You heard as a child in your government propaganda camp . . . Oh dear, I am having a Rick Perry moment. Most people don’t call those places “government propaganda camps.” What are the words? Oh, yes, most people call them “American public schools.”
At any rate, they told you that the Pilgrims in Massachusetts had the “first Thanksgiving” back in the 1600s. Well, actually, the those strange-dressing, “witch”-hanging, Yankee forerunners were actually pretty late to the party. About a half century too late to the party, to be exact.
The first Thanksgiving was celebrated September 8, 1565, in St. Augustine, Florida. Oh, you are one of those English-only people who think that you can find fault with this post? Well, think again. The first recorded Thanksgiving amongst English settlers was on December 4, 1619 in Virginia. Read all about it here.
Want to experience a real Old South Thanksgiving? Visit the Olde South Thanksgiving and Harvest Festival website to see what it’s all about. If you plan to be in the Abbeville, South Carolina area, it is this coming weekend. If not, wait until next year.
How to get there? Click here for Abbeville, SC on Google Maps.
Tags: American South, South Carolina, Thanksgiving
why is it southerners feel they can call northerners ‘yankees’ which is a derogatory term in the south and think its perfectly fine?
it is a derogatory term, i lived there so don’t try to bs me.
does anyone have an answer for this ageless question? is it a lack of manners? ignorance? enjoy being a rude ass? something else?
latent inferiority complex?
phobia of some sort?
perhaps some neurotransmitter anomaly?
We draw a huge distinction between “people who live in the North/are from the North” and “Yankees.”
A guy from Wisconsin that I worked with on an IT project defined “Yankees” thus: “Up north, we call them ‘jerks.’”
Okay, here ya go. Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani: Northerners.
The Serbs and Greeks I knew when I lived in Chicago: Northerners.
Mitt Romney, Ted Kennedy, Chris Dodd, et. al.: Yankees.
1389AD wrote:
sorry. i know enough southerners, and lived down there long enough to know that ‘yankee’ is either negative or is used just like ‘well, bless his heart’ is.
the irony of this discussion is, i am from sw pa…definitely not ‘yankee’ territory so its no difference to me.
we dont call yinz ‘rebels’ the war ended a loooong time ago.
“Yankee” is indeed negative. What I’m saying is that it does NOT apply to most people from north of the Mason-Dixon line. It DOES apply to those who would rewrite history to make the North look better than it was/is, and to belittle the South and those who live there.
Some of us ARE ‘rebels’ and that would include many people who weren’t born in the South, but who can’t stand the proggy mindset that still seems to emanate from the New England states.
Jeff Foxworthy said that “Bless your heart” means “You’re stupid.”
And sometimes all of us are. Rick Perry isn’t the only person who gets brain freezes. There are close to 7 billion other people who also do.
@ 1389AD:
you have the last word. this is a pet peeve of mine from many many first hand experiences.
dont feel like getting into it right now.
@ coldwarrior:
Thank you. The south is not the land of milk and honey, no matter how much they wish it to be. I am a yankee. I like being a yankee. I don’t break bad on the southerners. Yinz aint better than us. Really, you aint.
If yankee is supposed to refer to “some” northernors who are assholes then call them what they are…assholes. Yankee is a blanket term.
NoThreat2U wrote:
Assholes (in every sense of the word) exist EVERYWHERE where there are people.
As they say, “Everybody HAS one, but not everybody IS one.”
A “Yankee” is a particular breed of asshole who is very aggressive about being from the North and who seeks to impose his own mindset and way of life on everyone else.
1389AD wrote:
so what term shall we use for a person from the south is a particular breed of asshole who is very aggressive about being from the South and who seeks to impose his own mindset and way of life on everyone else.
@ coldwarrior:
@coldwarrior: That “Cold War” between America and Russia may be long over, but anyone who has spent any time here in Dixieland knows the while the Union and Confederate armies may no longer be shooting at each other, a multitude of Southerners still consider this to be a time of federal occupation. For example, Tea Party people here pretty much feel that way.
I was in the UK for high school. I can report that Brits use the word “yank” with about the same affection as drunken racists use… the words they use. I also looked it up in Wikipedia and it seems that it’s generally not viewed as a term of affection (that “yankee doodle dandy” song notwithstanding).
Which is not to say I object to the use of the term here. After all, I’m not a Yank.
coldwarrior wrote:
The closest we would have to something like that would be a scalawag like Bill Clinton. He isn’t too popular around here.
In our experience, the actual Southerners among whom we live tend to be pretty libertarian these days. Not like the stereotypes at all.
CzechRebel wrote:
and no one above the mason dixon line feels that way?
think about it.
coldwarrior wrote:
That’s not really been the Southern way. The Southern way is to impose their mindset within their own region. (Here and here and here.)
Yeah, I’m no fan of Dixie ways of thought. I also learnt not to like English ways of thought, or Yankee ways. What Dixie has in its favour is that it doesn’t spread its rot outside its borders.
@ 1389AD:
Scalawags? So yinz are all pirates down there??? And in MY experience, all us northern folk are Libertarian. How the hell can you say something about Yankees…as a blanket statement (even though you tried to walk it back) but then claim that all those in the south are of the same libertarian leanings? Really, the civil war is over. Ya’ll need to deal with it. If ya’ll want to fracture the republic…have at it. Ya’ll will be on your own.
1389 AD
You really do not like your country (and I am talking about America not Serbia).
@ Zimriel:
The Colfax Massacre happened in 1873. Not relevant to today.
The issues with public prayer – why should that matter to you? If you don’t like other people praying, you don’t have to join in. If you don’t believe in God, then it wouldn’t make any sense for you to believe that the prayers have any effect either way.
THIS is a typical Yankee.
I suffered through decades in Chicago. Big mistake. People like that were, and still are, legion there. And not only on the police force. The poison has spread from the Chicago political sinkhole of corruption into the White House, and we are all living with the results.
coldwarrior wrote:
Jimmy Carter!
By the way during the Civil War the Army of the North was referred to as The Federal Army or the United States troops, They did not use the term Union Army until after the war.
“Yankee lies” unless you are talking about the baseball team that is an offensive term. Why do you want to Balkanize the United States?
Fred Derf wrote:
Yup.
Fred Derf wrote:
I like what it was intended to be, not what it has become.
We have totally abandoned the Constitution.
I have my differences with Serbs, too. They aren’t very good about standing up for each other.
Florida was ruled by Spain.
@ 1389AD:
@ 1389AD:
You are an American not a Serb (any more then I am a Pole).
The term “Yankee”as a pejorative is just as offensive as the term “redneck” being used to describe your average Southerner.
Fred Derf wrote:
That is a constant theme with her. Always threatening to leave the US….as though the grass was greener anywhere else. All parts of the US have their assholes, even the beloved South..with a capital S. For all the people that talk shit, I haven’t seen one person leave yet.
coldwarrior wrote:
I have lived in the frozen north land longer than I would care to remember. I can remember biting my tongue and joining conservative friends as “Lincoln Day Diners” and hearing all the garbage about how dumb southerners are. I know the that Yankee superiority attitude all too well. In all my years up there, I found darn few individuals who–like presidential candidates Rick Perry and Ron Paul–believe the the South had/has a right to be free of federal tyranny.
@ Fred Derf:
Nor I a Croat…which is verboten to mention here.
Fred Derf wrote:
After Clinton bombed my people for absolutely no reason other than to deflect attention from the Broaddrick rape allegations and the failed impeachment, I began to feel like a subject rather than a citizen.
The US is still continuing to put pressure on the Serbs to give up all of their land, piece by piece. The few remaining Serbs in Kosovo are living in ghetto/concentration camp-like conditions. No kidding…Blogmocracy ran news stories about Serbs who were kidnapped and butchered so that their organs could be sold. Those news stories were, ironically, exposed by a very anti-Serb woman who had been running the kangaroo court in The Hague. The reality was so disgusting that even she felt a twinge of conscience and felt it necessary to write a book on it.
Sorry, but that’s the way it is.
@ CzechRebel:
Sorry but as a Pennsylvanian I dont feel superior to anyone else from any state. If there are those who feel we are trying to be superior, that is only because they are trying to prove they are not inferior. That is their hang up, not mine.
I’m fine if people display the confederate flag and disassociate it from slavery. Make a modern statment. Symbols evolve.
To me the South is tan women, with deep accents who drink southern comfort and coca cola. Good memories.
But really, if one travels the US one will see that it is pretty bland in terms of regional variety anymore. All the malls look the same. Except for the history and the weather the south is a lot like the north. I think it is time we conquered some new states. I favor Yucatan and Alberta.
Fred Derf wrote:
Many of us don’t mind being “rednecks.”
NoThreat2U wrote:
You haven’t, but I am acquainted with an entire group of people who already left, and are doing well.
NoThreat2U wrote:
No, it isn’t verboten to mention here.
There is a person (not you) that I will refrain from naming at the moment, who trashes me every time I post anything about the Serbs. Even though this blog supposedly supports the Serbian cause, I haven’t posted here very much lately because I’m tired of all that.
Fred Derf wrote:
I am always sorry to here a fellow Slav renouncing her heritage. One of the Ten Commandments says “Honor your mother and father.” Of course, in the original Hebrew, the word “father” also meant “grandfather”, “great-grandfather” etc. I don’t care if my family remains in the Americas another 1,000 years, I hope we never forget their Czech heritage. I know people make some nasty jokes, but there is nothing wrong with being of Polish heritage.
@ 1389AD: My reading of the blog is that the serb support is 50/50. I do but I don’t think everyone does. I wasnt a serb supporter in the war and subsequently I felt I let myself be mislead by the media.
Tough area. But the muslims there will eventually go bad. again…
NoThreat2U wrote:
Proving that you are definitely a Northerner and an NOT a Yankee. Good man!
CzechRebel wrote:
and when i was in the south i bit my tongue too, so dont play all superior with me…and i’m not even a yankee and i had to put up with it! for some reason, southerners cant fathom that pittsburgh isnt yankee territory…north of mason dixon, BAM, yankeee…
as for ‘free of federal tyranny’, do you honestly believe that that is only a southern thing?
really?
I had a book once that had Yankee jokes about the southerners. The only thing was that if you turned the book over the opposite side was the exact same joke about yankees via southerners.
Something similar happens between residents of Minnesota and Iowa. With Iowahawk proving that Iowa is the superior state.
1389AD wrote:
the blog takes no formal stand on anything but free speech
orangecrush wrote:
Believe me, the Muslims there have already gone bad. Very, very, very bad.
Bosnian Muslim “fuhrer” Alija Izetbegovic gave Osama bin Laden a Bosnian passport. Oh, and by the way, Izetbegovic was a Nazi as a young man. It would be incorrect to call him an ex-Nazi; instead, he was a lifelong unrepentant Nazi.
LINK to a great blog post that a colleague gave us permission to mirror.
@ 1389AD:
I feel personally attacked when it is mentioned about the Croats siding with the Nazis. That was before my time and I don’t like being put in that catagory. But the comments make me feel like I am. History is what it is and it mostly suck. But I refuse to go through life feeling guilty for something I was not a part of. Truly, it is over. We all need to move past it. My guilt or your hanging on to past grievances does not help our country..the USA one bit. And again, if the grass is so much greener elsewhere, I say go there and be happy. But you know what? We are all in this together as Americans. Giving up is not an option and bitching doesn’t help. Hell, I got Tito on one side of the family and Nazis on the other! Will I let them define me or my destiny? Hell no.
coldwarrior wrote:
Actually, there are a heck of a lot of Steelers fans here, from Yinzer territory. They fit in here just fine. Nobody calls them any names or looks down on them at all.
A lot of nationalism is based on subtle inferiority complexes and a resistance to change. We all like to hold on to the old memories but don’t get oneself stuck on an episode of hoarders or in the news as an owner of 100 cats.
What the internet brings to the world today is the necessity of constantly improving and reinventing oneself or be left behind. Facebook change everyday. Even conservatives need to leverage on how that type of change in managed in their lives.
Conservatives are about ordered evolution. Liberals are about OWS
CzechRebel wrote:
I’m a chick. lol I kinda embrace the yankee name. When I go visit my bro down south and talk about the Steelers, they call me a yank. It is all in the way you take it. lol
@ 1389AD:
I hate the steelers lol. I am a Seahawks fan. We were robbed in the Super bowl.
One thing I noticed about Seattle when I move here from the midwest is that I thought the residents were very cynical people and had a huge jones trying to one up California in everything. Sort of a snobbery. Now I make fun of Cal hippies with the best of them.
1389AD wrote:
only because charlie daniels warned all y’all not to lay a hand on a pittsburgh steeler fan
@ 53 NoThreat2U: MAybe we can all agree that the modern middle east muslim adheres to political parties with their deep root in the Nazi exodus from Germany. Hamas and MB in particular.
Fred Derf wrote:
¿Tienes problemas con España también? ¡Que lastima!
NoThreat2U wrote:
We are NOT talking about Croats…this clown was a Bosnian MUSLIM Nazi.
I am not particularly worried about Croats causing problems for Serbs in the present. I am concerned about MUSLIMS.
The US is siding, not with the Croats, but with MUSLIMS in the Balkans. They are dangerous to Croats as well as to Serbs and to everyone else who is not a Muslim
The US government siding with our Muslim enemies HAS TO STOP.
As long as we have a Muslim in the White House, and Muslim moles crawling all over Washington DC, and a foreign policy that sides with our common enemies, I am a subject and not a citizen.
Let’s stay on message.
I am not, repeat NOT, attacking Croats.
That said, I resist resurgence of actual, genuine Nazi doctrine (killing Jews and Slavs, and totalitarianism) whether it surfaces among the Muslims or in the US (the American Nazi Party backed the Occupoopers, and I complained about that).
NoThreat2U wrote:
As ancestors, I have Serbs who became pacifist, migrated to the US, then turned into actual card-carrying communists (no shit!)
I also have some northern Italians who were mercenaries and hired assassins.
We all have free will. I’m as conservative as a person can be, and a rather extreme stickler for being law-abiding.
NoThreat2U wrote:
OK, good woman! BTW, the Steelers about about the most popular NFL team in the Carolinas. Go Troy Polamalu!
@ coldwarrior:
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahah
@ orangecrush:
Look up the info on the Bismarck…You will find my kin there. Again though, I wont let that define me. My cousins on the other side are straight from Tito, with a minor change in the spelling of the name. I can’t put that info out here…but would love to share it with you sometime if you are curious. It floored me when I found this all out. lo
coldwarrior wrote:
I hope we also take an informal stand for the truth, whatever it may happen to be.
I expect that I will have to spend the rest of my life trying to defend the Serbs, as well as Slavs in general, and the Orthodox Christian community, and our Jewish friends, against libelous allegations.
@ 1389AD:
HAHAHA!!!
bitching about my pet peeve got your side thread here 55+ comments!
1389AD wrote:
justice, and the american way!
coldwarrior wrote:
Yep!
@ 1389AD:
I just notice when someone goes on a tangent about the Serb massacres and such, the Croats are always brought into it. Now I will not pretend that I know anything about that, because I don’t. But those comments hurt me because I know I myself am not that way and none of my family is that way. Maybe I just can’t fathom it or maybe it is God telling me it doesn’t matter…that was before, I am the now.
@ NoThreat2U:I can see where you get your blogging personality. j/k
@ CzechRebel:
Troy is awesome! Have you seen his commercials for his hair??? He makes me jealous and I’m a girl!!! He got better hair than I do!
@ NoThreat2U:
serbs and croats are in a mutual defense pact, train together now, and both recognize the muzz threat.
this is good, they are now allies, as it should be. so dont sweat the past, they arent.
@ NoThreat2U:
Our own blog is called 1389 Blog – Counterjihad. Our focus is on the real danger to all of us – Islam. (True, we also run stories on the economy, the Occubaggers, and cats, but we mostly try to stay on message.)
Don’t take this personally. A great many Serbs supported Tito and communism, even though Tito was NO friend of the Serbs. These Serbs had their reasons, or so they thought, but they were WRONG. Now they’re paying the price for the sins of their fathers.
@ 61 NoThreat2U: my personal loyalties will often follow a high school or college sports star. Currently that makes Tennessee and Arizona ranked right up there with the Seahawks. I am adverse to East Coasters. Can’t see why someone would sign up for an East Coast team
orangecrush wrote:
*smacks Orange Crush over the head with an,,,,Orange Crush bottle* lol lol It’s cool. Arguments and discussion are healthy. I can argue without hating. It is your point and my point and we all defend our positions. It is when someone runs away from an argument/discussion that bothers me.
NoThreat2U wrote:
Me too. My hair looks like heck. It’s not very thick and it’s pure barbed-wire frizz. Absolutely nothing makes it look decent. I put it up in a clip and hold it down with a headband at work, and it still looks bad.
NoThreat2U wrote:
AS a guy who has spent a lot of time in Lousy-anna, I can attest to that.
NoThreat2U wrote:
Troy Polamalu is also an Orthodox Christian.
@ coldwarrior:
And I think that is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Really, I do. The only major difference was the church. But now, times have changed and so have priorities. We are still basically one people with a common language and culture. I am glad that the new Pope is trying to unite all of Christianity. The methods may be different, but the goal is the same.
coldwarrior wrote:
I have toured scores of Civil War battlefields and am second to none in my admiration for Southern soldiers of the Civil War, but I am sick of hearing about The war of Northern Aggression. To deny that the confederacy was about slavery is to deny the truth. In the Articles of Secession of South Carolina slavery is mentioned around 20 times.
NoThreat2U wrote:
i have big news too.
the serb/russian/greek/american/ukie/ orthodox churches here in the states are looking at unifying under one metropolitan…no more foreign leaders.
(well, the american orthodox church never answered to any foreign head, but anyway….)
I’m an atheist so I don;t give a crap.
Fred Derf wrote:
dont confuse the narrative….
coldwarrior wrote:
IS that a joke? I have seen too many yahoos on too many blogs tell me that slavery had nothing to do with secession including a guy who used to post here named Grimcargo.
@ 1389AD:
I have no problem with Orthodox Christians. In fact, that may make me feel even closer to God., It is is like a chasm…where one begins and another one ends…and vice versa. We all need to unite and face our common enemy whick is islam. Christianity and Judaism versus the enemy.
Fred Derf wrote:
no, dont confuse the narrative that the ‘war of northern aggression’ had nothing to do with slavery at all ever never ever.
quit bringing facts into it.
@ NoThreat2U:
Throw in Buddhism and Hinduism.
coldwarrior wrote:
It is funny when I read people trying to say that the Confederacy had nothing to do with slavery, it almost is like Holocaust denial.
@ coldwarrior:
And see, I would never have a problem worshiping at your church as I consider it basically the same as mine. The process doesn’t matter, the message does. We should be united.
@ 72 Fred Derf:
Atheists don’t exist.
orangecrush wrote:
I do the last I checked.
@ Fred Derf:
I also have respect for those religions because they are about the individual and his own soul. That is the key to God’s teachings…judge not lest ye be judged. You are the only one responsible for what you get in the afterlife.
NoThreat2U wrote:
Islam menaces all of them.
Fred Derf wrote:
That’s OK…God still loves you
@ NoThreat2U:
close enough for me
@ Fred Derf:
They are probably trying to de prioritize the issues of slavery in the Confederacy. Dilute the history. Slavery was an issue for everyone at the time. I read them as saying the economic disparities caused the war.
If someone were to say slavery had nothing to do with the Civil War I’d probably assume it wasn’t possible to have a real conversation with then.
coldwarrior wrote:
as for ‘free of federal tyranny’, do you honestly believe that that is only a southern thing?
really?
Did I SAY that it is ONLY a Southern thing? Many Northern Copperheads supported the right of States to leave the Union. Today, we have many other who wish to be free of the nasty Washington, D.C. based dictatorship. Alaska has the Separatist Party and regularly sends freedom-mind legislators to Juneau to rid try to gain Alaskan freedom.
@ Fred Derf:
Yes it does. It forces one to believe, either in something or in what it tells you to believe in. I am OK with atheism because they learn eventually, but I would never force my beliefs on anyone else With islam it is do or die..literally. That is why most people who leave islam become atheists…they are afraid of God.
@ Fred Derf:
Creativity
CzechRebel wrote:
you are right, i stand corrected:
‘darn few over a long period’ does is not an exclusive set; its close though.
NoThreat2U wrote:
Islam gives God an undeserved bad reputation. Muslims think that if there is a God, then He must be the Allah they are familiar with – a frightening and unloving spectre to be sure. Thus they reject their idea of God.
BRB Please keep this discussion going..it is a good one!
orangecrush wrote:
The Union was not going to break up and slaughter each other over tariffs.
orangecrush wrote:
Slavery didn’t have a damn thing to do with it! If you would bother to read a whole book that sets the record right, try the Kennedy brothers “The South Was Right!” Heck, there are tons, and tons of data that completely rules out the slavery theory. Lincoln was offering to guarantee permanent slavery in the South via Constitutional Amendment. The easiest way to keep Slavery in the South, would have been to back that crooked railroad lawyer from Illinois.
The war had a number of factors, but the ONLY one that made secession necessity was to escape the high taxes. (Four Southern States paid 75% of all US taxes in those days and only 10% of all federal taxes were paid by all the Northern states. Lincoln wanted to tax and spend even more.) And the Yankees invaded the South to try to recover that tax revenue.
Fred Derf wrote:
Sorry, Fred. You are wrong! It did! Get a few facts and come back and join the discussion.
@ CzechRebel:
Nice attempt at revisionism but it is a crock of shit.
@ CzechRebel:
I’ve forgotten more Civil War history then you will ever learn and I don’t “cotton” (pun intended) to listen to people making apologies for treason to MY beloved country.
Fred Derf wrote:
Wow! Since you have no facts, you resort to an Anglo-Saxon swear word. It is NOT “revisionism” when you can actually refute the Yankee propaganda shoved down our throats in public schools. Go ahead, show us all the Anglo-Saxon swear words that you know.
@ CzechRebel:
I am not going to waste my time with someone who frankly supports treason. Go back to Bohemia and Moravia if you hate this country.
Fred Derf wrote:
The fact that you used Karl Marx’s term for the Recent Unpleasantness tells me you don’t know much. If it was “treason” why didn’t you tyrants actually give Jefferson Davis his trial for that crime? He presented himself, ready for trial, may times over about a two-year period.
If you REALLY believe that the Confederacy was an act of treason, you would NEED to admit the the American Revolution was an even greater act of treason.
I can see you love tyranny. Just enjoy it. The USA is going to Hades in hand bag. You will be getting more and more of it. If things don’t change soon, we will be wishing that we had the level of freedoms of the old Soviet Union.
We love freedom. That was what the War was about! Your lies about “slavery” cannot change that one. Sorry.
By that same psuedo-logic the Sudetenland should have been part of Germany since the majority of people living there were German.
CzechRebel wrote:
was anyone on this blog around when this occurred?
what is this collective ‘you’ blame stuff? actually, this further illustrates why the term yankee is a blanket pejorative.
CzechRebel wrote:
It was the magnanimity of the Federal government that saved Davis’s neck (and it was the right decision).
As one of the commentors on blogmocracy likes to say (Speranza or Nevergiveup) “Shouldn’t you be out on a ledge somewhere?”
By the way the 13 colonies were just that – colonies and not part of Britain. All the states of the Confederacy were states of the USA.
orangecrush wrote:
This blog supports Serbia 100%.
Hey take the Party to the Chucky thread!
Rodan wrote:
i am heartened by the fact that this thread was a good discussion and got more #’s than the lgf thread on the main page.
Fred Derf wrote:
You obviously know very little about this subject. I have researched it thoroughly. I can see you have never even visited the first Confederate White House in Montgomery, AL. I have written on the topic.
Davis had the winning arguments and every competent American lawyer knew that. My guess is that you are NOT a lawyer, as you don’t seem to understand this type of thing, at all.
Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Again, I assume that you never went to law school. I did and did pretty well, if I might say so myself.
If you had an inkling of the status of those 13 colonies, would know they were part of Britain. NONE of those colonies were considered sovereign. There is an excellent argument that the Declaration of Independence was an act of treason. (All the signers of the document KNEW that they were committing treason.) The war against the King’s forces, was definitely an act of treason.
After the war, at the Treaty of Paris, the British reluctantly agreed that those colonies would be sovereign States. Later, those sovereign States delegated SOME, but NOT all, of their powers to the federal government. Many of them made it clear that they retained the right to rescind that decision in the future.
On December 20, 1860, South Carolina rescinded the delegation of their powers, as it was generally agreed they had the right to do. Six other sovereign States followed suit. President Buchanan, being a reasonable man, let the South be. Few people in those seven seceding States believed that they were doing anything illegal. In fact, the most popular book commenting on the Constitution clearly stated that states had the right to leave whenever and for whatever reason.
There are people who can attempt to make cogent arguments in favor of the union position. I am sorry to say that you are not one of them. You clearly do NOT understand this period of history or the law. (But you are pretty good with Anglo-Saxon swear words. I will give you that.)
I thnk the Confederates were traitors but I’m glad they were treated leniently.
Fred Derf wrote:
Why am I not surprised that you side with Hitler on this one?
Yes, there were a lot of German people in western Czechoslovakia, as there were also Czechs living in Germany. I have never seen anything definitive evidence that there really was a “German majority” in a significant part of western Czechoslovakia. I do know that many, many full-blooded, middle-class Czechs have German surnames. I am not sure if Hitler’s people just grabbed a phone book and showed off all the German surnames to make his point. Seeing as how the German-Speaking Habsburgs ruled Bohemia and Moravia at the time when my people took their surnames, it only makes sense. Those were occupational surnames that did not reflect ancestry.
Fred Derf wrote:
I do NOT support treason! However, I know what the word “treason” means and you obviously do not.
Dixieland is my home. That is my country and I love it very much. So, for the time being, I am staying here.
Hey, aren’t you one of the people who complains to 1389AD for wanting to expatriate?
Let’s see, you are telling 1389AD to stay and me to leave. You don’t care what we want to do. Doesn’t that make you a t-y-r-a-n-t by definition?
Maybe I should be telling you to leave, if you don’t respect our liberties? But, I won’t. I am not a tyrant.
However, if you ever do decide to leave, two places you might like to consider are Cuba and North Korea. You might just find some like-minded people there.
I had hoped that this would be a nice little seasonal article to promote a historical, family-oriented event in the South.
Somehow it turned into a knockdown drag-out. Oh well, a day without conflict is a day without sunshine!
1389AD wrote:
this was fun!
i do enjoy a good brawl once in a while. there was no swearing and no real personal attacks (we are learning civility, finally). so its all good!
@ 1389AD:
It was the title that ticked people off. Not really the thread per say.
coldwarrior wrote:
Today, The Lone Ranger would be doing 15 to 30 years for tax evasion, assault and weapons violations. Really sad.
coldwarrior wrote:
Well, there wasn’t much swearing.
Fred Derf wrote:
Some of us used that word a few times.
I was guilty of that myself.
Maybe I’ve been seeing too many
OccupierOccupooper stories, like this one from Seattle.@ coldwarrior:
Yeah, it was real civilized. Unfortunately, none of you will bother to read the book @ CzechRebel: suggested. The book itself is not so important, the sources that it’s drawn from are. Check the bibliography in the back and read the sources they used, compare the facts with the Congressional records of the time. Decide for yourself, if you can put aside all the anti-Southern biases you have been raised with since childhood. If you do decide to actually do the research, let me warn you, when you’re done you’ll feel like you did the day you found out the is no Santa Claus. “The victors get to write the history books” is not a new saying.
Fred Derf wrote:
I have heard that lie so many times before! The word “slavery” is not mentioned even once in the entire South Carolina Ordinance of Succession, which reads as follows:
AN ORDINANCE to dissolve the union between the State of South Carolina and other States united with her under the compact entitled ‘The Constitution of the United States of America.’
We, the people of the State of South Carolina, in convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the ordinance adopted by us in convention on the twenty-third day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified, and also all acts and parts of acts of the General Assembly of this State ratifying amendments of the said Constitution, are hereby repealed; and that the union now subsisting between South Carolina and other States, under the name of the ‘United States of America,’ is hereby dissolved.
Done at Charleston the twentieth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty.
@ Bordm:
Without disparaging any commenters on this thread, CzechRebel knows what he’s talking about. The War of Secession was all about economics. If all the southern slaves were freemen, the War of Secession would still have happened.
Bunk X wrote:
You’re preachin’ to the choir brother, re-read my comment. I got in lots of trouble in school, pointing out Lincoln’s shutting down newspapers and suspension of habeas corpus so he could illegally imprison whistle blowers to his criminal activities.
@ CzechRebel:
If the war was truly about slavery, then the north would have had an easy job. All they had to do was reimburse the slave owners for a fraction of the cost of waging war, not counting the loss of lives. Or they could have just taken out the less than 10% of the southern population who were wealthy enough to even afford slaves.
This is NOT a defense of slavery, only a defense of fact.
@ Bordm:
Lincoln trampled law and the Constitution, with out a doubt. What he accomplished greatly overshadows the illegalities, IMO.
As for school… mention the fact that The Emancipation Proclamation freed no slaves.
Bunk X wrote:
It particularly bothers ME that so many people are upset about slavery in the 19th century and before, while being totally indifferent to slavery in the 21st century.
There is more human trafficking going on now, in absolute numbers, than at any time in the past. Mainly because there are more people in the world. In general, it’s a phenomenon of either organized crime or of Islam (though I repeat myself).
@ 1389AD:
The other popular myth is that slavery is tied to race. Slavery has nothing to do with race, and never has.
Bunk X wrote:
A war to end slavery? Maybe if I believed in unicorns for a few decades, I could try to imagine keeping two major armies in the field for four years to decide what system of labor one side would use in the future.
Slavery exists today. It exists in Africa. It exists in the Muslim world. Do you see anyone wanting to go fight against it? I cannot imagine too many people going to fight for or against it in 1861 either. But, when it comes to money in their pockets, I can see guys lining up, either expecting to prosper or fearing financial loss if defeated.
@ Bunk X:
Have you read “The South was Right”? A good 65% of what’s in it I already knew. I always have had an affinity for folks that were way older then myself, it’s amazing what you can learn from them. In my youth I was lucky enough to travel to all the lower 48 states at one time or another. The revenge (for lack of a better word) the the North imposed upon the South during and after the war is unparalleled in our history. No foreign defeated country was ever treated as ruthlessly as were our own Southern people and Indian tribes.
@ CzechRebel:
OT– My grampa’s uncles were dirt poor farmers but all fought for the south.
One of them, married and with a young child, joined up but was captured. He was released after signing a promise not to take up arms against the Union.
He returned to his Regiment. During the fall of Vicksburg he was captured again. Since he had a “record” he was told that if he was caught escaping he’d be shot.
Because he’d shown experience with horses, he was given a job with the cavalry. Eventually his captors got to trusting him, and left him alone. So he escaped again.
At that point he was a man without a country. If the Union caught him, he’d be shot; if the South caught him, he’d be hung for treason. So traveling at night he made his way home, then spirited his wife and child off to rural Ohio where they sat out the rest of the war in hiding.
@ Bordm:
No I haven’t, but I’ll look for it. I’ve picked up most of my information from numerous sources, including my dad’s half-brother who got me interested in it when I was in grade school.
Brutality was rampant. The South was starving, battered and burnt. When my great uncles returned from the war to the family farm in Georgia, some Union soldiers passed through. The commanding officer told them that he wanted their mule. My great-grandfather protested, since that was the only work animal they had. The officer agreed not to take the mule, and instead shot it between the eyes before leaving.
@ Bunk X:
Oops. Should read *My great-great grandfather.*
@ Bunk X:
I spent several years (off and on) here clearing the brush and cleaning up the property. It was one of the few antebellum homes the war criminal Sherman did not burn, as they used it for a head quarters. Miss Catherine (the last heir) told me of the history of the place along with much I didn’t know before of Sherman’s terrorist rampage through Georgia. I’ve spent the ensuing years trying to fill the gaps and learn the truth
@ Bordm:
and all y’all, frankly, i dont give a flying rats ass about a war that went on in the 1860′s. nor do i care to re-fight it daily like some do. even everyone in the world agrees with you and czech, what does it change today? not a god damned thing, does it. now, i actually dont care whether slavery had anything to do with the civil war. but, everyone has their own ‘passions’.
you guys go ahead and tie yourselves up in rhetorical knots and enjoy your historical pissing contest. i know brits who endlessly argue over the war of the roses, and frankly, they bore everyone to tears. i have far more important things to get all in a fluster about that are pertinent to my life today. if this is your thing, then by all means have a good time. i wont ask you to stop.
seriously tho, since this seems to be so important to some, maybe one of yinz write us a thread that is footnoted and accurate and sites multiple reliable sources and i will make sure it is posted as one of our historical pieces in prime time. and one can write that slavery did have to do with the civil war. then everyone can get educated. (i will be sure to be getting a root canal or something that night).
yes, the victors write the histories and no one cries for the etruscans
@ Bordm:
Sherman is a hero. he put the traitors in their places.
@ coldwarrior:
The Union won and crushed the rebels. They need to get over it.
@ 124 CzechRebel: you are applying modern thinking to a problem that was 150 years ago. Communications were different. Values were different. Slavery was more of a commonly accepted value at the time. But times were changing.
Wars have been fought over much less. But slaves were often spoils of war. If you look at the legislation being passed in Congress you would see that slavery was an issue of prime importance to the North and to the South. For different reasons. I would suggest all those are facts and your idea that people didn’t go to war to end or keep slavery is wrong.
Of course a lot of the southerners fighting had no slaves and fought to preserve their cultural and territorial integrity. But the slavery issue seemed to trump all that and they ended up fighting to preserve the status quo in the south.
@ 123 Bunk X: I tend to think people in power tend to want to make slaves of anyone regardless of race. Feudalism. But in modern terms slavery has been tied to race. There was science dedicated to prove that the negro was inferior genetically. Slaves were taken out of Africa because it was cheap to do so and there were few consequences.
The psychology of the slavers today would get them thrown in jail as sociopaths. But back then human life was less valuable to the will of the majority. There was an evolution in consciousness that was going on and it reached some areas of the earth later than other.
@ 117 CzechRebel: But the ordinance you quote says nothing at all on why they left. No mention of slavery and no mention of anything else.
Spock logic then dictates that South Carolina just up and left the union because they just up and left it.
@ 116 Bordm: Well the Swamp Fox was one of my heroes growing up. In my history books we studied the revolutionary war and the war of 1812 before the Civil War. There was nothing but pride for the south and its performance.
Now I will agree that there is a lot of ignorance abound about the South. Even to this modern day and age of internet information. Mostly these are people that NEED something to hate to HIDE their discontent with their owns lives. These are people unwilling to look at truths. Thus they can hate the south. Charles is a classic example of bigotry.
To me the civil war is history. And as CW says more important times are upon us. It’s ok to banter about the history if truer reflections are created. But we should also accept the culture and values of those times on both sides if we wish to do history justice. In a lot of ways we haven’t changes at all, but in some significant ways we have. We have more civilization under our collective belts these days but could still screw it up.
coldwarrior wrote:
I have no idea why but I think it mostly has to do with the elitist “more enlightened and smarter than you” folks from coastal Jersey, New York and New England than people farther inland like yourself and others who actually have a lot in common with most southerners.
At any rate ” Yankee” originally wasn’t even a term coined to refer to northeast Americans, it actually was coined by Dutch settlers in New Amsterdam after British troops were stationed there and got discriminatory and pretty heavy handed with them.
The British referred derogatorily to the Dutch as ” John Cheese” which when said by the Dutch sounded like “Yon Kee ” and that’s what they started calling the Brits in return and that’s where our term Yankee comes from today.
Not to mention, Europeans especially the Brits call us all Yankees or Yanks no matter what part of the U.S. we’re from.
@ P114 oteen: By the Facebook terms of service the Lone Ranger would not be eligible for a Facebook account. He would have to register as Clayton Moore. Batman would have to be Bruce Wayne. Superman would be Clark Kent. Though they could build fan pages around their alter egos. But anonymity is a no no.
@ John Difool: Interesting. Too bad they didn’t say Jack Cheese.
@ 104 Rodan:
SOme of the blog runners support it 100 percent. The blog in toto has some people who don’t. Which is probably as it should be so that discussions can take place.
HAndslaps.
9-9-9 Jobs-jobs-Jobs
I am padding the thread count now.
A lot of people on the blog don;t give a damn one way or the other about the Serbs, Kosovars, Bosnians, etc.
orangecrush wrote:
He was one of mine too!
Go and re-fight the Civil War if your want (maybe Pickett’s Charge will work this time) – the rest of the nation has long ago moved on.
1389AD and Czech Rebel you are both as Southern as Bill Clinton is Black.
CzechRebel wrote:
You are a moron, I was using your illogic to make a point.
@ Fred Derf:
Him and the Prince of Donegal.
@ coldwarrior:
So we’re not allowed to discuss U.S. history here? Might as well shut this blog down after all. I’m not about to walk on eggshells here when discussing facts and disputing myths.
Then I got an email that included a recent quote from this blog, and it gets a pass:
Maybe I should just shut up and move on.
Bunk X wrote:
where did i say “we’re not allowed to discuss U.S. history here”
go back and re-read what i wrote and get back to me because:
sure as hell looks like an invitation for further discussion HERE ON THIS BLOG at a much higher academic and more collegial level where those who are interested can compare notes and references in real time and maybe educate each other. will any of these civil war experts take me up on this offer to educate us? no.
or am i not alowed to say what topics bore me? because the civil war sure does because any joy i would have had learning about it was beaten out of me years ago.
Bunk X wrote:
I can’t blame that commenter for feeling that way. He didn’t act on it, nor does he plan to. He’s just blowing off steam. I’m seeing comments like that regarding OWS all over the innertoobz.
Don’t ask me to show respect for those who think that public pooping is Constitutionally protected free speech.
I personally am so outraged at those filthy, pretentious, disease-carrying louts that I would love to go full-on Tienanmen Square against them, everywhere at once. They more than deserve it. But here again, I am not actually doing anything to them other than exposing their activities online, nor do I plan to do anything else but exposing them.
Okay. Suppose that the OWS creeps give rise to some drug-resistant disease outbreak that gets passed along to the nurses and teachers that the unions have been sending to these events. They carry the disease into schools and hospitals and so on and so forth. People get sick and die. Who gets sued? Who is gonna pay the bills?
Just askin’.
orangecrush wrote:
Hmm, the Mr. Spock I saw on Star Trek always looked deeply into history. South Carolina was ready to leave in the union in the 1830s over high tariffs. It is pretty well documented. It ONLY stayed in the Union because the feds agreed to lower the tariffs.
The new tax-and-spend Republican Party was promising more high tariffs. When that part won the 1860 election, South Carolina reverted to its 1830s and left the union. It was 1863 before anyone in the north would dare say the war had anything to do with the peculiar institution.
Don’t believe me? Fine, find a history book and look for the “Nullification Crisis.” Then ask yourself, “if South Carolina was leaving the union over high taxes in the 1830s, why would they have a different reason in 1860?
coldwarrior wrote:
All good points. But, are you ready to let the South be free? You know many of are STILL asking for our independence.
CzechRebel wrote:
ummmm…i’m not keeping the south unfree.
Fred Derf wrote:
If they gave a Nobel Prize for ethnic hatred, I am sure you would be a finalist every year.
coldwarrior wrote:
Good man!
Fred Derf wrote:
Amazing! You have actually heard of Pickett’s Charge? Based upon the garbage you have posted on this blog, I am really impressed. Maybe you have spent the last 24 hours trying to learn something about the topic you trying to discuss.
@ coldwarrior:
I heard this louder than anything else you wrote on this thread, hence my response.
As for putting up a thread to cover all the causes and nuances of The War of Secession, that’s an absurd and unreasonable request due to the sheer scope of it.
On the other hand, I’d like to see an opinion/conjecture piece describing what this country would have turned into had the Confederacy won.
Fred Derf wrote:
I NEVER said that I was a full-blooded Southerner. My father was 100% Czech-American (both bilingual and bi-cultural). However, people tend to have two parents.
My mother’s family left their Missouri farm a few years before my parents married. I grew up eating cornbread, black-eyed peas, biscuits the whole nine Southern yards. Mama never thought to much of my little friends unless their families were from Dixieland. She made sure that my sister and I know the “proper” use the term “ya’ll” (Missouri dialect version). Mama was no Lincoln lover to say the least. And I have vivid memories, from a very tender age, of her asking me, “Have you head of Jefferson Davis yet?”
Some of mama’s family never left dixieland. The children of those who did go up north have mostly drifted back here. I have been back for years now. Very few of my Southern friends think of me as a northerner.
Ok, Fredie boy, tell me how Missouri is not part of the South. I can take it. It will make about as much sense as the other silly stuff that you have posted here.
Fred Derf wrote:
You side with Hitler and call me names? Those of us who have the benefit of a good education used facts rather than name calling in these discussions.
Why don’t you learn some actual facts and they try to discuss these things. You will never regret learning a few things.
LOL. Now I’m just trolling.
Bunk X wrote:
That is an interesting question, but not an easy one to answer. It depends a lot on when it would have won and how.
However, I would have expected both the Union and the Confederacy to exist as rivals. I would expect some States to drift back and forth between the two with the winds of political change. Some States, especially the larger ones, might be completely independent.
I doubt that South would have had much interest in the World War I. And I seriously doubt that Union would have much luck recruiting large armed forces. (Most of our servicemen are Southerners, as has been the case for well over 100 years.) So, it is likely that neither would be out there policing the whole world.
But, my crystal ball is broken, so it is only a guess.
Bunk X wrote:
Read the ‘Domination’ or ‘Drakma’ series of books by S.M. Stirling.
The North may have won but the South still has the best songs…
@ 151 CzechRebel: From Google Why SOuth Carolina succeeded.
@ 141 CzechRebel:
In the part I am reading slavery is mentioned a lot. Looking to see if this is the actual representation.
@ 151 CzechRebel:
Wikipedia suggests that the succession was driven by slavery and it was later that a tariffs explanation was introduced.
@ 151 CzechRebel: Do you think this transcription is wrong?
To me it says that the failure of the northern states to return escaped slaves was the primary agitation leading South Carolina to seek to succeed. They gave it up once upon the behest of the other slave holding states. But when Lincoln was elected it became too much for them to bear and the succession was unanimous. Nothing about Tariffs. Does that seem like a fair summary that accounts for the prevailing thoughts at the time?
@ Bunk X:
so i went from tyrant who didnt want anyone to ever discuss history here to absurd because i asked for a post that was too broad on a historical topic, all in the same comment?
as for too broad go back and re-read my request: one was that slavery was a cause and one was that slavery was not a cause. seems like that single subject could be handled in a post easily enough.
@ orangecrush:
Secession (not “succession”) was driven by economics. Certainly slavery had a significant part in the economics of the rural South as they were strapped for manpower in an agricultural economy. Cotton and tobacco were the main exports to the factories of the North.@ CzechRebel:
Had the South seceded, the Union and the Confederacy would have been inextricably tied together by trade. The north had the industry, the south had the materials, food and ore.
Slavery would have been abolished in any scenario. The fact that most of the freedmen stayed at the farms of their prior “Owners” is telling, but that can be attributed to the fact that they had nowhere else to go.
Had the Confederacy won it’s independence as a Free Nation, I surmise that the United States would have been forever balkanized, and would have become a mildly successful rendition of Europe (due mostly to abundant natural resources) but not a world power at all.
And we’d all be speaking Russian.
@ Bunk X:
f’n typos.
Oh and back on topic. The concept of Thanksgiving dates to pre-biblical times in the middle east, where they thanked their Gods for a plentiful harvest.
@ orangecrush
As it says, this was released four days later. The county secession conventions were ad hoc institutions. The South Carolina secession convention was an ad hoc event. Whatever the government releases after the fact sheds little, if any, light on why the people of South Carolina seceded.
Read it again:
orangecrush wrote:
No, it doesn’t make it clear. And it is NOT like the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence was the document causing the 13 Colonies to become Free and Independent States. It was written by the people who were seceding. The articles in question were not from the secession conventions. Very different.
orangecrush wrote:
Anyone can put anything on Wikipedia. However, the 1830s came before 1860. That is how a calendar works. The tariffs were an issue as early as the 1830s, maybe earlier. In 1860, it was STILL the issue.
orangecrush wrote:
No, I think the transcript is accurate. However, it does NOTHING to resolve the tariff/slavery debate.
Note the following facts:
1. The federal government levy of high tariffs was legal, but
2. Northern States refusing to return escaped bonded servants was illegal.
The federal government was allowed to have high taxes, but it was highly illegal for the federal government not to help return these fugitives.
I know that sounds ugly today. But, that was the state of the law at the time. And, as ugly as it sounds, on the face of the document, South Carolina had the feds dead to right legally. Lawyers will be lawyers. (And I am lawyer, too. lol)
Now, the reason the people had actually seceded was the high tariff. However, high taxes are legal!
Very, very few South Carolinians owned any slaves. Did most people care much about some rich people not having the federal government get there “property” back? Get real! Were they angry enough to leave the union because the federal government wouldn’t do what it was supposed to do and get their “property” back for those rich people? Not in any universe that I have ever visited!
And when it got to the point of an actual war, you can bet your sweet bippy that not too many people would want to have a war because the federal government didn’t help the rich recover their escaped “property” from the north!
All the legal documents in the world will not help. If you really want to understand this period of time, you need read what the people actually said about the reasons for secession. I found Memoirs of Service Afloat During the War Between the States by Admiral Raphael Semmes to give one of the best explanations of the reasons for Southern secession.
Bunk X wrote:
I agree. The US and Canada provide a good example of this concept.
I agree. The lunatic fringe with it’s slavery theory of the war cannot deal with the way southerners were in one accord after the war. It took a lot of Yankee occupation to create racial disharmony that followed later on.
Possibly. However, you could have had two world powers. Yet, I doubt we would have seen either of them get involved in World War I.
Now, that would have been the best part. I wish I could speak better Russian.
NoThreat2U wrote: [about 1389AD]
Well, I have. I know a number of people who immigrated to Chile and a few others in various other Latin American countries. I have a good friend of many years who has lived in Suburban Moscow for over two decades and has no intention of ever returning to the US.
It seems that just about all these people who really believe the rest of the world is not such a good place to be, have one thing in common. They do NOT have a passport. Few people who have been to other countries believe the US government propaganda that rest of the world is a bad place.
I have a passport. I have visited other countries. There are other nice places to live and work. Get over it!
Bunk X wrote:
How is this? This nation would have split into 5 or 6 other nations and would never have been the world power it later became, Germany would have won World War II and the USSR if it survived, the Cold War. Lovely thoughts.
CzechRebel wrote:
I have forgotten more Civil War history then a poseur such as you and your secessionist supporting family will ever learn. I also probably know more Czech history then you too. I don’t like folks who support the break up of my country.