Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General National Commission to Investigate the January 6

I have suggested, in another subject that Trump is exactly and precisely just like a TV preacher who has been able to harangue his believers for years by the TV industry itself who loves him because he makes them money.

Remember too, the south has been building statues, naming schools, and building museums to their fallen in the civil war which they continue to support to this very day! If you don't understand then go down to the southern states and take a look. Its blatant and obvious. When Nazi Germany lost we tried, with the help of many anti-Nazi Germans to erase their presence. All the statues, places, etc. have been destroyed. They were bad people doing bad things and treated accordingly.

Here however that was the plan but it never happened. Instead we have people in the South delighted with the thought of another run at the "Republic", with the full support of their teachers, politicians and government! Hell, many of the same people are actually professing admiration of Adolph Hitler! The current on that one is "Adolph Hitler was right!". At the same time our TV industry, greedy and powerful, love the new Hitler (Trump) because they can make money off him (right up until they get taken over by them)

In other words the United States of America did a really lousy job of winning the civil war and, now, we may have to do it all over! As far as I can tell the Trump thing is just an extension of the civil war AND Nazism AND religion and the rest of us still think its politics! It isn't - its worse. If we don't do something its gonna get a LOT worse whilst we continue being fooling around with folks who are, basically at war with devil worshiping monsters. Parties, etc have absolutely nothing to do with it!

We have, I think, a serious problem..........

Political wise maybe. But I'll remind you that in today's all volunteer military 40% comes from the south. The south provides much more than its share when it comes to defending this country. More than any other region of the country. But most in the military are apolitical or non-partisan. At least they don't show their political leanings on their sleeves.

Now active duty, retired, veterans tend to vote Republican more than Democratic, but there's a long history as to why.

I'll add this, as a Georgian I know of no one that wants another run at the Republic as you put it. Fact is we've been too busy defending her and defending her with more than our share of folks.

You are right about the military and how they vote and, I suspect, not just southern military vote that way as most think that Republicans support the military better than the Dems (and may be right!). I wasn't referring to those so much as I was referring to the militias. On reflection, however, most of those are northern. What I was basing it on was all the little confederate museums down there and they too might be gone too. I hitchhiked through the south two times. In each case we ended up sleeping in the some the houses of them that picked us up (there was two of us). That was pretty interesting. We slept in both white and black homes and about 70% of those homes were seriously ready for whatever and had guns all over the place. This was true of both white and black homes. The general feeling seemed to be "that if anybody messes with us we will destroy them." This was in the middle 50's. I have always thought that the civil rights that came, down there, was to cool it all down because folks were ready. The small museums I refer to were those run by things like (and this will not be all that accurate) "Confederate" which would be followed by "Wives", "Veterans", etc. we went to a lot of those because they were interesting, both the museums and the folks that ran them, usually older women who were seriously enthusiastic about the confederacy.

What I also remember was that many in the south were not exactly delighted when they referred to "the north" as well and suspect that too remains. In other words the South is not exactly fans of the North. On the other hand folks in the north just really don't care and many retire in the south as well (mostly for the weather).

On reflection I suspect some of my thoughts were probably not right and for that I apologize. Most of my experience was over 60 years ago! I don't apologize talking about statues and how they spoke about the confederacy though. I still think the north did a terrible job at dealing with the remains of the confederacy and we are dealing with the remains right now.

Then there are folks like the current governor of Texas who actually called up the Texas National Guard to stop the American Army for taking over Texas (they were on an annual exercise but the governor was convinced they were being invaded). This was close to after he took office. I had a good friend living in Texas and he was seriously embarrassed by that one. His incredible ignorance, and obvious hatred of the north, also has something to do with my attitude towards the south as well.

The military voting Republican goes back to the Vietnam era. LBJ in 1964 was the last democratic presidential candidate to win the military's vote. Many in the military during Vietnam point to McGovern and his what they say was the U.S.'s unconditional surrender to North Vietnam campaign pledges. That was probably the real turning point. The military mind is different than a civilian mind. Not better, but different. Most of us who served just wanted to accomplish our mission of Keeping South Vietnam free. Mission orientated More to it than that. But as history unfolded, Carter came around after Vietnam and shrank the military big time. If you remember a lot of people were talking about Carter's hollow military. Reagan rebuilt the military, then Bill Clinton downsized it again by 500,000 personnel. Downsizing is always a four letter word when it comes to the military. Obama cut another 300,000 out of the military and pulled the military out of Iraq preventing what I refer to as mission accomplishment This is just a short synopsis, but beginning with McGovern the democratic party in military circles for a very long time was known as the peace dove party.

This certainly isn't the south of the 1950's. You'll see very few bumper stickers or licence plates with the confederate battle flag on it. You'll see perhaps ten times as many old Obama/Biden bumper stickers still on cars than the confederate flag. No one celebrates Confederate Memorial day anymore, heck we don't even know when it is if it still is. Atlanta has the slogan, The city too busy to hate. Georgia took the confederate stars and bars off it's state flag in 2003. It was done with approval of a majority vote of Georgians, 70% or so if I recall. I can't remember when was the last time I seen a confederate statue. Although Stone Mountain still has it carving.

Alabama and Mississippi always lag behind, so I can't say about them. Texas is always reflecting on when they were a nation and at times still acts as if they were. As for statues and the like, if northerners let us be, we'll take care of these thing ourselves. One last quickie, we can also get our southern hackles up. Back in 1998 when Zell Miller was governor, we were all set them to take the stars and bars off Georgia'ls state flag. But we were invaded by tons of folks from the north, protesting and marching, telling us to remove it. Well, that got our hackles up, instead of voting to remove which probably would have passed easily, it was defeated soundly. We weren't going to let all those protesters from out of state tell us what to do. In 2003, with no influx of millions of folks from out of state trying to tell us what to do, we took it off ourselves. It was all done rather quietly. Don't underestimate southern hackles.

Interesting to note Zell Miller was a Democrat who first tried to get our flag changed, Sonny Perdue a Republican accomplished it.

I guess you have to be southern to understand our ties to the civil war.

It wasn't entirely about slavery. It was the industrial north vs the agricultural south.

The cities vs the rural areas. Factories vs farms.

It wasn't wealthy slave owners who fought and died in it, just stupid rednecks like me and my friends.

Farmers mostly. It's still felt deeply here, but it's not really on display much. Those flags are rare, but each generation learns of it anew and come to their own conclusions. If Lincoln had been worth his salary he would have stopped that war in it's tracks.

But he began a longstanding Republican tradition of wrecking things every time they get elected.

Speaking of Lincoln, here's what he had to say to Horace Greeley.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

For the whole letter.

http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm

The first couple of years of the civil war was all about saving the union. Slavery didn't really become the issue until Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation when England was threatening to enter the war on the south's side. It work and the rest is history.

What is strange to me is it always seems someone from the North is always the first to bring up the Civil War as if nothing has changed in 165 or so years. But it is what it is. Besides slavery which certainly played a major role, it was the north demanding that the South sell is cotton and other raw materials only to the factories in the north, rather than to other countries. The north set the price for the cotton and all extra would then be sold by the north and shipped by the north to other countries. There's many other reasons, but they get totally ignored and untaught.

I don't know, perhaps that is for the best. It is said winners write the history and that history is reinvented and changed some by each succeeding generation.

I have an article written by who and where I got it, I don't remember. I saved the article, but it was certainly written by a civil war buff, historian. I'll post it as this one here is long enough.

Just for those interested, here is the article. Take it however you want. I found it interesting and fact based.

Real reasons for the Civil War:
This is well-reasoned document concerning the reasons the Civil War occurred.

Many people think the Civil War of 1860-1865 was fought over one issue alone, slavery. Nothing could actually be further from the truth. The War Between the States began because the South demanded States' rights and were not getting them.

The Congress at that time heavily favored the industrialized northern states to the point of demanding that the South sell is cotton and other raw materials only to the factories in the north, rather than to other countries. The Congress also taxed the finished materials that the northern industries produced heavily, making finished products that the South wanted, unaffordable. The Civil War should not have occurred. If the Northern States and their representatives in Congress had only listened to the problems of the South, and stopped these practices that were almost like the taxation without representation of Great Britain, then the Southern states would not have seceded and the war would not have occurred.

I know for many years, we have been taught that the Civil War was all about the abolition of slavery, but this truly did not become a major issue, with the exception of John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry, until after the Battle of Antietam in September 1862, when Abraham Lincoln decided to free the slaves in the Confederate States in order to punish those states for continuing the war effort. The war had been in progress for two years by that time.

Most southerners did not even own slaves nor did they own plantations. Most of them were small farmers who worked their farms with their families. They were fighting for their rights. They were fighting to maintain their lifestyle and their independence the way they wanted to without the United States Government dictating to them how they should behave.

Why are we frequently taught then, that the Civil War, War of Northern Aggression, War Between the States, or whatever you want to call it, was solely about slavery? That is because the history books are usually written by the winners of a war and this war was won by the Union. However, after following my family around since I was just a year old to Civil War Living History scenarios in Gettysburg and elsewhere, I have listened to both sides of the story, from those portraying historical figures, both Union and Confederate. Through listening to these people and also reading many different books, including some of the volumes of The Official Records of the Civil War, Death in September, The Insanity of It All, Every Day Life During the Civil War, and many others, I have come to the conclusion that the Civil War was about much more than abolishing the institution of slavery.

It was more about preserving the United States and protecting the rights of the individual, the very tenets upon which this country was founded. I personally think that the people who profess that the Civil War was only fought about slavery have not read their history books. I really am glad that slavery was abolished, but I don't think it should be glorified as being the sole reason the Civil War was fought. There are so many more issues that people were intensely passionate about at the time. Slavery was one of them, but it was not the primary cause of the war. The primary causes of the war were economics and states' rights.

Slavery was a part of those greater issues, but it was not the reason the Southern States seceded from the Union, nor fought the Civil War. It certainly was a Southern institution that was part of the economic system of the plantations, and because of that, it was part and parcel of the economic reasons that the South formed the Confederacy. The economic issue was one of taxation and being able to sell cotton and other raw materials where the producers wanted to, rather than where they were forced to, and at under inflated prices. Funny, it sounds very much like the reason we broke from Great Britain to begin with. The South was within their rights, but there should have been another way to solve the problem. If they had been willing to listen to Abraham Lincoln, perhaps the war could have been avoided. Lincoln had a plan to gradually free the slaves without it further hurting the plantation owners. He also had a plan to allow them to sell their products anywhere they wanted to and at a fair price. They did not choose to listen to the President, however, so they formed the Confederacy and the Civil War began.

The Republican party was founded by members of the Whig party over slavery - they were against it. Economies based on slavery are also dependent on slavery as it becomes the basis of the economy itself. A threat against slavery therefore threatens any economy which has slavery.

I don't deny anything you said but there is an underlayment here that, basically threatened the entire economy of the South. This, in turn .............

Right now, incidentally, we have seen a Republican party get taken over by a man who has pretty well laid out where he is at. All soldiers, especially those who got killed in one of our wars are "suckers", he likes to grab women by their (you know), he lies even when the truth is better, he was a TV star, he has failed at virtually anything he has ever done. All this is true and verifiable, He also has millions of followers. The civil war happened for very specific reasons beginning with the creation of the Republican party. We now have a situation where we seem to be moving onto another civil war and I think that the Trump takeover of one of our main political parties is just the beginning.

Unless?

The slavery of child laborers in the north didn't end until many years after the slaves were freed.

Neither side was lily white and there was a lot more to it than slavery.

Never shoulda happened. Just the first of many grievances I have against the republican party.

The billionaire class of the day just flexing their muscles to the detriment of everyone else.

We most certainly are NOT moving towards another civil war.

Just because a handful of of discontents are using the word does not make it a part of the future.

There is no force on the planet capable of taking on the US Government in any sort of "war".

Political parties do not maintain standing armies and cannot go to war against each other.