----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Minettte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Killer Bs Discussion'" <brin-l@mccmedia.com> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 7:24 PM Subject: Civil WAr
> > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dan M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 7:22 PM >> To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' >> Subject: RE: So Austin >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> On >> > Behalf Of Robert Seeberger >> > Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:59 AM >> > To: Killer Bs Discussion >> > Subject: Re: So Austin >> > >> > It was really one of those things where it was both ways >> > simultaneously. >> > There is a good parallel with our modern situation. >> > The freeing of the slaves would have had an economic impact on >> > the >> > South that would have devastated in a manner similar to what >> > would >> > happen if all foriegn oil were suddenly embargoed away from the >> > US >> > today. >> >> Well, it would have had an impact, but I don't think it would have >> been >> that great. First of all, they could still have the labor of the >> slaves....just as tenant farmers...as they did later. And they certainly did, but at the cost of their former affluence, so I don't think you can minimize the impact of freeing the slaves. How many decades did it take for the agricultural South to recover? http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/ransom.civil.war.us Quote: "Whatever the effects of the war on industrial growth, economic historians agree that the war had a profound effect on the South. The destruction of slavery meant that the entire Southern economy had to be rebuilt. This turned out to be a monumental task; far larger than anyone at the time imagined. As noted above in the discussion of the indirect costs of the war, Southerners bore a disproportionate share of those costs and the burden persisted long after the war had ended. The failure of the postbellum Southern economy to recover has spawned a huge literature that goes well beyond the effects of the war. " To avoid wandering too far from the original point, I think you have to understand the reasons why the political and economic entities of the South decided to fight in order to understand why there was such patriotic fervor (Confederate) in the region and why it persisted for so long. >> >> > As I said, there was slavery in the North prior to the Civil War, >> > but >> > it was not economically necessary as it was in the South. It much >> > like >> > the way Illegal immigrants are hired these days to increase >> > profits by >> > keeping labor costs low. >> >> But, it was abolished during the early 19th century. Mostly abolished. In 1860 there were slaves working at the White House. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9076827/White-House Quote: "Until the Civil War, however, most White House servants were slaves. " http://www.newstatesman.com/200607100033 Quote: "The atmosphere was such that black people were still being bought and sold as property in Georgetown as late as November 1861 - even though President Lincoln signed a local law the following year to free slaves eight months before his landmark Emancipation Proclamation of 1862. The white slave owners of Georgetown, DC (as it was then known, because it was not officially absorbed into Washington, DC until 1895) demanded compensation, and an "Expert Examiner of Slaves" was brought in - this was a local phenomenon that did not happen elsewhere in the country - who, after examining the slaves' teeth and health in general, assessed their overall value at $300,000." > Indeed, slavery was >> close to being abolished throughout the Union during that time, >> with >> Virginia coming within one vote of abolishing slavery on several >> occasions. I know that is "official", but not strictly accurate: http://www.slavenorth.com/index.html Quote: "Slavery in the North never approached the numbers of the South. It was, numerically, a drop in the bucket compared to the South. But the South, comparatively, was itself a drop in the bucket of New World slavery. Roughly a million slaves were brought from Africa to the New World by the Spanish and Portuguese before the first handful reached Virginia. Some 500,000 slaves were brought to the United States (or the colonies it was built from) in the history of the slave trade, which is a mere fraction of the estimated 10 million Africans forced to the Americas during that period. " >> >> >> > > some noble cause like state's rights. >> > >> > Well, I think you have to consider that the majority of those >> > monuments were built long ago when attitudes were quite >> > different. >> > The social inertia that supported the building of such is pretty >> > well >> > spent and is unlikely to ever build momentum again. >> > I'd go so far as to say that with regard to the subject of >> > racism, the >> > South is in better shape than the North or the West. Things have >> > changed a lot here. >> >> They have...I also agree that Texas has made more progress than >> many >> northern states, but DWB is still an offense. >> Yes, but that is true pretty much everywhere in the country, even sometimes when Black law enforcement officers are involved. xponent Large Subject Resources Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
