- 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: The road to Appomattox and the end of the Confederacy began on this day 160 years ago
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:57 am to Wayne Campbell
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:57 am to Wayne Campbell
quote:
What does "end organically" even mean. Southern states fought tooth and nail, first figuratively and then literally, to preserve the institution of slavery. They also resisted every attempt to limit it's expansion. There is no indication that slavery was on it's way out of the American South in 1860.
It’s really hard to say but with the rapid advancement of the Industrial Revolution, gilded age and then the progressive era, I just don’t see how it would have survived. You can certainly argue that all that advancement was because of the wake of the civil war but life in 1860 wasn’t all that different from life in 1660 but over the next 75 years it changed rapidly and I think slavery would have seen its demise
0
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:10 pm to Toroballistic
quote:
Millions died during WWII. You don't think their deaths were worth it to stop the Nazis and Japanese?
Well, the CSA didn’t invade the Union. The Union mustered troops to invade the CSA, but to answer your question, I don’t think I’d categorize millions of dead as being worth it. That’s an enormously steep price to pay if you’re the one sacrificing your life for it, especially when they weren’t sacrificing their actual life for it, rather doing their duty as they were ordered to do so and died as a result of it. Only those sending them to their fate or those who are beneficiaries of their sacrifice can determine if they think it was worth it or not. The Civil War however was completely avoidable in every sense of avoidable.
This post was edited on 4/2/25 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:16 pm to Mike da Tigah
quote:
Well, the CSA didn’t invade the Union.
The Confederacy invaded the Union multiple times:
- Missouri in 1861
- Kentucky in 1861
- Maryland in 1862
- Kentucky in 1862
- Maryland/Pennsylvania in 1863
- Maryland in 1864
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:52 pm to wadewilson
quote:
The confederacy believed that they could still operate as under the articles of confederacy.
Huh?
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:54 pm to RollTide1987
General Sherman is all I got 
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:59 pm to RollTide1987
frick Grant and frick Lincoln
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:05 pm to TT9
quote:
General Sherman is all I got
His men raped a lot of black women but other than that, did their job. Not sure which one of those 2 things it is you support
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:10 pm to RollTide1987
These Confederacy threads give me strong Uncle Rico vibes.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:18 pm to wadewilson
quote:
They were traitors.
That’s weird, I don’t remember any of em being tried as such
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:20 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Slavery had never been more profitable than it was in 1860. Do you think that shite just ends over night?
No. But there is no way it would have made it passed the 1880's.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:21 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
The finest men ever placed on the planet were our forefather confederate soldiers.
quote:
They were manipulated into fighting for rich slave-owners who didn't want to lose their profits.
Both things can be true. You can honor the bravery of the soldiers who fought while realizing that they were mislead about what they were truly “fighting for”.
History repeated itself on that regard when the MIC and other business interest got us involved in Vietnam.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:23 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
But there is no way it would have made it passed the 1880's.
Based on what? The South had no immediate emancipation plans or even gradual emancipation plans in place. They weren’t even thinking about emancipation in 1860. The very idea of emancipation was anathema to them.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:31 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Based on what? The South had no immediate emancipation plans or even gradual emancipation plans in place. They weren’t even thinking about emancipation in 1860. The very idea of emancipation was anathema to them.
This is all part of the Lost Cause. They have to believe that it would have died out on its own in short order, otherwise they are arguing in favor of slavery.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:32 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Based on what? The South had no immediate emancipation plans or even gradual emancipation plans in place. They weren’t even thinking about emancipation in 1860. The very idea of emancipation was anathema to them.
Historical, economic, and industrial trends that played out everywhere else. I do not believe that we would have held on to slavery any longer than Brazil did. Slave labor was obsolete for big agriculture and processing by that time in the United States. The social and political pressures would have been at play as well, through the early progressive type movements.
Much of the reticence against emancipation wasn't some principled defense of slave labor, its because they didn't know what to do with them in society if they were freed. I'm pretty sure that solutions to that would have been developed in less than 40 years.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:38 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
The road to Appomattox and the end of the Confederacy began on this day 160 years ago
Were those 2 roads already existing when they built Shenandoah subdivision?
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:45 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Much of the reticence against emancipation wasn't some principled defense of slave labor, its because they didn't know what to do with them in society if they were freed. I'm pretty sure that solutions to that would have been developed in less than 40 years.
Didn't have to wait that long. It was called the Jim Crow Laws. How do you continue to starve out and keep emancipated slaves out of politics? No voice, no vote, no economic way out of poverty, no chance to live the so-called American Dream. In essence, a more human way to keep them under the same servitude for another 100 years.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:46 pm to Mike da Tigah
quote:
The Union mustered troops to invade the CSA
Factually incorrect.
The United States army marched south to shut down a rebellion.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:46 pm to ronricks
quote:Other countries like Brazil didn't end it until decades later. Seems very unlikely that without the US leading it would have just played out. You can also look at how sturdy and long Jim Crow was for a clue.
Technology and innovation were going to make slavery irrelevant and unprofitable.
These same "confederates" people are slobbing over in this thread visited horror upon their fellow citizens for many decades after the civil war.
frick all this revisionist bullshite. "The CSA" FAFO - big time.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:51 pm to Mushroom1968
quote:bullshite
His men raped a lot of black women
Posted on 4/2/25 at 2:02 pm to TT9
quote:
bullshite
No they did actually get the job done. Not sure why you’d disagree with that
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News