Re-re-revise history

[Plane]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/07/AR2011010703178.html


Slavery was a key factor in the situation that led up to the civil war, so key that it could be reasonably argued (as president Grant himself did) that the cause and what the war was about was freedom for slaves.

For two generations or more there was a minimiseing and maximiseing of other factors as the historians wrangled over what the lessons of the war were. The passage of time simplyfies the picture as people care less and less about the details.

The devil being in that these are important details , if we learn the cause of the war , and the lessons of the war we might risk less a repeat of the supertragedy, do we learn the lessons better for taking sides or by being dispassionate?

[Xavier_Onassis]

If the nation had purchased the freedom of every slave, we would have been infinitely better off than fighting the Civil War. A small elite of Southerners managed to convince the White masses of hicks that somehow they would benefit from the perpetuation of slavery.
It was the single dumbest thing that this country has ever done.

Grant was a slave owner. So was Lee. But Grant also understood eventually that winning the war, which he was commissioned to do, would be made far easier if the slaves were freed.

Lee was greatly overrated. He inherited slaves from his wife. She had promised them their freedom when she died, but then she died, and Lee kept them in bondage.

All in all, he was far more productive and useful as a college president.
 

[Plane]

If the nation had purchased the freedom of every slave, we would have been infinitely better off than fighting the Civil War.

That is an interesting idea , but what would have produced so much cash and put it into the hands of the Slave owner?

Taxes for that purpose would have been very unpopular, and the value of the slaves being purchased wopuld have risen as they started to become scarce.

One of the problems was the widespread fear of black people , freed or slave there was a fear that the Denmark Vessy or Nat Turner incidents would be repeated or worse. The economic problem and the greed that produced to problem in the first place was compounded by a dark fear and hiding shame that caused in slaveowners and their associates a desire for complete controll of slaves and freedmen . John Brown exerbated this fear with retoric that alarmed slaveowners a lot more than it inspired slaves to revolt.

Thomas Jefferson compared the institution of slavery to holding a wolf by the ears , costly to keep on and costlyer to stop. Jefferson thought that forgiveness for the injurys of slavery would not happen,

[Xavier_Onassis]

It turns out that Black people were not nearly as scary after they were all freed. Besides, they could have easily asked for volunteers to repatriate to Africa. They surely would have had a number of takers, and Liberia was already available,as was Sierra Leone.


Only a tiny fraction of the White population owned plantations, but they were very, very rich and influential.

Somehow rather a huge amount of cash was raised to fight the wars. They could have paid for the slaves with shares of stock in companies to build transcontinental railroads, of course.

The price for slaves would have to have been established before any was sold.

Slavery could have been ended gradually,as they did in Brazil. There were slaves everywhere in Brazil, but more in the tropical north.

In Brazil, they first declared "Freedom of the womb", meaning that no one born after 1871 was born into slavery.In 1885, slaves over 60 were freed,and in 1888, all the rest were freed, at least officially.

In 2008, 4,634 were freed from over 250 locations where they were enslaved illegally and compensated for this.

The Emperor was overthrown in 1888 by some businessmen, who came to regret what they had done.

[Plane]

It turns out that Black people were not nearly as scary after they were all freed. Besides, they could have easily asked for volunteers to repatriate to Africa. They surely would have had a number of takers, and Liberia was already available,as was Sierra Leone.


Only a tiny fraction of the White population owned plantations, but they were very, very rich and influential.

Nat Turner and John Brown frighten rich guys only?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Nat Turner and John Brown (who was a White guy). were exceptions.

After the Civil War, there were very few reprisals by ex-slaves. Nqt Turner and John Brown would not have been a problem had there been no slaves, they were opposed to slavery, not plantation owners per se. You should know this.

[Plane]

Nat Turner and John Brown (who was a White guy). were exceptions.

After the Civil War, there were very few reprisals by ex-slaves. Nqt Turner and John Brown would not have been a problem had there been no slaves, they were opposed to slavery, not plantation owners per se. You should know this.

I do know this, but I am talking about a fear that really was.