BLACK CONFEDERATE TROOPS – CIVIL WAR – YouTube.
Sadly he mentions H. K. Edgerton and not Andy Hall or Kevin Levin’s research on “Black Confederates”. However, he does a great overview of the Lost Cause version of Black Confederates…because “we are not going to see any form of hard research, evidence, first-person sources, muster rolls, etc., because belief is so much easier than actual research.” (Quote taken from Dead Confederates comment by Neil Hamilton)
Why should they mention hall or levin, those sclawags stole what they know from true Southern Confederate Americans.
Josephine,
How can you make that claim. Andy and Kevin have provided information that no other site has bothered to present. Most Black Confederate sites just state what they have seen on other sites and in most cases, as Andy and Kevin have shown…is wrong.
Thanks for trying. You can attempt to refute their claims if you like. Remember to site your sources!
Whether or not free blacks and slaves served in defense of their homeland really isn’t relevant to THE question you Yankee Empire acolytes won’t answer.
That question is why did Lincoln commit treason, start the invasion of our country, and wage a war that slaughtered a minimum of 400,000 United States military, 250,000 Confederate States military, and as many as 350,000 civilians, 100,000 of whom were blacks?
Until. you come clean on that question, your blog is nothing more than sophomoric bunk.
Pattycakes,
We have answered your question…you just don’t like the answer. Lincoln did not commit treason. You still fail to grasp the definition of treason. Where are you getting the number of killed civilians. Way too high…I mean Tommy Dilorenzo (The south’s new Patron Saint) only claims 50,000?
Corey,
Lincoln did, in undeniable fact, commit treason as defined by the United States Constitution. You may read that at your leisure.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii#section3
While it is true that after 1863 Lincoln was in no danger of being captured, tried, and convicted of treason, his death was most certainly a righteous one, too well deserved.
The fact that the Yankee Empire had to insulate itself from recovery of damages with the 14th Amendment shouts out its guilt.
Pattycakes,
Lincoln did not make war on states, he surpressed a rebellion in the states. Plus the southern states saw themselves out of the Union that was defined by the U. S. Constitution, therefore, that definition of treason no longer applied to them. Lincoln cannot be guilty of treason if the states he fought against were not part of the government. Now granted Lincoln did not full believe that the southern states had left the Union in reality, but it still stands that Lincoln had the right to defend the government and surpress the rebellion of the southern states.
Nice try.
Treason? Seems to me that was the Confederacy’s gambit; and all to defend their right to hold human beings in bondage. At least they had the courage to admit it. Unlike their mewling cultural descendants.
“Dilorenzo (The south’s new Patron Saint)”
More like Minister of Propaganda,the Goebbels of the Neo-CONfederacy.
And how many of those civilians were blacks ,southern and southern unionists folk and even northerners killed by confederates ? And,even most of the soldiers weren’t “slaughtered” considering that about 2/3 died from disease.
Lincoln and the union soldier fought because they didn’t believe the nation could be dissolved by a minority special interest and I’m glad for it.The United States is my home,I love it,all of it.
Now really Corey, are you trying to have your cake and eat it too? The Southern States are in the Union when that will help your point. Well, that is the way Lincoln, etal played it too.
Honest if the Lincolnites could have proved in court and tried and won in court treason by Jefferson Davis and all the Generals down to the last private they would have. They simply could not get around Pat Hines point about the constitution., http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii#section3
The Constitution forbid states from making war on their sister states. The entire yankee invasion and take-over was against the constitution!
Josephine,
Pattycakes does not understand the section of the Const. on treason. Here is Andy Hall’s response to this same question. The first quote is from Pattycakes
The rest is Andy Hall…
How did the South rebel?
It failed to accept the election results of 1860 and seceded. Secession in this case was in the form of rebellion against the Constitutional election of Abraham Lincoln to the office of the President.
Andy and et al, you know very well that Lincoln never recognized the Confederate States of America! Therefore, for his purposes they were in the union. He called them states in rebellion for his purpose of invasion and take over. Therefore, Lincoln was not following the Constitution by making war on sister states. He committed treason! Death to Tyrants!
The Confederate States of America did mean that they were indeed a separate nation, and had every right to protect and defend their country in their 2nd War of Independence!
The phrase United States could easily refer to either a collective of individual states or the whole collection there of. It could mean any attack against a states, which happened at the time of reference to be united or it could mean an attack against the whole of the collected states. Just weighing in on that. Arguing who committed treason is often a mute point, since victory largely settles the matter.
Corey,
I see there has been no direct evidence or sources supplied on the topic of this thread, Black Confederate Soldiers, but immediate attempts to go off track onto ANY other topic the posters feel comfortable commenting on (attacks on Andy Hall and Kevin Levin, Lincoln as committing treason, etc., etc., boring and forever ongoing ETC., ANYTHING else but actual history.
Facts, evidence, sources, not angry opinion, frantic emotion, or personal attacks. Something different for a change, please.
Neil
It is the Neo-Confederate’s SOP!
Educate yourself Mr. Neil and don’t expect us to do all the work. You know there is various sources and evidence out there so go get it!
josephinesouthern,
I have educated myself, Miss Josephine, and I have done the research, the study, the hunting down of facts, documents, sources, and historical accounts, much to my own satisfaction on the topic of this particular thread.
Because of that research, I know exactly why you and others dare not present any evidence to support your views concerning black Confederates and why you retreat to the common answer of “educate yourself” and NEVER provide it yourself.
You can’t.
Sincerely,
Neil Hamilton
It’s “death was most certainly a righteous one, too well deserved.”
And many may well think the same thing of the so called-CONfederacy
josephinesouthern,”Death to Tyrants!”
Considering that slavery was tyranny,this would apply to the CONfederacy as well.In fact,the motto Sic semper tyrannis was used on the battle flag of some USCT,just scroll down a bit.
http://jubiloemancipationcentury.wordpress.com/category/us-colored-troops/regimental-flags/
Your comparison sucks! Slaves were purchased and paid for with real money, they fell under property laws for lack of a better place to insert them in the order of things. They were taken care of from cradle to grave. They had representation in courts, yes indeedy it was a peculiar institution in the South.
They were also counted as real people one day out of every ten years too.
josephinesouthern,
And your reply is absolutely horrifying. “They were taken care of from cradle to grave.” Much like criminals senteced to life at a federal pen. “They had representation in courts.” Since when? They couldn’t serve on juries, they could not represent themselves, they could not hire lawyers, they could not testify against whites in most cases.
Peculiar institution is not a comment of praise or fairness, Josephine, not by a long shot.
Please, read some history, get some facts before you make such comments.
Sincerely,
Neil
“Your comparison sucks!”
Clearly tyranny is in the eye of the beholder,
Not getting your way in a presidental election in a constitutional republic equals tyranny.
Being bought,sold and owned,not tyranny.
Your reply speaks for it’s self.
“Not getting your way in a presidental election in a constitutional republic equals tyranny.”
Same as it ever was.
tut tut Neil, oh how horrifying to acknowledge that there were some good things about slavery in the ole South. but hey you would have to read the slave narratives to know that. BTW Yes they were represented in court, one account is the free services provided by the little 5’4″ fellow from Georgia, Little Alex, the one that you all love to quote out of context, and the one who became the famous senator in Washington after the war.. oh hum same ole same ole, lay it on me with a wet noodle mr. neil this blog is the place to beat the white slave guilt into the good people of the South.
Josephine, you need to start backing up your cliams with some proof. There was nothing good about American slavery…North or south. And did you know that Alex Stephens gave another speech similar to his Cornerstone speech prior to the actual Cornerstone speech? I am still trying to find it to prove it, but my source is pretty solid in telling the story.
Josephinesouthern,
There is NOTHING good about the institution of slavery. PERIOD. I have read the slave narratives and I know what conditions and times they were taken. Little Alex could have defended a 6’10″ slave in a court and it would still not make the institution of slavery and “better.”
As I have stated elsewhere, the term, “kindly slavemaster” makes as much sense as the term, “kindly drug pusher.” ANY degree of slavery, no matter how lightly applied, no matter how ‘kindly’ administered, NO GOOD WHATSOEVER can come from it.
What is particularly horrifying to me is that you can somehow reconcile something so wrong, so evil, as “some good things about slavery” in your own mind. The problem with such does not rest with me, Josephine, but the silly idea that you think such horror and disgust with the institution some how represents a “wet noodle” from “mr. neil.”
The history of Southern secession over the institution of slavery, to preserve it, protect it, and expand it, is simply historical fact and if there is any “white slave guilt” with the good people of the South, it is most apparent is those who try to find some good in it or deny that history.
I suggest, Josephine, the fault is within yourself, and not the good people of the South.
Sincerely,
Neil
“Alex Stephens gave another speech similar to his Cornerstone speech prior to the actual Cornerstone ”
http://www.confederatepastpresent.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=127:alexander-h-stephens-speech-before-the-virginia-secession-convention&catid=40:secession&back=yes
http://collections.richmond.edu/secession/documents/index.html?keyword=stephens&element=p&formType=Keyword&start=21&order=date&direction=ascending&id=pb.4.397
Good slavery
“I have observed this in my experience of slavery, – that whenever my condition was improved, instead of its increasing my contentment, it only increased my desire to be free, and set me to thinking of plans to gain my freedom. I have found that, to make a contented slave, it is necessary to make a thoughtless one. It is necessary to darken his moral and mental vision, and, as far as possible, to annihilate the power of reason. He must be able to detect no inconsistencies in slavery; he must be made to feel that slavery is right; and he can be brought to that only when he ceased to be a man.”
― Frederick Douglass, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Jefferson Moon,
So refreshing to hear about slavery from someone who was actually a slave AT THE TIME, vice someone of the 21st century who can find “some good” with such a disgusting institution.
Thanks for providing evidence and sources vice unsupported opinion.
Sincerely,
Neil
“Sadly he mentions H. K. Edgerton and not Andy Hall or Kevin Levin’s research on ‘Black Confederates’.”
Research by Hall and Levin? They carefully pick and choose what items they “research.” And carefully pick and choose what items to ignore.
***
“However, he does a great overview of the Lost Cause version of Black Confederates…”
Mr. Levin has admitted on his own blog of having an agenda. Calls it a “form of activism.” Is that better? A “form of activism” is history? Don’t think so.
***
…“we are not going to see any form of hard research, evidence, first-person sources, muster rolls, etc., because belief is so much easier than actual research.”
My experience has been that if you place the evidence right in front of these people’s faces – they will not acknowledge it. So I don’t see much reason to bother with them.
In response to you last comment…they why even study history…just let people believe what they want to?
BorderRuffian,
I notice you attack people and not their research or evidence.
I also see the standard excuse, with both you and Josephine, an either “do the research yourself” or “why bother.”
This, to me, signals a rear-guard action because neither of you, or your excuses, have anything significant to produce in the way of evidence to support your views, or that you both know your evidence will not hold up to serious examination.
To me, when such phrases are employed, they signal frustration and anger, not serious evidence and research.
But we have been here before, but the response like yours and Joesephine’s, gets weaker and weaker, each time when such a thread pops up.
And one day, there will be no response at all, for fear of being ripped to shreds by fact and history.
Until that time,
Neil
I don’t doubt there were black confederates.how many there were.how willing they were and how they were used is the questions I wonder about. If you have evidence of large number of blacks used in combat please present it,and I do reserve the right to question evidence.
BorderRuffian,
“So I don’t see much reason to bother with them.”
JosepheneSouthern,
“Educate yourself.”
I interpret the above to mean, “I can no longer support my views with historical evidence, so I will either label those who have disproven my views before, or I will retreat behind such statements as given above.”
“But he has no right to mislead others, who may have less access to history, and less leisure to study it, into the false belief that “our fathers who framed the Government under which we live” were of the same opinion–thus substituting falsehood and deception for truthful evidence and fair argument.” — Abraham Lincoln, Cooper Union Speech, Feb. 27, 1860.
Neil