- 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
re: On this day 159 years ago, Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation
Posted on 1/2/22 at 6:37 am to DONHOGG
Posted on 1/2/22 at 6:37 am to DONHOGG
quote:
Actually didn't mean shite. It didn't free the slaves in the North and the South was under it's own control.
This is fairly inaccurate.
Yes, you are correct that Lincoln's proclamation did not affect slaves in northern border states such as Kentucky and Maryland. But the proclamation did affect slaves in the southern states and in a major way. By January 1, 1863, large swaths of Louisiana, Arkansas, Virginia, and Tennessee were under Union control. Within these "occupied territories" were tens of thousands of slaves. On January 1, 1863, all of those slaves in that area were told that they were free.
And as the North continued to advance through the South, when Union soldiers came across a plantation with slaves they were also freed. So to say this proclamation didn't mean anything is poor history and sour grapes. It was in and of itself an unconstitutional document. But it was made constitutional by the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865. Which is why it's taught in history class to this very day.
0
Posted on 1/2/22 at 7:08 am to chRxis
quote:
the "switch" occurred well before even civil rights... try the turn of the 20th century, with William Jennings Bryan leading the way
Elections results point to 2000
Posted on 1/2/22 at 7:41 am to dgnx6
I have never understood this argument about the parties switching sides. In 1964, the vast majority of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act while just about every Democrat who represented southern states voted against it. So, in retaliation, the Deep South votes Republican in the presidential election. What sense does that make? Clearly there was something else at play in 1964 that southerners were far more concerned with than race. Could it have been LBJ and his Great Society proposals, all of which were expansions of government authority and power? If there is one thing that was true in 1860 about the South that is still true in 2021, southerners are very distrustful of government.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 7:57 am to fr33manator
quote:
And it did diddly squat except on paper
Like the Declaration of Independence? It was paper, too
Posted on 1/2/22 at 8:24 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Following the Union victory over Robert E. Lee at the Battle of Antietam
It was not a union victory. It was a draw.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 8:29 am to wileyjones
quote:
which only freed slaves in southern states, not northern ones
Didn’t do that either - at the time, the southern states were a separate country. The Emancipation Proclamation freed zero slaves. It was a political maneuver.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 8:31 am to Buck_Rogers
quote:
It was not a union victory. It was a draw.
Lee was invading Maryland. He retreated back to Virginia after the battle, his invasion plans foiled. It was a strategic victory for the good guys. However, the Union general was fired by Lincoln, even though he achieved the strategic victory, because he failed to pursue Lee’s army with his superior force.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 8:43 am to The Boat
quote:
And it didn’t actually do anything.
It did trigger Confederate sympathizers for the next 159+ years.
They are still pissed about even the symbolic freeing of slaves, as evidenced by the bitching about Lincoln in every such thread. It really gets under their skin.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 9:15 am to Buck_Rogers
quote:
It was not a union victory. It was a draw.
Lee retreated back into Virginia. Tactically the battle was a draw, but operationally and strategically it was a Union victory.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 9:34 am to RollTide1987
Military historians consider the Battle of Antietam a stalemate. The union claimed it as a victory for political reasons.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 10:17 am to Buck_Rogers
quote:
Military historians consider the Battle of Antietam a stalemate.
I am a military historian and I consider the Battle of Antietam a strategic Union victory, if also a tactical draw. Generally speaking, when one army retreats from the field while the other stays, that retreating army is admitting they have been checked/defeated. That is what Lee did after the Battle of Antietam. McClellan and his Army of the Potomac maintained possession of the field.
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 10:25 am
Posted on 1/2/22 at 10:44 am to RollTide1987
The North inflicted a great amount of damage on the South that day in comparison and the North held the field. I know Lincoln would have liked the Union commander to pursue, but after what had just transpired just repelling the South was more than enough. Both armies were bled out.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 11:07 am to RollTide1987
I wonder if European recognition of the South was ever a serious consideration for Europe. I read that the Palmerson at the time wanted nothing to do with it after the Crimea War a few years before and the unrest in India in 1857 -58. Plus the textile workers in Manchester in a fit idealistic altruism actually refused to accept American cotton during the war. Plus the French were bogged down in Mexico and had military and colonial designs closer to home in N. Africa and committments to a civil war of this size did not appeal to them.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 11:14 am to RollTide1987
Lincoln's concept of keeping the union whole and abolishing slavery was the right move. I'll pick up a gun today to maintain it. frick all of you who disagree. I hope Covid gets you.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 11:27 am to BestBanker
quote:
Lincoln was a republican
Comparing the 19th century political parties to today’s political parties is dumb. Please stop.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 11:55 am to KiwiHead
quote:
The North inflicted a great amount of damage on the South that day in comparison and the North held the field. I know Lincoln would have liked the Union commander to pursue, but after what had just transpired just repelling the South was more than enough. Both armies were bled out.
That’s not correct. The Union never used all of their forces. They had the larger army, the South’s distribution and every advantage. They failed to use all of that. Over 25% of their forces were never used.
A tactical Union victory should have been a crushing Union victory.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 3:33 pm to Penrod
Lee's motive for invading Maryland was to end the war quickly. Lincoln's intentions were also to end the war quickly. Lee retreated south, while McClellan failed to pursue Lee, as the north sustained heavy casualties; actually more than the south did. It was suppose to be the battle to start the end of the war. Both sides failed.
It was a strategic draw. And the north were not the good guys.
It was a strategic draw. And the north were not the good guys.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 3:37 pm to Penrod
quote:
Like the Declaration of Independence? It was paper, too
The piece of paper didn’t do anything - the blood shed and the battles won put that paper into action
Posted on 1/2/22 at 3:39 pm to Buck_Rogers
quote:
And the north were not the good guys.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 3:40 pm to Twenty 49
quote:
They are still pissed about even the symbolic freeing of slaves, as evidenced by the bitching about Lincoln in every such thread. It really gets under their skin.
Every citizen of the United States lost something when the North won the Civil War, even those who were slaves at that time. States being unable to leave the union has emboldened the federal government to act with impunity in all matters.
It was a short-term gain for slaves and the North that has resulted in a long-term loss for everyone.
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 3:41 pm
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News