- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 4/24/18 at 6:53 am to TheOcean
quote:
Seems like you have no factual proof Lee didn't actually own slaves
So, I have to prove a negative, now, counselor? Since when is the affirmative burden of proof on the person asserting "there is no factual basis for an assertion that Robert E. Lee personally owned slaves"?
Hell, it's tough to argue his wife owned slaves because the Parke Custis slaves were dower and on the path to manumission once GW "Wash" Parke Custis died - now, as I said, at a certain point I will concede that it is a fairly fine distinction and Lee, for all practical purposes was the slave "master" for the Parke Custis slaves under his charge from October 1857 to December 29th, 1862, but did not have legal title, could not have sold them or otherwise interfered with their manumission any longer than he did. By strict interpretation of Wash's will, Lee acted legally and, generally, morally by the standards at the time.
quote:
he felt blacks were inferior
This was, by far, the prevailing sentiment in the United States, North, South, East and West - even many abolitionists took a parochial, white supremacy approach to the issue, although with humanitarian leanings. Saint Abraham would be considered a rabid white supremacist by today's standards.
And, I in no way mean to suggest that Lee was an abolitionist - just like many in Virginia had a very complicated view of the institution. Wash himself was an active member in the ACS - this was not popular among black slaves in the South, many of them chose to remain slaves in the South instead of relocating to Liberia as free men.
So, again - a very, very complicated issue. Not simplistic and easy to digest as many would prefer.
This post was edited on 4/24/18 at 6:54 am
Posted on 4/24/18 at 7:14 am to Ace Midnight
One more outburst like that and I'll hold you in contempt, counselor.
Posted on 4/24/18 at 7:52 am to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
You can now have your own personal Robert E. Lee replica statue. $300
If you want to be an idiot, it's cheaper to get a neck tattoo and fly a rebel flag in the yard.
Posted on 4/24/18 at 7:57 am to OleWarSkuleAlum
Someone knows how to cash in on butt hurt
Posted on 4/24/18 at 8:06 am to Jimmydatiger
quote:
US Grant owned slaves and didn't free them until 1867 - two years after the war ended. Or so I read in the history books
Missouri abolished slavery in January 1865, so that can't be true.
Posted on 4/24/18 at 8:09 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Lee didn't actually own any slaves. They were his wife's inheritance.
This isn't true. Yes, his wife owned slaves. But Lee also owned slaves of his own.
Posted on 4/24/18 at 8:10 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
So, I have to prove a negative, now, counselor? Since when is the affirmative burden of proof on the person asserting "there is no factual basis for an assertion that Robert E. Lee personally owned slaves"?
Hell, it's tough to argue his wife owned slaves because the Parke Custis slaves were dower and on the path to manumission once GW "Wash" Parke Custis died - now, as I said, at a certain point I....
This post is much more entertaining if you read it in Foghorn Leghorn's voice.
Posted on 4/24/18 at 8:12 am to OleWarSkuleAlum
I put mine by a window partially obscured by curtains to scare off potential thieves
Posted on 4/24/18 at 12:27 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
But Lee also owned slaves of his own.
Not going to rehash pages of posts, but this is unsupportable. All the Lee slaves were gone before he came of age. He moved from his mother's townhouse in Alexandria to West Point - then after married Mary, moved onto a Parke Custis property. U.S. Grant owned at least 1 more slave than Robert E. Lee did (which was 0).
Posted on 4/24/18 at 12:39 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Not going to rehash pages of posts, but this is unsupportable. All the Lee slaves were gone before he came of age. He moved from his mother's townhouse in Alexandria to West Point - then after married Mary, moved onto a Parke Custis property. U.S. Grant owned at least 1 more slave than Robert E. Lee did (which was 0).
Even if you disregard the ownership argument, it is a fact that Robert E. Lee was directly involved in slavery through his management of the Custis slaves.
Posted on 4/24/18 at 12:45 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
Even if you disregard the ownership argument
I accept your gracious concession...
quote:
it is a fact that Robert E. Lee was directly involved in slavery through his management of the Custis slaves.
I've said as much in this thread. I've conceded it is a fairly fine distinction. However, we must embrace FACTS before going off the rails with emotional arguments.
In the case of U.S. Grant - he actually purchased at least 1 slave, then freed him "for consideration" some years later. As far as the slaves he administered at White Haven, it has always been assumed that they wandered off as did most Missouri slaves between 1862 and 1865 - also, as you and I have pointed out, slavery was Constitutionally ended in January, 1865, both in Missouri and later that month for the United States, extant, via the XIIIth Amendment.
But we have no evidence he took any affirmative action to free any of the White Haven slaves, particularly beyond his man, William Jones (sorry, I may have said William Joseph elsewhere in this thread.)
This post was edited on 4/24/18 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 4/24/18 at 12:54 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
quote:quote:
Even if you disregard the ownership argument
I accept your gracious concession...
I'm not conceding, just avoiding a bog.
quote:
I've said as much in this thread. I've conceded it is a fairly fine distinction. However, we must embrace FACTS before going off the rails with emotional arguments.
Did I say anything emotional? I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to get at here. That U.S. Grant was worse than R.E. Lee on the issue of slavery?
Posted on 4/24/18 at 1:05 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
Goes to a great cause and lets everyone know where you stand.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News