r/facepalm Jul 11 '24

🇲​🇮​🇸​🇨​ Mom needs to go back to school.

Post image
83.7k Upvotes

5.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

11.8k

u/dansk968 Jul 11 '24

Was it about states rights? Yes.

States right to do what exactly? To keep slaves.

3.3k

u/Hearsaynothearsay Jul 11 '24

Several states, including South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas, issued "Declarations of Causes" explaining their reasons for secession. These documents prominently featured slavery as a key motivation .

The declarations made clear defenses of slavery and objections to Northern opposition to slavery. For example:

Mississippi stated its position was "thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery" .

Georgia complained about Northern states refusing to comply with fugitive slave laws .

Texas denounced Northern states' "debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color" 

To be fair, Texas may have the same position today.

110

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 11 '24

Yup, slavery is right their in their declarations, the primary sources.

But the “Lost Cause” narrative of bullshit historial propaganda came about around the turn of the century, same time as all those factory made Confederate monuments.

Fuck this momsplainer and fuck all those historically illiterate CSA apologists.

44

u/ArchonFett Jul 11 '24

Tbf most were intentionally taught history wrong

75

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 11 '24 edited Jul 11 '24

As an adult, you have a responsibility to educate yourself before you miseducate your children.

Here the mom is incorrectly correcting her kids.

I have zero sympathy.

Like many things, there’s a knee jerk inclination among many people to assume that the unpopular or contrary opinion is correct, it gives them self importance that they have “special knowledge”:

Anti-vaxers, flat-earthers, QAnon, lost cause people, Holocaust deniers, people who blame everything on Soros.

Fuck them all, no need to be fair to them, they cause harm to others, in many cases death, due to their ignorance.

612,222 people died in the US Civil War, along with countless premature deaths due to slavery during its hundreds of years.

She’s spitting on their graves. No need to be fair to her due to her personality disorder and historial illiteracy.

We fought a Civil War over this shit and we can fight another one to preserve the Union if necessary.

The Union is like a blood in blood out prison gang, it’s not a gentleman’s club.

16

u/ArchonFett Jul 11 '24

Oh I agree. The gradual dissembling of public education was the greatest crime. Further indoctrination that “this is the truth and any other information that doesn’t agree with it is a lie” only makes it worse. Since they automatically dismiss any evidence that hurts their feelings you can’t educate them to the truth.

3

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24

Yeah, we just have to tell it like it is.

Hate all this knee-jerk bs.

-2

u/No-Question-9032 Jul 11 '24

FYI, We fought a civil war over secession. Slavery wasn't abolished until 3 years later. Lincolns campaign platform was about prohibiting expansion of slavery laws into the west, not removing it from the south.

2

u/inkcannerygirl Jul 12 '24

Yes, we fought the civil war because the south seceded, and the north wanted to preserve the union.

The south seceded, as explicitly discussed in many of the southern states' declarations of secession, because the conservatives in charge of those states were offended that anyone was attempting to place any limits on slavery or its expansion, as you said.

Slavery was the root cause of the war. Otherwise the issue of secession might never have come up.

1

u/DonyKing Jul 12 '24

Lincoln was in the Republican party tho wasn't he?

Not an American. Correct me if I'm wrong.

2

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24 edited Jul 12 '24

Correct. But it was a different political party than the one now, totally different platform.

When LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act in the 60s, he lost the Democrats the former “Solid South.”

People say “the parties switched,” but of course it’s more complicated than that.

Dems have always been the party of the immigrants even before the Civil War but they were also more blue collar and rural.

Republicans were more industrialist and reform oriented.

It used to be that you had liberal and conservative elements in both parties. And you had white Dems in the Deep South and in urban centers in the North.

Now, the parties are fully aligned on the conservative - liberal spectrum and tightly aligned on a regional basis.

2

u/DonyKing Jul 12 '24

Holy fuck Lebron is that old? God damn /a

What party was the south, or did they not have one?

1

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24

Hahaha, they don’t call him King James for nothing.

The pre-1960s South was overwhelmingly Democrat.

US Sen. Storm Thurmond of South Carolina was the last pro-segregation Democrat in the U.S. Senate, he served 48 years as a Senator.

Uncle Joe Biden and Thurmond palled around.

He was succeeded by Lindsay Graham, a Republican.

2

u/DonyKing Jul 12 '24

Cool, thanks for the knowledge. Gotta look those names up now.

2

u/DonyKing Jul 12 '24

So dumb to me that presidents only have 2 terms but every other branch is unlimited.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/HangedManInReverse Jul 14 '24

Yeah, he was. Is there a connection to this conversation?

1

u/No-Question-9032 Jul 12 '24

Yeah but 160 years ago. So it doesnt matter today. The voter bases changed some what in the 50' and 60's with Republicans using their Southern Strategy to get more white voters

2

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24 edited Jul 12 '24

Yes, Pat Buchanan was the architect of the racist Southern Strategy when he worked on Nixon’s successful campaigns.

Still used today - Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric is just a variation.

HW did the same with the Willie Horton ads against Dukakis.

Tapping into that latent fear of black people a lot of voters still have.

3

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24

I’m well aware of why it was fought, the South seceded over slavery.

0

u/No-Question-9032 Jul 12 '24

Of course. But we have to acknowledge that slavery was the backbone of the southern economy and its output played a significant role in the norths ability to grow its wealth and manufacturing industries. It's an effective strategy that the US still uses today: export suffering and import the profits.

4

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24 edited Jul 12 '24

For sure, NYC’s Wall Street and merchants benefited enormously from slavery.

And Britain although itself and banned slavery profited enormously from slave harvested cotton.

History’s complex but no reputable historian is going to correct their kid and say the Civil War didn’t start because of slavery. It’s the main issue that could not be resolved without violence.

2

u/No-Question-9032 Jul 12 '24

Oh definitely. 'States rights' to slavery. I just dislike how history lessons paint the south as the only villains and north as the heroes when so many were getting rich from it.

1

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24

There were some villains up North too for sure, there were riots against the draft in NYC in working class immigrant communities (rich were allowed to buy their way out with a stand in) and rioters went on to lynch some blacks.

And some southerners did fight for the union.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/JoseSaldana6512 Jul 11 '24

Also the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free any slaves. The North kept theirs and the South had seceded so Lincolns proclamation meant nothing to (at the time) a foreign country. 

It would be similar to the President of Uruguay declaring the slaves in Saudi Arabia and China free.

2

u/Lanky_Republic_2102 Jul 12 '24 edited Jul 12 '24

The Emancipation Declaration freed slaves in the CSA, it did not free slaves in border states that remained the Union like MD, MO, DE, and KY.

There were no other slaves states in the North and no other slaves. Lincoln had to keep the loyal states loyal.

It would not be at all like the President of Uruguay freeing slaves in China and Saudi Arabia, thats absurd on its face, not even on the same Continent. . If you believe that, you too are historically illiterate. I hope you don’t homeschool your kids.

It would be as if states within Uruguay seceded, there was a civil war and the President of the loyal states of Uruguay issued a proclamation freeing slaves in areas of the breakaway regions that he did not yet control.

0

u/HangedManInReverse Jul 14 '24

Hmmm, why did the South secede?

13

u/Cumohgc Jul 11 '24

You're 100% correct. My wife, born in 1987, was taught growing up that the Confederacy won. Didn't learn the truth until college. (Grew up in Louisiana)

3

u/ArchonFett Jul 11 '24

Damn 11 years difference in the same state and the education was sabotaged that much.

5

u/Cumohgc Jul 12 '24

Yeah, I couldn't believe it (I'm from New Jersey). Granted they were from a rural area, I'm sure it varies... maybe.

1

u/Key_Education_7350 Jul 12 '24

Arguably, looking at it from outside, they did win. Just not on the battlefield...

5

u/IHateMashedPotatos Jul 12 '24

virginia literally requires that students in elementary school (for the non americans, roughly ages 5-12) be taught that the civil war was for states rights. It’s usually only in high school (ages ~14-18) that it may be corrected to the truth, and that’s only if your teacher bothers to mention it. So I don’t blame people for not knowing. I do blame them for refusing to accept the truth.