You don't have to be white, a north American or a member of any particular organization to be a racist.

Racism comes in every color, from every region of the world and from people of every political party.

All people are somewhat guilty of making generalizations and prejudging those they do not know. The key difference is that some people are willing to set those aside long enough to get to know others, engage in dialog and broaden their horizons.

What really bothers me about this slavery issue is that it's going on now all over the world but I see little being done. Was it an injustice? Yes Was it solely something whites in North America imposed on blacks in the U.S. pre-civil war? No

A question for posters with children. Do they teach history in public schools anymore?

Not so much. When my son was in 6th grade, they showed Gone With The Wind in his history class when they were studying the civil war. The teacher's justification (and the school's) was that it was an historically accurate view of the war. WTF?

I frequently find myself either correcting or expounding upon what he is taught in school otherwise he would believe that this world was populated and grown only by white christian males.

Oh, you're accurate, but like most people who want to spread hatred, ignorance and bigotry, you're only giving out partial information. And you focus on an emotionally-explosive topic in order to mask what you either know nothing about or want to ignore because it doesn't support your view.






Its not my view its the view of my college history textbook, heres the source citation:


Kennedy, David M., and Lizabeth Cohen. The American Pageant. 13th edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006.

I can prove what Im saying!!

I suggest you review the chapter on the Civil War!!

The Civil war wasnt about rascism. it was about slavery.

Im not sure where we disagree Fanta You seem to be saying much the same thing as me

Eh, Possible! Im answering e-mails at the same time.

Ill reread in a minute!!

Then what are you disagreeing with me about?

Please review my postings on this thread from the begining.

The war was not about slavery per say mirror.
That was one of the areas of contention between the North and the South but it wasn't the defining cause.
Many of the Southern States were, on their own, already attempting to eliminate their need for slaves and also thought it was wrong.
They couldn't just do it over night though, and the main reason for them wanting to secede was big Gov infringing on States rights to self-govern themselves.
The contention with slavery in the new western States was about the same thing.
Many of the settlers into these states were Southerners, esp in the newly acquired Louisiana Purchase areas.
They already owned slaves, which was legal then, and wanted to protect their property! Slavery was wrong, but in those days it was legal and they were considered legal property!
The North wanted to dictate the these new States a law which didn't even exist in all the Northern states at the time.
They wanted to do this as a way to pressure not only the remaining Northern slave states but also to legislatively overrule the Southern States in the Federal Gov..(notice how the new states also divided)
Not only did the South think this was dirty politics by a few to attempt overruling a majority, but the new states residents were mostly Southerners and wanted the same right to self-govern themselves as the rest. The South supported that right and what was legal.
The war was not about slavery except as the North used it as a political ,and later a guerilla weapon against the South to take away States rights.

States rights were a major cause of the war. I think most people who have even a basic familiarity with the Civil War know that.

The issue of states rights continues to be a contentious one today. Typically the party not in power asserts that states rights are important yet when they gain a federal majority their positions and actions shift.

The republicans campaigned heavily on states rights and no big government but not long after he was elected Bush said,"I used to beleive in states rights but I was wrong." Dem's have been just as guilty in doing this too but less entertainingly quotable as that.

5 Northern States were slave holder States at the on-set of the Civil War!
Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, and West Virginia were aligned with the Union.

If the war was about slavery please explain this??

It was about the slave states wanting to keep slavery legal in the south, and the federal government putting a stop to it.

What color were the slaves?

What color was the owners?

Its as simple as that.

Lincolns emmancipation proclamation pertained only to territories not under union control in 1863, and The 13th amendment was not added to the Constitution until the war was almost over in 1865!

When the war was fought it was legal in the Northern States to own slaves and many did.

Was there slavery before the Civil War?

Was there slavery after the Civil War?

Theres your answer.

Gotta agree with Fanta on part of this one.

States rights, the balance of power and conflicting ideas on the powers of the federal government in areas outside of the issue of slavery were at stake.

The Civil War was NOT the pure and good northern states wanting to eliminate slavery. It would be nice to hold onto that illusion, it would make things much more simple wouldn't it? Unfortunately the real world isn't that simple.

yes,yes,yes. It WAS a states rights issue. the Southern states wanted to keep the demonic right to own slaves and the federal government did not.

Was there slavery before the Civil War?

Was there slavery after the Civil War?

Therein lies your answer.

Your only disagreeing with me over the details of how it all happened.

I gotta love your cmmitment to your belefs mirror!

Rock-on brother!!