Is the argument that Unite the Right is generally a good group of nice patriots who only want stautes of historical significance preserved and whose movement has been unfairly tainted by a few white nationalists? Or is there another reason why there’s reluctance from some to condemn them?
Among other reasons: a straightforward condemnation moves away from one of the foundational/prime directives of the Right right now: punch liberals and make them cry. While it can be attempted on this issue, the angle of the punch is unsatisfying.
Once again, you prove your reading comprehension is very bad.
I didn’t say anything about the mind of the average soldier. I simply stated that if they were fighting for the confederacy then, by default, they were fighting for the right to own slaves. There’s no mistake about that.
If he lived in and fought for the south, then it’s incredibly likely his state’s article of secession directly stated that his state was seceding from the union over slavery.
Soldiers kept journals and wrote letters. Surely if this were the case, you can show us more than a handful or soldiers who believed this very thing.
It would have made more sense, however, for a person who believed that to defect and fight for the north instead.
But hey, sounds like the Founders of this great country shouldn’t have fought a war against England-they should have pushed to abolish those taxes through lawful means.
What is your opinion of the scheduled speakers? Patriots or racists?
According to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the National Park Service released documents on Monday showing that Kessler’s confirmed speakers include neo-Nazi Patrick Little, former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke, Suidlanders spokesman Simon Roche, Patriot Prayer follower Kevin Cormier, Revolutionary Conservative editor Avialae Horton, attorney Corey Mahler, and “pro-white” town manager Tom Kawczynski.
You people… why try to change my argument from one that is difficult to refute to one that is easier to refute?
I said nothing about the thoughts and motivations of the political leaders of the south. And while they may have been literate, how many southern farmers and workers read what you reference? Almost none.
Are you people just sloppy when you read posts and debate? Are you intentionally deceptive?
Not that many. The average confederate soldier was either a dirt poor farmer or a member of the urban working class. The wealthier young men often came from slave holding families but didn’t own any themselves yet. Some of what we would today call “middle class” farmers often owned one or two slaves who worked with the family. The young men who would later go off to war were raised in this environment.
The communities they resided in or traveled to market their farm goods often had slave auctions. Slave plantations were plentiful. Slavery was everywhere in the Deep South at that time. You couldn’t avoid it if you tried. And they understood that their way of life, built upon the backs of slaves, would cease to exist if the institution died. The urban white working class would be forced to compete with millions of freed blacks. The rural white farming class would have to compete for land with millions of freed black farmers.
They understood better than anyone else then or now what abolition meant.
You’ve got it all wrong. They went off to war to fight because something something and planned all along to fight slavery through lawful means after the war was over. Or something.