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: JF Quinnelly who wrote (14163)	12/9/1997 8:24:00 AM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Freddy, the net is full of all sorts of research material, much of which is factual, and some of which offers opinions based on various political positions. The sources I read for the debate about the Civil War included a very intesting web site about a museum of the history of slavery, for example, some interesting essays about women and slavery, and Lincoln's speeches. I'm not sure where your arrogant condescension comes from, and frankly I do not care, except that it is not impressing me. In fact, I find very curious indeed the extent to which arch-conservatives will attempt to wrap a very reasonable, intellectual, states' rights debate around trying to justify a way of life like slavery. And since you have stated that you are Confederate American, and have never responded directly when I ask you what your position is on this issue, I still must assume it is slavery your are supporting. Certainly pointing out issues of trade and taxation and economics are part of the factual tapestry around the Civil War, but the essential fact is that for many years the Abolitionist movement had been growing as more and more people found slavery reprehensible, and this was the primary issue which was being decided in the Civil War. The Underground Railroad was NOT smuggling tax fugitives northward!! It is very easy, as you know, Freddy, to wrap history around something and obscure the center of the debate. I did this in college, and am actually pretty good at it, but right now I consider it a waste of time, a mind game. If you consider the mere supporting of an America without slavery moral posturing, I find that incredible, incidentally, and I am concerned about how offensive your remarks would seem to other readers of this thread, some of whom may be black.

To: JF Quinnelly who wrote (14163)	12/9/1997 2:55:00 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Okay, what do Fogel and Engerman actually postulate in "Time on the Cross"? And what do you want to say about the economics of slavery? Are you saying it was an EXPENSIVE source of labor? If so, then why do you think the practice of holding slaves continued? I do think one of the things most people don't know is that slaves weren't mostly a function just of plantation life. Many Southern farmers were not wealthy men farming huge tracts of land, and they worked right alongside their slaves on relatively small plots. I don't know enough about Eugene Genovese to decide whether I would find him interesting or not, but will look around at the bookstore. I am intrigued that you have thrown a Marxist historian into the mix. For anyone who might want to know more: system.missouri.edu You aren't just trying to throw me off balance, are you, Freddy? Some people would argue that I am unbalanced enough already!!! Of course, I disagree!!