Oddbean new post about login | logout @🌲-alist Yup, it was all the states that bordered the south but were in the north. Though technically you could argue after the emancipation proclimation (since the north is the legal recognized government) the north was the only region left with slaves after that moment.. Of course the reality is more complex since southern states didnt recognize the authority. But at least from the perspective of the north, as the one true government, after that point slavery existed **only** in the north (legally).
@b05df304 @🌲-alist Speaking of border states, one problem the South had was all the high tech industry was either in the North or in those border states that sided with the North. The Confederates built a big powder mill - one of their few industrial successes - and they had to confiscate a Northern made steam engine to make it go! They also wound up pulling railcars with horses because their steam locomotives were broken and they could not fix them. They didn't have enough horses either.
Speaking of things stacking the fight in one direction, the Union relied heavily on filling it's front lines with immigrants or their children: > 25% of the white men who served were immigrants, and further 25% were first-generation Americans
@🌲-alist Yea and similar the native americans (a group i am part of) were vastly abused by the north and sided mostly with the south. Usually the picture painted as the north as some hero for minorities and the south as a bunch of racists is a gross oversimplification... The truth is both sides were just racists fighting racists, as would be the case at that time in history when everything and everyone was racist. @e7f7ab20
Time for the evergreen Norm meme.. https://social.fbxl.net/media/095c8e5e863f97d613bbc63fbc284318e987959fb36877b684f6dfcf51969526.png
@b05df304 @🌲-alist Yes the Civil War was, like most wars, a battle between two forms of exploitation. The North practiced the modern interest and debt serfdom method, while the South took the old fashioned approach. The Northern approach made better use of technology. As far as I can tell there have been very few wars with an actual good guy involved, and those few had the good guy on defense. At best you have a bad guy versus a really horrible guy.
@b05df304 @🌲-alist @e7f7ab20 I might be wrong on this, reading history, I have the impression that white European elite(intellectuals, politicians, high class families, etc.) looked at many human civilizations and considered many as subhuman and treated their people as commodity i.e India, Africa, South America, Polynesia, etc). I don't believe that this the defacto human civilization dynamic, were the dominant civilization enslave the other ones. I think this white European Elite Ideology that still persist to this day in other forms of control at the global level, i.e modern debt slavery, IMF, WHO, etc.
@0134ce10 Half true... it isnt "white European elite"... its literally every society, including minorities themselves. The northern africans enslaved white people... we had to go to war to stop them from enslaving whites.... Central africans enslaved their own people for sale to salve traders, so they had a hand in their own slavery, and sometimes even owned their own slaves within tribes. Native americans would enslave other native americans. There is no shortage of examples of every race, any race, enslaving almost any other... this includes white people on both sides of slavery throughout history. @🌲-alist @e7f7ab20
@b05df304 @0134ce10 @🌲-alist Absolutely. You also had Black people in the South who owned other Black people. Slavery was normal in Africa, so if an African made it big in America, well of course he'd buy himself some slaves. Democracy and human rights are rare, fragile, and under threat. Slavery, domination, and killing people just to display your power (Roman gladiators and Aztec sacrifices being prime examples) are the norm. Making this a race thing is a big mistake.
@b05df304 @🌲-alist @e7f7ab20 Civilizations fighting each other has always occurred, I agree, human using others for slaves or free labor, has occurred in many civilizations, I agree. But Human considering others as subhuman or even another race, this is white European Elite Ideology. > The northern africans enslaved white people... we had to go to war to stop them from enslaving whites.... Bullshit, how much many of "white slave" descendant live in North Africa right now? Compare that of black slaves descendant that live in US or European colonies. They were act of ship piracy, yes! The European were the ones taking north African for slaves thought out history from the Roman Empire to recent European colonization of North Africa. >Central africans enslaved their own people for sale to salve traders, so they had a hand in their own slavery, and sometimes even owned their own slaves within tribes. The slave trade has been forced to many African nations back then as they are now force to sell their natural resources for cheap. >There is no shortage of examples of every race, any race, enslaving almost any other... this includes white people on both sides of slavery throughout history. Classic history whitewash to justify the massive industrial scale of the European international slave trade. I just want to add that the majority of white European are the victim of the white European Elite ideology, through out history i.e (WWI, WWII) and up to this day.
@0134ce10 But Human considering others as subhuman or even another race, this is white European Elite Ideology. Not really, racial superiority is a concept that is as old as time. Bullshit, how much many of “white slave” descendant live in North Africa right now? Compare that of black slaves descendant that live in US or European colonies. What? You say its bullshit and then argue against something no one said… We said northern africa enslaved whites and we had to go to war to get them to stop… this is true… what does that have to do with the number that survived or live there today? I mean I made no assertions about that so no matter what the answer, how does that relate to if what I said was bullshit or not? They were act of ship piracy, yes! The European were the ones taking north African for slaves thought out history from the Roman Empire to recent European colonization of North Africa. I mean the ship piracy certainly was a source of the slavery industry in norther africa… but white slaves were very much documented and a historical fact fromt he period. The slave trade has been forced to many African nations back then as they are now force to sell their natural resources for cheap. Forced is a matter of opinion… These were wholly native blacks operating it locally, capturing, enslaving and selling other blacks. Obviously whites did come and buy those blacks, and that money is what encouraged the trade. But when those whites set off and sailed again those black people that remained, free black people, kept the business going until the next ship arrived. Classic history whitewash to justify the massive industrial scale of the European international slave trade. I mean if you want to call actual historic facts white washing… go ahead… everything I said was true. I notice again you talk about scale, and thats valid, at no point did I suggest the less populace nations with fewer resources were able to scale at anywhere near white nations… probably not… but also largely irrelevant. Per capita it was more or less the same, whites arent guilty just for being more industrial or there being more of them. @🌲-alist @e7f7ab20
@b05df304 @🌲-alist @e7f7ab20 We can argue back and forth all day about history. notice again you talk about scale, and thats valid, at no point did I suggest the less populace nations with fewer resources were able to scale at anywhere near white nations… probably not… but also largely irrelevant. Per capita it was more or less the same, whites arent guilty just for being more industrial or there being more of them. We can agree that scale matter a lot, whether in terms of slave trade impact on the European global dominance with a large network of slave colonies, or recent massive scale of use fossil fuels, the wars to control that trade and it’s impact on the planet in terms of climate change. It seems like that the white European Elite greed has no limit until the destruction of the planet. Ether by nukes or climate change.
@0134ce10 We can argue back and forth all day about history. We can. And considering the gross misrepresentation of history you seem to be selling, I suspect we probably should. We can agree that scale matter a lot, whether in terms of slave trade impact on the European global dominance with a large network of slave colonies, or recent massive scale of use fossil fuels, the wars to control that trade and it’s impact on the planet in terms of climate change. Scale matters in terms of effect, sure, but lets go back to your original claim being debunked: But Human considering others as subhuman or even another race, this is white European Elite Ideology. The truth of this statement has nothing to do with scale. So while scale may “matter a lot” due to societal impact (and it does) that still has no relevance to the argument in debate at the moment. @🌲-alist @e7f7ab20
@b05df304 But Human considering others as subhuman or even another race, this is white European Elite Ideology. The truth of this statement has nothing to do with scale. So while scale may “matter a lot” due to societal impact (and it does) that still has no relevance to the argument in debate at the moment. I still stand with that statement, because I can bring you many quotes from so many prominent white European Elite(Philosophers, politicians, rules, writer, etc) that make claim. I challenge you bring quotes from prominent Elite from North Africa, middle eat, south America, that make that claim. I truly believe that the master race Ideology is purely European origin. Note:(Ideologies tend to spread, so other nations i.e Japan embracing that ideology does’t make it less European). @🌲-alist @e7f7ab20
I still stand with that statement, because I can bring you many quotes from so many prominent white European Elite(Philosophers, politicians, rules, writer, etc) that make claim. You dont see the fallacy of logic there? You are claiming “Only X does Y”.. and then go on to effectively say “I can prove it by giving examples of X doing Y”… That would only prove that X does Y, it is the “only” part you need to prove. So if for every single one of your examples of a white man treating a non-white as lesser, if I could match each one with a historic example of a non-white person doing that to another, then do we agree you’d be wrong? If you dont agree then do you see why your approach here doesnt prove your point? I challenge you bring quotes from prominent Elite from North Africa, middle eat, south America, that make that claim. I’d be happy to, but before I waste my energy what is the exact number of prominent non-white people doing this do I need to actually quote for you before you agree I have proven you wrong? I mean, I need to know what the rules are if you wanna go this route. Note:(Ideologies tend to spread, so other nations i.e Japan embracing that ideology does’t make it less European). Well at least you moved the goal post before I bothered… So now your saying no matter how many quotes I give you of elite non-whites looking down on other races you can always play the “well the idea originated from a white guy at some point” game and invalidate those quotes arbitrarily? I hope your seeing your biases now and how you even set the rules up knowing you will be proven wrong and giving yourself a backdoor… Because even actual evidence now you can just hand wave away with no proof.
@🌲-alist @b05df304 Wow that's a lot. I know the South actually had a lot of slaves forced to fight for it. And there were a surprising number of Southern men - like 200K - that left to join the Union army. The non land-owning white Southerner had to know that slavery did not serve his interests. It depressed wages and allowed the Boss to treat him with contempt. So he had to wonder "what's in it for me." I think that is what the "Golden Circle" invade Mexico idea was for. Were they serious?
The big issue of the time was the "Tarrif of Abominations" which was perceived as harmful to Southern agricultural industry. It is interesting to read the dairies of Confederates. The ones I've seen in terms of "why they fought" most often reference a pride in their homeland and the view that Washington didnt represent their interests or values.. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A2001.05.0123%3Achapter%3D7.66 > Dark and lowering clouds hover over the political horizon. The recent elections in the northern States indicate the triumph of the Republican party, in which event a disruption of the Union, and a civil war will probably follow, as the South will not submit to a sectional President, and the North will not submit to a peaceable separation.
