RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3220Goal: $6000

No offence...

Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 13 March 2011 at 05:32.
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.

No offence... but an organised block war just seems a bit lame :\

Also, the Confederate States of America were racist. If you'd like to argue otherwise, please begin by refuting Alexander H. Stephens' length speech at the founding of the Confederation:

"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."

If I were taking part in the founding of a new state, which I believed not to be racist, and the new Vice President spoke these words, not only would I be disgusted, but I'd probably have heckled him. In fact, the enormous non-racist crowd, from the population of this non-racist state, would probably have all heckled him.

    DalekEXTERMINATE00:02, 13 March 2011

    I never said the PEOPLE weren't racist, also an organised block war is better than organised religion.

      Colbert|FanNewbie-admin00:05, 13 March 2011

      So: - You accept that the Vice President of the CSA said that the state was founded on the principle that one race is superior to another. - You do not deny racism among the population of the CSA? - You accept that the CSA would rather fight a bloody war than give up slavery; but claim that they were not racist?

      By these standards, what possibly could be a racist state? Could a racist state exist, if this were not one? Surely, Apartheid South Africa was racist, with whites legally seen as superior to blacks? Well what if the whites OWNED the blacks? Would that be racist?

        DalekEXTERMINATE00:13, 13 March 2011

        Also the CSA's constitution specifically gave people the right to keep slaves - and only Negro ones at that.

          - π00:17, 13 March 2011
           

          How is that a nation state (the CSA) the founding documents of which entrench the right of members of one racial group to own members of another (and not vice versa) can be viewed as anything other than racist?

            MtD (talk)01:12, 13 March 2011

            Our friend here appears to be under the delusion that the CSA was founded on the noble philosophical principle of states' rights, which was of course completely separate from slavery and racism.

              Seme Blue03:33, 13 March 2011
               

              "which was of course completely separate from slavery and racism." --Seme Blue

              I didn't say it was SEPERATE from slavery and racism, what I mean by "Nor do I believe the Confederacy was racist" means that I don't believe that is mainly founded on slavery. I know that it WAS a racist state, however, so was the US when it was founded(most of the founding fathers owned slaves) and we don't say the US was founded on slavery.

              Putting people to high standards and then saying to supporters of a view "SEE!" is a bad arguing method.

                Colbert|FanNewbie-admin03:42, 13 March 2011
                Edited by author.
                Last edit: 03:48, 13 March 2011

                Well if you know the Confederacy was a racist state, why do you have Nor do I think the Confederacy was racist. on your userpage?

                Updated to say, don't you think you should qualify Nor do I think the Confederacy was racist. to represent what you really think?

                  MtD (talk)03:46, 13 March 2011

                  Miswording, I will change it to Nor do I think the Confederacy was MAINLY racist. Okay, MtD.

                    Colbert|FanNewbie-admin03:47, 13 March 2011
                     

                    Please, since you've spent so much effort describing what you don't think, tell us clearly what you do think.

                      Seme Blue03:49, 13 March 2011
                      • The Confederacy was founded mainly on states' rights
                      • Abe didn't care about slavery as much as people think he did
                      • The Union at that time could be easily compared to the Great Britain under King George III with regards to secession movements.
                        Colbert|FanNewbie-admin03:53, 13 March 2011

                        So, it was just a little bit racist?

                          MtDHolla!03:56, 13 March 2011

                          It was FLAWED, it wasn't made by God. What I think you mean is "Was the Confederacy made for slavery", which my response would be no. It was made for states' rights, and free blacks fought in the War for Southern Independence.

                          Also, I DO NOT have a Southern accent.

                            Colbert|FanNewbie-admin03:58, 13 March 2011
                            • The Confederacy was founded mainly on states' rights
                            Yes, this is a partly true statement.
                            • Abe didn't care about slavery as much as people think he did
                            Also true.
                            • The Union at that time could be easily compared to the Great Britain under King George III with regards to secession movements.
                            This is not even wrong.

                            Let's talk about this.

                            What you fail to understand about the Confederacy was that the reason the Southern states seceded was because they felt that their way of life was mortally threatened by the election of Abraham Lincoln, who was an anti-slavery (not an abolitionist, of course) Northerner. Their way of life included economic, political, and social elements--some historians even contend that the North and South were not simply different economic regions, but two entirely separate civilizations--and differed from the North in all of these elements. One government could no longer contain both societies, especially given the expansionist tendencies of both (c.f. the wp:Ostend Manifesto and wp:Kansas-Nebraska Act and its repercussions), so the South saw no choice but to break away. What you specifically fail to realize is just how integral the institution of slavery was to Southern socioeconomics, and how the subjugation of blacks was not simply an economic policy but a societal necessity. The Confederacy, the culmination of the seceding states' effort at housing their society in a new government, is simply inextricable and inseparable from that subjugation.

                            You correctly point out that the chief reason given for secession by the Southern states was that under the "compact" theory of the Constitution, it was a "state's right" to secede. Lincoln, the North and ultimately the Supreme Court affirmed the "contract" theory of the Constitution, meaning that the federal government was supreme. This issue was put to bed after the war in a legal sense, but persists to the present day in the political invective in conservative Southern states. States' rights were the legal foundation of the Confederacy. But the moral, economic, and social foundation of the Confederacy was the aforementioned subjugation of blacks. That's not to say that states' rights were not vitally important to the Confederate States--they were, and that probably helped them lose the war--but that the Confederacy was created to preserve the Southern way of life, their civilization if you will, which was based on the subjugation of blacks in all respects. States' rights were merely a justification of their continuation of that way of life.

                              Seme Blue04:21, 13 March 2011

                              It was only a part of their way of life, a part that would have ended. Slavery wouldn't have lasted long.

                                Colbert|FanNewbie-admin04:26, 13 March 2011

                                Please try to read what I wrote. Perhaps I should rewrite it at a seventh-grade reading level?

                                  Seme Blue04:27, 13 March 2011

                                  I did, are you happy now?

                                    Colbert|FanNewbie-admin04:37, 13 March 2011

                                    You: "It was only a part of their way of life, a part that would have ended."

                                    Me: "What you specifically fail to realize is just how integral the institution of slavery was to Southern socioeconomics, and how the subjugation of blacks was not simply an economic policy but a societal necessity. The Confederacy, the culmination of the seceding states' effort at housing their society in a new government, is simply inextricable and inseparable from that subjugation. [...] the moral, economic, and social foundation of the Confederacy was the aforementioned subjugation of blacks. [...] States' rights were merely a justification of their continuation of that way of life."

                                      Seme Blue04:41, 13 March 2011

                                      You: "What you specifically fail to realize is just how integral the institution of slavery was to Southern socioeconomics, and how the subjugation of blacks was not simply an economic policy but a societal necessity. The Confederacy, the culmination of the seceding states' effort at housing their society in a new government, is simply inextricable and inseparable from that subjugation. [...] the moral, economic, and social foundation of the Confederacy was the aforementioned subjugation of blacks. [...] States' rights were merely a justification of their continuation of that way of life."

                                      Me: "It was at the time needed, however needs changed. The South seemed just fine without the slaves. The problem is what Abe Lincoln did the South; that caused the real problem for the South.

                                      If slavery was such a big part of Southern life than how come that only about 10% of Confederates owned slaves?"

                                        Colbert|FanNewbie-admin04:45, 13 March 2011

                                        Uh, because there were very few big plantation owners. Here's a quick summary of the Southern economy, and the relevant part: "Because large slaveholders owned most of the region’s slaves, wealth was more stratified than in the North. In the Deep South, the middle class held a relatively small proportion of the region’s property, while wealthy planters owned a very significant portion of the productive lands and slave labor. In 1850, 17 percent of the farming population held two-thirds of all acres in the rich cotton-growing regions of the South."

                                          Nebuchadnezzar (talk)05:32, 13 March 2011
                                           
                                           
                                           
                                           
                                           
                                           
                                           

                                          Who said it was made by god? Also, I don't recall suggesting you have a Southern accent.

                                            MtDPinko Scum04:00, 13 March 2011

                                            No, but people put it up to perfect standards, when all governments are flawed. Also, the Southern accent part was joke. However, in reality somethings I can say with a Southern accent.

                                              Colbert|FanNewbie-admin04:01, 13 March 2011
                                               

                                              Everybody's a little bit racist sometimes

                                                Nebuchadnezzar (talk)04:01, 13 March 2011

                                                Well, ok. I don't really care for the Welsh. But I don't think I'd enslave them.

                                                  MtDPinko Scum04:05, 13 March 2011
                                                   

                                                  True, I used to be racist. When I was I tried to stop it, however, it was hard because most of my bullies where brown(or Latino for those politically correct Nazis).

                                                  I thought Latinos had an African skin color, I thought there was only 2 skin-colors.

                                                    Colbert|FanNewbie-admin04:08, 13 March 2011

                                                    Really? You were bullied? Whodathunk it?

                                                      MtDPinko Scum04:15, 13 March 2011

                                                      I still get bullied, bullying is a big problem for me (sad face).

                                                        Colbert|FanNewbie-admin04:16, 13 March 2011