand the basis of their ideology is; that they are 'Predestined' and 'Predetermined' to be the ruling caste. Ubermen destined to rule over all the rest of us. How's that delusion going for yah?

What surprised me the most about myself? Was my visceral reaction to their public renunciation of their Oaths of Allegiance. Me, a materialist atheist and I suddenly find that I am embroiled with a visceral fury against the secessionists acts of blasphemy in violating their oaths of allegiance and their oaths of office.

With the Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson Presidencies methodically rebuilding the Social Order with the enforcement of the Civil Rights legislation, the dixiecrats bolted the Democratic Party. Their inability to form a national coalition against the Civil Rights Movement forced them to find new allies.

Over this same period the Republican Party had to face the bitter facts that population growth among non-republicans left them as obsolete as the Whig Party. They desperately need to re-brand themselves and find allies who actually were increasing in population.

That was when the Republicans took in the Dixiecrats and forged a renewed GOP power structure strong enough to hold back the Democrats. The Old Republican leadership thought they would continue to dominate and control the GOP against the low class Southern parvenu's. But in elections, it is number of votes, both popular votes and in the Electoral College determine the winners.

The Old Black Republican Party died with a whimper more then forty years ago and what we have left is more correctly called the Dixiecrat Party. And no it does not matter what part of the continent they are from or even their race. It is mainly about cultural values.

I do not care about the Popular Vote, it is meaningless noise. What is important is the Electoral College as that majority is determined by the smaller states. That proportionally provide the majority of professional military commissioned and non-commissioned officers. To quote the Ancient Sage Mao Tse-tung "Power flows from the barrel of a gun".

When nearly half a century of Cheney/Bush league corruption and incompetency ended the American Republic and almost strangled the new Empire in it's crib by eviscerating the Global economy, by trying to please the War Profiteers and the Saudi Royal family. It was the support of the Electoral College compelled by the overwhelming demand among military officers to end the Cheney/Bush kleptocracy that would gift Obama with back to back Presidencies.

To add to the discomfort of the Dixiecrats, demographics is a bitch when your faction is in the decline. It will be interesting to observe as Dixiecrats in eminent obsolescence try to find new allies. Pity for them their Saudi paymaster's cannot vote.

Go rant and rave like a lunatic somewhere else fanfare. This is not some political website for idiots to post their views. All qhml1 did was to give some history about slavery because of what he wrote. I can only imagine the uproar from people like you if he had used the word niggardly in his story. You'd be there demanding an apology from the steps of Congress. There have been several incidents in the last 10 years or so where people reprimanded for using the word because people who didn't know know what it meant were too lazy to find out. Everything qhml1 stated was true. If you don't believe it, quit reading so many loving wife stories and check it out like I did.

They will not be able to get out of Atlanta traffic...

Slavery as practiced in the US was was based on, and justified by, advancing the notion that those being enslaved were less than human, an inferior species, no different from livestock. This notion was so widespread in the society that it was advanced from the pulpits of churches as being part of God's plan for man to be master of all animals.

It is true that slavery has existed throughout human history, but in the past it was based on enslaving defeated enemies or citizens of plundered cities, or sentencing criminals or debtors, things that could and did happen to anyone. US slavery was unique in that it was not only based on enslaving a single race, it was also based on the belief that the slaves were of an inferior, subhuman species that deserved to be enslaved, and not just unfortunate victims of circumstances. The fact that that belief continued long after the end of slavery, and is still widely held today, just makes the slavery and its supporting beliefs all the more evil.

I don't fault the author for mentioning it, it is as he says, a fact of history. Just offering some insight on why the subject continues to invoke such vitriol.

The South fought to keep their slaves. They were fighting to preserve a monstrous wrong.

By 1860, records show, an 18 year old "Prime Field Hand" sold for between $2000 and $3000. This was a time when common wages for unskilled labor were less than $1/day (a 12 to 16 hour day). The slave owners were responding to the law of supply and demand.

What they didn't realize was that they were paying so much that on the average they would not ever get their money back. Add in 3% interest and other expenses (medicine and Dr. bills) and the real risk that he would get sick and die or escape to the North, and the South was going broke.

Plantation owners were getting deeper and deeper in debt as time went on. Or so my sources say.

So, why did they do it? Why didn't they see why they were going broke?

Partly cultural inertia. Partly because having "power" feels good. Partly because they convinced themselves that the North was somehow cheating them, maybe with the Protective Tariff. But, somehow.

I wonder if the readers of an Erotic site can think of an additional reason?

I post this Anon because I don't want my head bit off by descendents of Southern traitors.

I agree completely, but this is the age of the hot button and the 30-second sound bite. During the last presidential election a youtube group had one of there group hold up a sign declaring "Obama is a Keynesian" in the DC area. Person after person castigated the sign holder, declaring the President to be a native-born American. People were unable to distinguish Keynesian - a follower of the economic policies initially expounded by Sir John Maynard Keynes, from Kenyan - a person from the African country of Kenya. People do not read and reflect anymore. I am a proud son of the South, but that does not blind me from historical fact.

I agree with you and people no longer have common sense, the people that scream the loudest about racism are the biggest racist. They want you and me to make up for their upbringing.

one thing i can not understand about slavery is why is everybody so absorbed with the idea. yes there were slaves in the south. the civil war was not fought over slavery. it was a puely economic issue. 75% of the federal income was produced by the south. the money was then spent in the north. the south just wanted a bigger portion spent in the south. lincoln was not opposed to slavery.

The preambles and articles of secession of the southern states only mention one specific grievance against the United States, interference with slavery. The rest of the articles give legal/constitutional basis for secession.

Examples: "Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” Dec 24, 1860 They note “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery” They also objected to interference with the return of fugitive slaves, voting by black men in New England, the establishment of abolitionist societies, and not recognizing "slave transit" by slave holders into non-slaveholding states. There are no reasons cited not directly tied to slavery.

Mississippi, Jan 9, 1861 - "Declaration of Secession" - “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world,”

Read them all, they are online.

The belief that somehow the south paid the taxes while the north benefited is also bogus. The federal government received the vast majority of it's funds from Ad Volorum taxes in the form of tariffs. FY 1859, Total Federal Income $65.4 Million - Tariff income from:

Major Northern ports, $44.994 million

Major Southern ports - $2.830 million,

Other ports $8.576 million.

www.flickr.com/photos/36584779@N05/8512092444/sizes/o/in/photostream/

The cause of The War Between the States, The War of Northern Aggression, The Late Great Unpleasantness, The American Civil War or whatever you may choose to call it was caused by the fear of abolition of slavery and the economic chaos that would most likely ensue.

I am a southern man, and I'm damn proud of it. My ancestors owned slaves. I have four ancestors who served in the military during the War of 1861-1865; three went with the South, one with the North. I'm proud of all four.

Slavery in the USA was benign when compared to other places. In Brazil they had to continuously import more slaves because they worked the ones they had to death. Here in America the slave population was so healthy and so well treated it was able to reproduce itself. Most slaves did not live on huge plantations, but on small farms. For a young southern man to be able to buy a slave it was like being able to buy a better horse. One did not mistreat a horse. In most cases the first slave purchase was a female; someone to help out with the kids.

The War Between the States wasn't about slavery; it was about the 'racial readjustment question'. No one knew what to do with 4 million hapless black people once they would be set free. They just weren't competent to manage on their own; many still aren't. They needed, and regrettably still need to be managed. The descendants of our slave population do not make our country stronger or better; we are weaker because of their current circumstances. I might add it's not their fault.

Most southerners served in southern armies, not because of slavery, but because they didn't want a bunch of northerners telling them what to do. Southern whites, true southern whites, are usually Anglo-Saxon or Scottish. They, we, don't see things the way some other people do. Yes, we have our own customs.

I read some of the crap some 'anon' wrote about 'Kush'. He's misinformed; if the people of Kush had a language, there is evidence they did, it hasn't been deciphered. Hippocrates was Greek, and most likely a light haired blue eyed Dorian. Cleopatra was Greek too. Imhotep was an Egyptian, but they very clearly asserted that they were not black! Ancient Egyptians held the black people of Nubia and Kush in very low regard. There are ancient 'stele' along the Nile that forbade the movement of black people north of certain points.

Don't get me wrong. I am not a bigot. I am honest, and I am a realist. I am glad the South lost. I don't think black people have had the same opportunities as whites. We as a nation have never adequately addressed our 'black problem'. We most likely never will; the financial costs to appropriately educate and acclimate our black fellow citizens is considered too great by those who run our country. Regrettably many believe it's cheaper to incarcerate them.

I don't think there is any culture that hasn't practiced slavery in one form or other at some time in their history.

We all live in glass houses so let us stop throwing stones and learn to live with each other - in peace!

Here's the ultimate kicker.

I really hate liberals. Really and truly. They've built their platform out of special interests, and nearly all those interests claim some aggrieved victim status of some sort. It's handy when it comes to raising money, getting out some votes, and hell, why argue with someone over the facts when you can just scream "racist!" and walk off a winner? And there are many people very invested in keeping the racism alive; race hustlers like Al Sharpton (he's no Rev in my eyes).

The problem is that the race card has been played for far too long and too often. Like how it's all about "white privilege" now, how white people are all racists just because they are white, like if I said all black people were retarded, would that be racist? Odd...one sweeping generality is racist, yet another is not. And it's remarkable how one set of self appointed victim industry people have supposedly taken on the mantle of all knowing grand poo-bah, and their judgments are not to be questioned.

So now, when anyone speaks of race in any form, if they are not one of the "entitled" class, that speech is to be shouted down and drowned out regardless of validity or truth. Today, it's about some thug in Ferguson who messed with the bull and got the horns, but tomorrow it's some obscure writer in Literotica.

Here's the sum up.....true racists don't want a conversation on racism. They want to dictate how they are victims, everyone else is an oppressor, and they are quick to pile on and subjugate anyone who speaks out. But what they haven't noticed, hell, maybe they just are incapable of seeing it, is that most people are tired of the hype and bullshit. Tired of being manipulated, tired of being accused of things they do not do, but mostly tired of being forced to give a shit about a condition which hasn't existed in this country since 1865.

I don't own slaves. To the best of my knowledge, no one in my family ever has, either. I don't know any slaves, or parents of slaves, or grandparents of slaves. When I see an actual situation of slavery or racism, then I'll give a shit. Until then, I owe no-one a damned thing, I'm not responsible for what anyone else has done in any generation, and anyone who tries to impress responsibility for their made up victimhood status on me will get served a large and hot steaming bowl of "shut the fuck up." Further attempts will only get that person a side order of "go fuck yourself," and the really persistent will get a double helping of "may you be rectally relieved by a syphilitic boar." Twice.

And to the author, I say....fuck it. Write what you want, be responsible for your fuckups, and tell the grievance industry tards to go fuck themselves.

you're just justifying what you wish to believe.. and rationalizing so that you feel no guilt for what you've already written... my main problem with your story was your pushing of the idea that those darkies were happy and well fed and that darkie girls just loved massa coming down to poke them... often times making their husband qnd kids watch... i have more respect for outright racists that just say to my face that they dont like my color... i don't doubt that you think that you're an enlightened moral person... but your elaborate excuses for the south paint a picture of a person that i don't think i'd like being friends with..

No, YOU'RE just trying to justify what YOU want to see!

NOTHING in "Boston To Birmingham" tries to justify slavery or to suggest that the slaves had any sort of love for their masters.

Were there SOME masters who treated some or all of their slaves with SOME degree of care and affection, and/r some slaves who developed SOME degree of affection for their master? I've not made a study of it, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if so! In ANY case, even if true, it certainly would justify slavery, and I don't believe that qhml1 was trying to do that.

And it IS a historical fact, as Q says, that many of the slave ships were owned and manned by Northerners, and the initial capture of the saves was at least usually carried out by fellow Africans. Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

Spot on with your explanation.

Very well written and documented. You mentioned that your people were share croppers which like the indentured were defacto slaves themselves. as history shows some masters were humane but many were not.

Ed Grocott

edgrocott@gmail.com

over 4 million (i think the number is closer to 8 milion) africans were shipped across the atlantic in slavery.

onlt 450,000 were sold into slaverey in the usa / colonies.

slavery in the usa was deplorable, and a life sentence.

however,

slavery in the tropics was deplorable and a death sentence.

in the tropics,

slaves work the sugar plantations ,

and they were worked to death,

day in and day out.

there was never any down time.

there was no winter rest period.

relative to the tropics,

slave life in the usa was so ''good'',

the slave population grew well beyond the half million that were ''imported''.

this was not typically the case in the tropics.

there, they were worked to death,

and then when the plantation owners needed more,

they went and bought another one.

of course this does not mean some slaves in the usa were not worked to death.

slavery in the usa was deplorable.

but so is slavery in africa today, and everywhere else it exists in the world.

just google ''human trafficking'' and read up, to see how large a problem it is.

i do not know that my ancestors owned slaves,

but it would not surprise me if they did.

i'm not proud of it,

but i'm not ashamed of it either.

i have never owned a slave.

and i have been taught it is wrong to do so.

now if i could just bring myself to buy ''free trade'' coffee.

Indentured servants most certainly did want to come; it's why they agreed. That said, they were basically slaves until they completed their contracts.

There is a cadre of people who go around looking for reasons to call people racist, sexist, etc. Some of them have found a way to make money at it. Never apologize to these people. You'll know them by how they behave. Some call them Social Justice Warriors, others call them the PC police. They are liars and frauds.

I read your work; you owe them nothing. No apologies, no explanations. Any rational adult would not read what they have into your work.

Slavery in the South was different because it was indeed "racist" slavery.

And unfortunately the genesis of this "scientific/philosophic" racism was the Enlightenment Philosophers - seizing on Aristotle's "some men were made to be slaves and others their masters." John Locke wrote the Charter for the Carolinas and held stock in "The African Company." It was Protestants and then purely atheistic secular humanists who led all this racist slavery and NOT the Roman Catholic Church.

Look up Bartolome de las Casas and the Valladolid debate.

Look up "racism of the Enlightenment Philosophers."

Read what "the Cornerstone" of the Confederacy was in Alexander Stephens 1861 Cornerstone Speech.

Consider the whole Eugenics science movement of the 20th century - where slavery had ended but scientific racism continued right along and drove all those anti-misegenation laws like Virginia's 1924 "Racial Integrity Act."

Also google "the Truth about the Catholic Church and slavery" and read the article by historian Rodney Stark.

Well just read this story 3 years after it was posted. My what a raucous comment section ! I am a Son of the South, I've traced 11 ancestors who fought for the confederacy ( and 4 for the Union). Not one of those ancestors was beyond the rank of Capt. , only 2 were officers. None of my ancestors, that I've been able to research had any high standing in the leadership of either side of the conflict. Did find 2 who were slave holders, but apparently on a small scale. Now with my skeletons laid bare for all to see, will someone please tell me where MY actual sin comes in ?

How does one be convicted as so many commentators on this posting seem to think that I should be ? Half of my family tree were from East Tennessee , which was actually a stronghold of unionist , which is where 3 of the 4 ancestors who fought for the union come in. They were actually seven Union regiments of Tennesseans who were well decorated during the war ( Homegrown Yankees : Tennessee's Union cavalry in the civil war by James Alex Baggett ) , does this lessen the stain on my soul ? Not in the eyes of the know everything crowd that has commented over the years since this was posted !

The simple ( I know that nothing is ever simple in this discussion) fact is that slavery in various forms is as old as the Human animal ! Everyone reading my words have ancestors who were war like invaders of their neighbors lands. They killed and enslaved their enemies , and acted in ways that our civilized minds can simply not fathom today.

But , that base part of the human psyche is still there in every homo sapiens that still walk the planet ! We as a species are capable of barbaric acts on our fellow man , its just a cold hard truth ! One has only to look at the Syrian conflict of today where over half a million souls have perished ! Look at the Bloody conflict in Rwanda in the 90's when a million people were slaughtered in just a few months ! Bosnia, Sudan , East Timor , and many others in just the last 20 years in our so called " civilized " world of today.

And slavery is alive and well as I right this in March of 2016. The Boko Haram rebels in Nigeria famously raided a school and took hundreds of teenaged girls into slavery recently. ISIS fighters in Iraq and Syria have been well documented as having pressed their captives into slavery in the last few years. These groups were far from the Antebellum South as could possibly be ! These are only a couple of incidents of modern slavery, there are too many more for me to even begin to list !

So what I'm trying to say ( not very well I'm afraid) is that the human condition is not a simple black and white thing, there are thousands of different shades of gray between the two.

Very lively discussion you have begun Qhml1.

Cpprcrk

The problem as I see it is the Lost Cause apologetics that claim that African chattle slavery had little or nothing to do with sesession and the Civil War (War of Northern Aggression). This nonsence started with Jubal Early.

Four Confederate states passed formal Statements of Reasons for Sesession. All four were adopted at the same time as and by exactly the same conventions that enacted the Ordinences of Sesession. All four state clearly and unblushingly that the prospect of federal interference with slavery was the reason for sesession. Yet in the South you still hear to the contrary, as I did repeatedly on a recent trip.

Don't y'all think your ancestors knew why they did what they did?

The idea of one person owning another has become anathema since the middle of the 19th century...before that (and in some places, since then), it was just accepted as fact of life!

In the United States South, it had another chilling effect. It fostered a cash-poor economy (in which slaves were often a measure of economic wealth and societal importance).

It took a Civil War to start the repairing process.

To all those busting your chops, ask them if they know how many slaves you own or have owned! It might not shut the knuckleheads up, but might make you laugh a little.

Facts eventually prevail.

When that line comes up?

My answer is..."The South Already Done Riz..."

Presidents, heroes in all fields, an Olympics...In what way hasn't The South risen?

..... brook no argument, except among those deluded zealots hiding behind the States Rights myth as the justification for tens of thousands of deaths (my southern family members included) in a war to preserve the abomination of slavery and wealth of a privileged few. Slavery was the cause of the Civil War, just as Catholic Church greed was for the Crusades.

Yes, slavery was the primary economic system for almost all larger agricultural "nation-states" throughout history - from the ancient Egyptians to classical Greeks (Plato's utopian "Republic" depended on slaves to do all the boring work) to the pagan Roman Empire to the Aztecs, Incas, and Mayans.

But it WAS actually Christianity (especially Catholic Christianity) that successfully fought against and eventually eliminated slavery within "Christendom" - Medieval Europe. It was only Christianity that moved Roman Empire economic slavery to non-slavery by 1200AD. Thomas Aquinas by then had directly articulated that slavery WAS a sin - but it then only existed on the fringes of Europe - the few pagan Vikings in the North and the Islamic world to the South. See this for more details:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/julyweb-only/7-14-53.0.html

Also read Stark's book "The Victory of Reason".

So where did it all go so wrong starting in the 16th century and the new form of colonial RACIST slavery? It started with Luther and the Protestant Reformation and the inevitable "throwing the baby out with the bath water." The Magesterium of the Church - official Catholic doctrine and authority got very much weakened and the supposed "Age of Enlightenment" soon followed.

Here's the funny part - ALL the revered "libertarian" philosophers of that "Age" were actually racists - who believed as just "science" that basically WASPS (White Anglo Saxon Protestants) were superior and every other race inferior (including White Irish.)

This includes Locke, Kant, Hume, Voltaire, Jefferson, etc. etc. etc.

Compare Locke's investing in the Royal African Company and writing the Aristocratic slave-owning constitution of the Carolinas with his OTHER works on individual freedom and equality for "all" - all WASPs, actually - with the arguments of Bartolome de las Casas in the Valladolid debate - arguing successfully that Amer-Indians WERE fully human and deserving of all human rights despite their own level of societal development.

Even after the Civil War (again look up Georgia US Senator Alexander Stephens and his 1861 "Cornerstone speech") philosophical scientific racism merely morphed into "hard science" Eugenics racism which absolutely "proved" the truth of White superiority over all the other "lesser" races - the Yellow, Brown, Red, and Black races - in that order. Read just about ANY college level biology textbook published before 1950.

The actual purveyors of racism in the "modern" world - at least until WW2 was finished - were the liberal secular humanist scientists and politicians - all those Dem icons like Woodrow Wilson and FDR. It wasn't "ignorant Rednecks" or "fundamentalist Christians" or any OTHER kind of knowledgeable Christian and especially Catholics who fomented this crime - accept that many DID participate as either common sinners or misled by the same science that HAD been correct in so many other areas. But not this one.

And this topic is till hotly debated. The comments by and large on either side have been for the most part concise and well reasoned. A few weren't. Doesn't matter. I personally am glad it struck some kind of nerve with so many people.

I have since come to believe that life in our plutocracy is heading towards economic slavery of the highest order. And as with almost all plutocracies, revolution is never far away. In my opinion, the recent presidential race pushed it into sharper focus. The shrinking middle class, mostly middleaged white people who were tired of their lifestyle eroding away, and when Trump offered them what they wanted, they jumped on the bandwagon. What we forgot was our new leader is himself a member of that plutocracy. I myself voted for neither, flashing back to the Richard Pryor remake of the old classic "Brewsters' Millions', where he had to waste a certain amount of money to gain much more. One of his money waters was to run for office, and then make himself and the other candidates look less than appealing, finally running ads urging the voters to vote for "None Of The Above', which is what I wrote in on my ballot. A waste, I know. I'm almost sixty-two, and have voted in every elections since I was eighteen, but I just couldn't make myself vote for either candidate.

Oh, and for all the people who labeled me an apologist, I have to wonder what they thought I was apologizing for. Stating facts? Avoiding revisionist history? It was what it was.

My great grandfather and his brother were both in the Army of Norther Virginia, and were with Lee all the way to Appomattox Court House. Their rank and regiment is inscribed on their headstones, just as all veterans of all wars are remembered.

Please, have a socially acceptable politically correct day.

Q

And I haven't been politically correct since the Free Speech Movement in Berkeley. Some people have an opinion. Some follow along like Lemmings. We, in this Country, find ourselves more divided then at any time since the Civil War. And nobody, especially our Political Leaders, seems to know how to negotiate or compromise. We've elected a business man that leads by Twitter and really cares only about his money. I'd say "God help us all" but that would be both socially unacceptable and politically incorrect. Have a day.

Your history lesson (much appreciated, by the way) stopped just short. Most everyone forgets that the party of racism right up to the mid-60's was the Democratic Party. Bull Connors and George Wallace stood for segregation until the troops moved them. It wasn't until LBJ noticed that all those blacks had votes to cast that the Democratic Party became the party of the oppressed minority. Not surprisingly, they still view everything through a filter of race.

Q, I have to agree with you about the election. I looked at the slate of candidates early on and didn't find a one worth spit. (Maybe Kasich, but I'm not sure about him). Anyway, until Election Day, I was planning to vote Libertarian or Green or None of the Above. At the last minute, I changed my vote to vote against Hillary. Apparently, a lot of folks did the same. It was a choice of the Wicked Bitch of the East or PT Barnum. Welcome to the circus.

Finally, I live in Texas. People are moving here in droves to escape the mess that is their former state. However, they bring their voting preferences unchanged. Soon, I fear, Texas (and many other Southern states) will be falling rather than rising. Look at New Hampshire and tell me how I'm wrong. JPR

Basic fact, humans have long memories especially when retribution is involved.

Curiously absent when the Deconstructors of History start clamoring about how poorly muslims were treated during the Crusades is the causal event that led to those campaigns.

The Moorish(Muslim) invasion of Europe. The sole professed purpose of which was to eradicate Christianity and the lighter skinned followers of that religion.

Though some younger males were castrated and enslaved, most were butchered in front of their families. All females were repeatedly raped and impregnated over generations.

Nothing done to the muslims during Crusades comes close to the horrors visited upon the inhabitants of the Iberian Peninsula by the Moorish invaders.

If not for Charlemagne's father a similar fate would have been visited upon the rest of Western Civilization.

I'm struggling to understand what's going on in the US at the moment, with the proposed disposal of statues of Lee, Jackson and monuments to Confederate soldiers. I sort of understand how some African Americans may have an issue but it all seems pretty much over the top from Over the Pond. How do Southerners feel about the slur against their family who may have fought for the Confederacy without any particular liking for slavery?

Generals vs. slave owners.

On the one hand there are no statues of Hitler any where in Germany except maybe in a museum. And I doubt swastika flags are flying from flag poles in people's front yards. So why is it ok for generals of the CSA to have statues honoring them.

On the other hand, just because a man served and fought in the German army in WWII, does that make him equal to Hitler? I think not.

Therefore not all members of the CSA mitilary were evil. Don't forget, in in the early 1800s, slavery was legal every where in the USA. Even in the north. And when Lincoln freed the slaves with the Emancipation Proclomation, he only freed the slaves in the secession states, not the north. And yes there were slaves in the north. Just not nearly as many.

The south never wanted to destroy the USA. It did however want the right to keep slavery. Imagine if you eared a living making and selling whiskey just before prohibition, and the new law was going to eliminate your job, your livelihood and any investment you had made in your factory. This is what the spit was facing. It is easy to see why the wanted to secede. Slavery is repugnant.

When all the crap was going on in C'ville, a friend of mine asked in passing "What's next, protest against Jefferson and Washington because they were slave owners?"

Well as it turns out the answer is yes, students(?) at UVA protested Jefferson as a "racist and a rapist" and draped his statue in black. And according to a comment on the Today show this morning, somewhere in our great nation some locality is considering changing the name of a school from Washington because he owned slaves.

Slavery was / is repugnant. It should not have happened 200 years ago and it should not happen now. And yes , it is still happening in some places around the world.

Over 6 million Africans were sold into slavery and shipped over seas. Only about 400 thousand were sold in the US. (Over time they grew to over 4 million through procreation.) Most of the rest went to central and South America as well as the carribean.

Slaves in the US had a life sentence. The chance of freedom was almost non-exsistant.

Slaves in the other Americas had a death sentence. They were worked 7 days a week 50 weeks a year. It was cheaper to buy a new one than to care for an exsisting one. There was no rest, no winter, no life.

Slavery is repugnant in any form. It should be eliminated every where.

There is a movement in the US that is pushing to eliminate any thing and everything that is connected to slavery. This includes statues, flags and maybe soon, American presidents who owned slaves.

Slavery is / was repugnant, but a little common sense would be nice.

By the way, to paraphrase Tine Fey on SNL Weekend Update, let the idiot white extremist have their protest. Don't go to listen to or protest against them. Let them shout their message to an empty microphone in an empty street. How much TV time would that get.

You really are a talented writer... A couple of your stories really are works of art... But sadly... After reading your rebutal... I cant in good conscience read any more of your offerings... The sad thing is that i get the feeling that you're a fairly decent person... But you just don't get it... Slavery in america can't be rationalized by comparing it to other evil acts... It's amazing how intellingent people can grasp onto some of the most unintelligent ideas... And the perpetrators of this vile institution... There is absolutely no way of excusing them... Which is pretty much what you tried to do... Its a shame... Cause you are such a good writer...

-jaye-

I'm a fourth generation Northern Californian. No axe to grind about All This.

Now living in Nashville. Because I'm a songwriter.

Just read Shelby Foote's "The Civil War: A Narrative"...3 volumes. 3,000 pages.

Read that. BTW, no more than 20% of Southerners owned slaves?

The vast majority of Confederates were defending their homes and families

against hundreds of thousands blue-clad Invaders who were grabbing their crops, burning their homes, and killing their families?

Oh...That's what really occurred.?!

For me, FACTS overrule hype. Every time.

The "history" I grew up with now reads like press releases from a government agency.

The original article. And I almost never read all comments when there are 78. So interesting I read all 78. At 69 years old and having a master's degree, I think I'm now better informed. Not that my actual viewpoint has changed so much. Leaves me wondering how the usual American can be "well informed" from the 30 second sound/video bites and the "objective" views of our media. Leaves me wondering how those usual Americans can come to agreement even if they were well informed, when even commenters on Literotica who claim "the facts" as the basis of their opinions have such divergent views. Agree with comment about us/US more divided than since (un)Civil War. Hate to be negative fatalist, but don't see it getting better in future. Right stays to right and left gets further left and the rhetoric in our civilized society gets more uncivilized and hateful (including some of comments on Literotica).

This ends on negative note (my feeling).

Most interesting read, though.

Did not know what to rate the article. Now know. 5 stars. Both for the article and that it could engender such discussion.

Paul in Oklahoma

I've lived on all four points of the compass and in the Midwest and traveled internationally. Am now a proud 30-year southerner (both Carolinas) who has observed far more than the average person.

For what it's worth, I find your comments to be clear, concise and accurate. Glad you made the history much more understandable. Hopefully, people will read and understand what you've so clearly explained.

Shortly after my wife died. I took a little trip. Okay, I spent 9 months most of a 100000 dollars and 46000 miles just traveling the United States. As far south as Florida. As far west as North Dakota, as far east as the Atlantic ocean, and north, well, I ran out of the United States. In my travels, I realize that people are just people. There are good, they're bad. A corn field looks the same in south Carolina as it does in New York. And ironic enough, it looks the same in Kansas.

So what does this have to do with the conversation at hand? As people are people, assholes are assholes. Sir, you have caused for me a whole hell of a lot of enjoyment. You've made me laugh, you made me cry, you made me think. Screw everybody else. You keep doing you. Let the whiners whine. Let the bitches bitch. And please, Sir, let the writers write.

Interesting and straightforward. Those that are currently removing statues of Confederate soldiers refuse to acknowledge that the War between the States [ Sometimes referred to as the war of northern aggression :-) ] could possibly have been fought for reasons other than the defense of slavery by the South. A small percentage of the soldiers actually owned slaves and those from slave owning families totaled only around one third. It is hard to logically explain why two thirds of the soldiers fighting for the Confederacy were doing so to defend owning something they did not have.

Slavery was bad but as stated it has been around since humans first decided to conquer other humans and the US South did not have a monopoly on slavery with it being outlawed by Great Britain only in the first half of the 19th century.

The war was definitely fought over slavery. The right the south didn't want taken away was the right to own slaves. The Republicans were staunchly anti-slavery, and the election of Lincoln, and the refusal of any more compromises, precipitated the war. Denying this is simply denying historical fact.

With that said, even at the absolute height of slavery, 97% of Americans did not nor ever had owned a slave. Slaves were very much the purview of the wealthy. The war was fought mostly in the south, and most of the soldiers were poor folks, fighting against what they saw as an invading army.

What you said is true to a degree, while the southerners did not invent slavery, they did take it to another level. To control the slaves they took their identity from them by busting up any groups from the same tribes so that the slaves were with other slaves that they could not communicate with. And not allowing them to speak in their native tongue. And at no time during any of the other times of slavery was that done to a people. The effects of that is still felt today by Black people in America. Then from there black people was not taught of the accomplishment they have made in this country in the schools, at least not while I went. And after slavery we had him crowlaw for a 100 years to keeps us in our place. While I don’t think you are a racist for mentioning slavery in your story, and I have read that story so I do not know the content of how it was presented. But I do know that racism is a live and well in this country and it is amazing that some white people believe that black people should get over what happen to them as a people when it has only been 50 years that we finally gotten almost equal rights after 100’s of years having no rights and being treated as property, then as 3rd class citizens with low intelligence .

It has no choice but to rise with the predatory tax incentives that draw factories to the cheap labor pools.

The problem are the fucking neo-nazi/aryan brotherhood cunts that crawl out of the woodwork anytime someone mentions that it might not be a good idea to idolize someone that liked to hang a certain color of person from a tree. When y'all fix that, we can talk.

.....To see someone not fearful of using historical information in a story. Our history books have been altered now till they quite resemble fiction, moreso than history. There are only a couple of generations now that remember a time when, as ugly as it was, history was taught in schools, instead of this watered down agenda driven mockery of historical facts. Lee never owned a slave and was instrumental in, with his wife, opening numerous schools to teach former slaves basic and advanced courses enabling them to compete in employment and even business ownership. Something few will admit, but the main reason the south hesitated to release slaves as ordered. They had hoped their resistance until education and grants were promised so that they (former slaves) could survive would be successful, but ended up having to do it themselves. (Why many former slaves fought for tge south as free men) Few will admit that the north held their slaves for 5 yrs after abolition, sending them out penniless and without the education of their southern counterparts. I find it funny that people believe now that the Civil War was fought over slavery instead of the taxation of slaves that were no longer enslaved. They south had released 75% of held slaves at the time the CW began. I guess our generation will be the last to know the facts. How it would blow their minds to know that Pres. Lincoln attempted the largest mass murder of all time by a leader over land a friend wanted, nothing more. Instead they made him the sle hero of the era. Yet with all the good Lee did in his life, his leadership of the south, during a war that has been bastardized is all he will be known for. So sad. Thank you for having the courage to write about it, however minimally, and for doing so with a nod to fact.

Slavery in Europe and North America could not have existed without the delivery of African slaves, by fellow Africans, to the coast.

Your point regarding Indentured or bond servants is well made. That type of slavery existed well into the 20th century.

Would you please read the articles of secession before claiming that the CW wasn't about slavery? Thanks.

As another Brit, and I know we seem to come across as less than viceral in this debate, I don't understand the emotion in this debate. It's as pointless as getting upset because a female mantis ate her mate.

a) It's perfectly normal in mantis society.

b) How does your emotion affect anything about the action?

c) How can your emotion change the outcome of what has already happened?

Yes there was slavery. There always has been all the way back to prehistoric days. Yes, every single society without fail has in the past effectively practiced slavery. Yes, some still do. Yes, it's uncomfortable. No, your emotion over your discomfort has no bearing whatsoever on what happened. Yes, you can make sure it doesn't happen again - that is the true lesson that history teaches.

I know the Brits practiced slavery for many years, and became wealthy in part because of it. I also know they declared it illegal and used a quarter of their gross national product - of a whole empire - one year to buy the freedom of every slave in British hands. But I can't be ashamed of or proud of either. History is not a football match, and no matter how much you cheer for or applaud for one side or decry the other, it's not going to change a thing. It's as pointless as going to watch 'Titanic' and hoping they steer clear of the iceberg this time.

So what is this debate really about? Is it one side trying to get digs in on the other because of something happening now? Is it another side trying to protest their personal dissatisfaction with their life?

From what I've read, both options are squarely on the table.

But this is history, and your personal feelings mean squat in the discussion. Debate the facts and not your feelings.

Otherwise you end up with a President.

A magnificent HISTORY. Worth reading all 3,000 pages.

As a fourth generation Northern Californian, I learned what I have come

to realize was Yankee History.

Nothing about Lincoln accurately saying, "The Civil War was caused by taxes."

(Congress's northern majority voted itself a major chunk of southern cotton profits--a money grab.

(20 %?) The southern states exercised their opt-out clause. Which, of course, was outvoted again. So the southern states appealed to the decisive next higher level.

Before getting their hearing? The shooting started.)

A nice little fiction with some facts(could give more support) however part of problems in the south are due to the fact that the daughters of the revolution and false historians contrived to put false accounts of civil war in southern schools-this reminds me of europeans allowing moslem hate preachers to incite violence for years -and then be surprised at what happens nowadays.- also the statues of traitors who should have been hung were always going to be a source of more animosity-i blame the north for that oversight ps im not american

BUT! America was the first nation to try and make the slave race seem less than human, through science, propaganda and ultimately law. Look up 'Phrenology' and the origins of the IQ test, if you don't believe me.

What you have written here is all true. There will be many who disagree with your take on this topic. However you are correct in what you wrote. It was a dark and shameful period in our history, yet you are correct in saying that slavery has been around since the begining of time. Perhaps someday we will be able to rid our culture of this cancer.

People who don't know history are the first to complain about it.

Most people think slavery ended with the Emancipation Proclamation, but it did not. All the proclamation did was to nullify slavery in the territories (states) rebelling against the United States. Its purpose was to encourage the blacks held in slavery to rebel and leave. As you said, it was an economic issue. Most are not aware that slavery still existed in Maryland and Delaware for some time after the end of the civil war.

Most people also don't know that the reason many of the Irish were in the Americas early on is that they were rounded up by the English and sold as slaves in the new world, primarily in the Caribbean, but some in the colonies. In fact, until the 1800's, there were more Irish slaves in the new world than there were Africans. That is how some of my own people ended up over here. (Where do I sign up for reparations?)

Was slavery right? No. Obviously not, but wanting to judge eighteenth and nineteen century actions by twenty-first century mores is not realistic, accurate, or proper.

I personally found Boston to Birmingham a good tale. I can also state that having lived most of my life in Yankee country, but spending sixteen years in SC and GA during college and after, I find much more racism in play in the north than I did in the south. What is seen in the south may be blatant by the few who practice it, but what is practiced in the north is much more insidious, limiting advancement and opportunity when it comes to education and employment opportunities. If you doubt it, all you have to do is look at Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, Washington DC, NYC, and other cities.

I completely agree with you. I love the South, having lived in Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee twice and now Lower Alabama. The war was not about slavery but about Northern taxation that unfairly impacted the South. I had a great uncle who was a Northern General and a distant cousin who was killed in Arkansas by northern treachery. I will take the South anytime and every time. The South is not about slavery but about our heritage - PLAIN AND SIMPLE. I fly an American flag but I have the same size flag with the Stars and Bars on it. I am proud of them both and proud to be an American but stop with trying to denegrate Southerners. Does anybody talk ugly about Bostonians?uyoayk They don’t have a particularly great history of tolerance.

They are facts. How are you go to have a serious discussion about this when all your items are based on facts. There is no way your going to convince BLM or ANTIFA that their positions are nothing but Anarchy. You can"t have a debate with someone who hasn't read a book or has based their stance on the lies and misinformation provided by their vaunted leaders.....ack,ack, ( Sorry, I knew i wouldn't be able get through that description of their leaders without throwing up a little). The major majority will agree with your comments even if they don't like the past. The easiest way to silence the vocal minority is to simply ignore it. When they cross the line from vocal to physical because they are losing every argument or are just pissed at being ignored.

Then the time to re-educate them on the repercussions of trying to force their views is acceptable. And by re-educate, make it so physically painful that they will never force their views again.

You have your own views and comments, great. That's is your right to believe what ever you want. Taking away my rights to force your agenda is going to be very very painful.

we are fixing to have another civil war !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! these A$$ holes trying to wipe our history out better wake up or bring their own body bad .

All your little paragraph does is to show how normalised the institution of slavery was back then. but overtime we realised that acts such as slavery, infanticide, child marriage are not so moral. and thats why south gets all the flak. Just replace slavery with infanticide. would you erect statues of people who committed infanticide just because it was a prevalent during some point in history all over the place.

I wholeheartedly agree with your essay!!! I too descended from Germans in PA, who emigrated to Cabarrus County, NC down the same route. None of my family EVER owned a slave. My original ancestor came as an Indentured servant. My family fought in the Revolution and the Civil War. Anyone who thinks Southerners were all slave owners is just plain stupid!!!

Good point of view. I'd forgotten about the ships being mostly from the North. Probably Boston LOL. I'd read, a long time ago, about a swamp somewhere in a slave state, that needed to be drained, or logged or something. (I said I read it a long time ago.) Anyway the first option the people who wanted to do it had was to send slaves in. But it was tough work, snakes, gators, malaria, etc. Slaves were expensive and having them die was cutting into the bottom line. What did they do? Stop the project? Hell no, they sent in Irish immigrants - they were cheaper and they had to buy their own food and lodging out of the piss poor wages they got paid.

Capitalism can suck. Big green ones. It wasn't just slaves that took it in the neck. The Irish came here not due to a famine, but due to the loss of the potato crop. Just the spuds. The big landowners didn't care, they continued to export food to Britain in the form of beef, grain and other produce - Getting Pounds sterling was more important than feeding the common folk who grew their own food in the form of taters.