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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (440178)	8/8/2003 5:46:20 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Respond to of 769670

Simplistic. Many of those newcomers in the North were foreign immigrants. They mostly were at the bottom of the economic pile and saw freed slaves as competition. I clearly stated that the dissent was due to Northern transplants from the South in addition to poor Irish and other Europeans who were exploited by Northern politicians. But to suggest these people were so politically significant as to define the North’s position is folly. Most Northerners likely were not even that engaged with the slavery issue, certainly not nearly as much as the Southerners. And regardless of their origin, many Northerners opposed emancipation. And some Southerners favored it. West Virginia seceded from Virginia… Not sure of your point. WV did not secede because it favored Emancipation, and whether Jones really seceded is debatable. Surely some Southerners were in favor of Emancipation – but the vast, overwhelming majority of these were black slaves (grin). (Calling for dinner - been a pleasure, Laz)