Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edwarda who wrote (56582)	9/30/1999 11:44:00 PM
From: Michael M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Historian, hell! You old diplomat, you. Mike

To: Edwarda who wrote (56582)	10/1/1999 5:34:00 AM
From: nihil	Respond to of 108807

The Emancipation Proclamation applied only to the slaves in the states or parts of states that were in rebellion on January 1, 1863 and not to all slaves in the South. Lincoln, of course, had previously refused his generals the right to free and enlist the slaves who had fled within federal lines. lcweb.loc.gov

To: Edwarda who wrote (56582)	10/1/1999 2:51:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

I would appreciate it if you would supply supporting evidence for your assertion that "slavery did exist in the North," at least insofar as the North at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation. My understanding is that slavery had been outlawed by the individual Northern states, long before the Civil War. Perhaps what you mean to say is that slavery was legal in some states which were not part of the Confederacy, e.g., Missouri, due to the Missouri Compromise. It was the Missouri Compromise which made it impossible for Lincoln to free all the slaves, thus, the Emancipation Declaration could only apply outside the Union.

To: Edwarda who wrote (56582)	10/1/1999 3:10:00 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

Slavery was negligible in the North. edit- and the issue I was addressing was that there WERE distinct cultural differences between the North and South. The North had no culture of slavery, the North was already looking squarely to a post agrarian future- the USSR did not have a society like that where even half the country was prepared for the end of the USSR. The North became the engine of change- as I see it the USSR had no such engine to pull the rest of its citizens along forcefully through the difficult transition.