re: Anyone questioning the history they were taught in school?

Texas literally said that they were seceding because of the threat Lincoln posed to slavery.
It's laid out in black and white. Pun intended.

quote:

---

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

---

They pretty much felt the same way about Mexicans and Indians.

It's all pretty complicated and yea, not "black and White".

Here is one. Any mention of the "Mound builders" in North America?

quote:

---

history was never given the same significance as math or science

---

I don't think it should. Math and Science are definites.

History can be skewed depending on who is teaching it and their agendas.

Mounds as in Indian burial mounds? I know a little bit about it but not sure whether it was from school or just out interest. Passed by some mounds near Greenville where I used to hunt.

quote:

---

No bc I like reading the truth

---

So you reject all the evidence that Hitler did not die in Germany?

You deny that there are cities in South America were every one speaks German? You believe the female skeleton the Russians found was Hitler? You believe Hitler decided not
to use the escape tunnels? You deny the hideaway in South America with the same medication that Hitler needed was not for Hitler but somebody else?

quote:

---

Texas literally said that they were seceding because of the threat Lincoln posed to slavery.
It's laid out in black and white. Pun intended.

quote:
We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

---

Ah so close but so far.

Texas joined the US in 1845 and then seceded a decade and a half later. It was the same generation. Slavery was not illegal in the US in 1860 when they seceded. Texas being a slave state (which had the fewest slaves mind you and was least dependent on slavery of the other Confederate states) certainly had an impact but why would Texas leave if it was all about slavery?

At a minimum they were assured when they joined just 15 years and change prior to that (Dec 29, 1845-Feb 1 1861) that slavery would be legal. More likely there was a HELL OF A LOT OF OTHER REASONS. Very few people owned slaves in Texas and military leaders like Lawrence Sullivan Ross never owned a slave.

What is far more likely is Texas didn't feel like they fit with the United States anymore and felt their rights weren't respected. The same rights that they felt were guaranteed when they joined. The same rights other Southern states felt they had protected by the Constitution.

Prior to the Civil War they were referred to as "These United States" and not "The United States" because state sovereignty was a pivotal part of the Constitution and why those states originally went along with it as opposed to being independent. They felt little loyalty to the United States, they felt loyalty to THEIR state and to the people they knew and fit with culturally. Not some group of folks far away that had no connection to them.

In the 1860s most people never left the state they were born in or if they did they didn't go far. Texas or Alabama or South Carolina had almost nothing in common with New York or Vermont. They saw no reason why they should have to stay in the Union when they voted to leave as they saw it as their self evident right and more specifically a right guaranteed by the 9th and 10th Amendments. The fig leaf of justification against it is the ridiculous Texas v White decision that was controlled by Lincoln appointees and had no basis in even the most common sense interpretation of the law.

Hey but if you want to look at statements where Texas or other states said they thought slavery was their right as the only reason for the War (ignoring the 4 Union States that had legal slavery of course) I suppose you can. I understand it because if you open that door it really makes everything about the Civil War and Lincoln look very, very different and most people simply don't want to accept what that would mean.

Oh, and obviously slavery was horrible. Honestly it ended up holding back the South more than anything. It was an outdated and inefficient practice beyond the obvious violation of humanity. The problem also was with the end of the slave trade it made slaves currently in the US FAR more valuable and they were the primary collateral for any large plantation. Ending slavery would have bankrupted them. The banning of the slave trade was well intended but it actually made it harder to end slavery as a whole because it made the value of slaves too great and ending it would have destroyed the economies of most Southern states. Not because of the labor (most became sharecroppers anyway and little changed for them) but because of the financial impact of suddenly taking away those assets.

BTW, as you go through that door it makes you realize that there was a HUGE vested interest for a lot of NY Bankers especially to end slavery in the South for that reason. It would bankrupt Southern landowners for which they carried their loans. Slaves were the primary asset those landowners had besides the land itself. That would allow them to come in and buy up that land and invest cheaply. That's also part of why there was so much mistrust between the North and South.

It's a long and complex mess and good and bad intentions on both sides. No one was innocent and no one was completely at fault for the most part. The key is if you understand the true underlying consequences you can hopefully avoid making the same types of mistakes, unfortunately rewriting history makes that virtually impossible. People would rather spend time trying to vilify some and make others heroes instead of learning from both.

quote:

---

Math and Science are definites.

---

Well dinosaurs went from being reptiles to birds in my lifetime, from having leathery skin to feathers. We even got a new type of organism in that time “archaea”. Science is the opposite of definitive, it is ever changing or at least our understanding of it is…

I definitely agree with you.

And we still can't scientifically explain Gravity, beyond theory.