If the South had won the War Against Northern Aggression...?

You'll have to ask the African kings who sold them to the Yankee slave traders.

Indeed, a bit of a point lost on many.

Did they consent to being sold?

Would you?

As long as the buyer and seller consented, it was pure capitalism, and therefore moral.

Considering that Lincoln had to put his boot heel down to keep the Northwest Conspiracy from gaining momentum, a second secession was not unthinkable.

Well, let's round up Nashville and sell them en bulk

They considered it an honor to be chosen for a duty by their tribal kings.

As for me, no, I wouldn't consent, but then, I'm a 21st Century Renaissance Man.

You stole that line word for word from Alex Haley's Roots

Really?

Well then, it must be true.

Alex and I agree!

I'm sure he considers it an honor that you quoted him.

I doubt all slaves were bought from tribal kings, just as I doubt all slaves consented to being sold.

In which case, some (if not most) slave owners were in possession of stolen 'property.'

I didn't actually quote him; I just said the same thing.

Alex is happy, I'm happy, and you've got something to bitch and whine about, so you're happy too!

I love a thread with a happy ending.

Not all were bought and sold, but the majority were. Chasing Lavar Burton through the jungle didn't really happen all that much.

Only after the volunteers dried up and the draft began

Wait wait wait let me catch my breath. Are you really saying with a straight face that the South thought the black man was their equal?! That's rich even for you. Man your romanticized delusions know no bounds.

So you're saying that you think that the North thought the black man was their equal?

Ofcourse not, I said no such thing. Institutional rascism was widespread at that time. The big difference is in the North you were far less likly to have a neighbor with an ottoman named Leroy. Northerns didn't treat blacks as equals, but they didn't see them as farm equipment either, something Southerners were comfortable with at that time.

Neither was Muad Dib.

He was just saying that the South was no more racist....then and now...than the North.

You didn't see race riots in the South at the time where whites pulled blacks from their beds and murdered them for absolutely no goddamn reason....unlike the North.

Jim Crow would like to have a word with you. And yes the South was far more racsist than the North for the sheer undeinable fact that the South was was comfortable with blacks being property and went to war to help spread that way of life. The second part I realize you've out of your mind, but the first part is incontrovertable. As for race riots and murders, did you forget the slave riots and well I guess it wasn't murder because slaves weren't considered humans to their owners. LIke I said to Muad, of all the delusions out there, this one is right up at the top.

Before I got to bed I leave you all with this thought. All this "it's the North's fault it's the north's fault" yada yada yada cry baby whiny by Southern apologists. Slavery, Rascism, civil war, Jim Crow...all the North's fault. Poor Southerners. When will the South ever start taking responsibility for what it did? You do realize you sound exactly the same and have just as much substance, which is to say little, as Jessie Jackson et tal when he blames everything today on the white man for the troubles blacks have today. I'm a proud American, warts and all. Slavery was our fault, I'm not going to project it onto the British because it started when we were still colonies. We treated Indians horribly and deserve scorn. The biggest problem with some Southerners here is the complete inability to take basic responsibilty or even recognize their past while being proud of their Southernness. It's the same damn thing as being a proud african american in one breath and in the next blaming each ill on whites.

Get over yourselves.

You go ahead and live in that delusion. What is more racist...thinking that another race is something to be feared and hated, or thinking another race is property? I'm not saying that the slavery was good or that the South was innocent of racism, but if you think that the North was any better with regards to racism, then I feel sorry for you.[/quote]

No it's not. It's very controvertable.

Like I said, you can keep deluding yourself, but that's just what it is. I forgot no slave riots...I'm thinking of the race riots that the North had.

Whatever, dude.

When the fuck have I not done that you douche nozzle?

No Southerner here is proud of slavery.

How many blacks were killed in New York during the Draft Riots?

^ Nobody knows.

It's funny that you Confederate types are the same people always banging on these days about having people lined up and shot for treason.

Luckily for you the North didn't do just that.

I can definitely see why they don't make much headway towards "setting the record straight".

trea·son (trē'zən)
n.

1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

[Middle English, from Anglo-Norman treson, from Latin trāditiō, trāditiōn-, a handing over. See tradition.]

Looking at that, I'd say it was the north who committed the treason...

If that were true, I could secede my home and lot from the United States, not pay my taxes, and accuse the United States of treason if they protested.

Ass.

You will die a traitor's death.