Slavery; the root cause of Secession & War

[Johan Steele]

60% is a clear majority, no ,matter how you spin it.  THey were not willing Secessionists... but dragged into it "at the point of a bayonet." As some are fond of saying.  Saying their opinion didn't matter is par for the coarse from your side of the aisle.

Missouri. Maryland and Kentucky didn't Secede.  Yet the CS viewed all three as part of the CS to the point of launching "Liberation" invasions.  It is legit to view their contributions to the US, how many units did they contribute to the CS?  It is not a significant number either.

[BorderRuffian]

Ma'am the men of the USCT voiced their opinion quite clearly w/ their actions.  They served and their voice was obvious where it counted.  You may not consider them southern or relevant; they did and their impact upon the war is rather obvious no matter how much you might wish to deny or belittle it.

The claim that the USCT were all 'volunteers fighting for freedom' is a well-crafted Northern 
myth-

"all able bodied negroes that can be reached shall be taken to fill up the colored regiments"
"the able-bodied negroes...may be taken possession with or without their own consent"
"All negroes who have not been employed in accordance with published orders may be taken to put in the ranks"

Maj.Gen. U.S. Grant, August 28, 1863


"A major of colored troops is here with his party capturing negroes, with or without their consent."

Maj.Gen. John Logan, February 26, 1864


"Negroes in the employ of Government and those hired by citizens, whether by order of the Treasury Department or otherwise, are exempted from conscription"
[meaning the ones NOT in the employ of the Government were being conscripted]

Maj.Gen. U.S. Grant, February 25, 1864


"All able-bodied colored men between the ages of eighteen and fifty, within the military lines of the Department of the South, who have had an opportunity to enlist voluntarily and refused to do so, shall be drafted into the military service of the United States"

Maj.Gen. J.G. Foster, August 16, 1864

[Johan Steele]

And the claim that all were dragooned into it is one as well.  The joy of history sorting fact from fiction.

[ole]

Border:

I'll assume that these "orders" are taken directly from the ORs or Grant's Order Books. Sounds like a lot more conscription was going on than I was aware of. Care to expand?

ole

[Catherine Hopley]

Up until now I’ve never voiced a personal opinion as to the status of Southern Negroes. As a 21st century person I obviously take the view that their status should have been indistinguishable from that of any other group of human beings, regardless of race, creed or colour.

But that personal opinion is of absolutely no consequence to this discussion. What matters is the status of the Negro in mid-19th century America. Politically speaking, the opinions of Negroes were of no consequence. If they had no say in the running of the United States – “the last, great hope of mankind” – it is manifestly unreasonable to claim that they should have had a say in the creation of the Confederate States of America if that country was to claim legitimacy by 19th century standards.

The constant drip, drip, drip of innuendo that anyone posting views sympathetic to the Confederacy should be suspected of racism until they prove otherwise is perhaps the least agreeable aspect of any WBTS Forum. It’s the very definition of cultural condescension.

[Catherine Hopley]

"60% is a clear majority, no ,matter how you spin it."

Well, indeed.

And if a fairly modest majority like this allows a group of counties - half of which opposed the action - to split from a state and create one of their own, it begs the question why a probably larger majority did not entitle a group of states to leave the U.S.A. and form a nation of their own.

I look forward to learning what distinguished the one act of fission from the other.

[Johan Steele]

60%, at least, who wanted nothing to do w/ the CS in the first place.  They got what they wanted w/ a far more legitimate claim to self determination than the CS IMO.  I don't believe the CS ever truly enjoyed a 60% majority.

The USCT formed 186 units... they voted w/ their backs, their arms and their very lives.  While some enjoy painting all USCT men as conscripts and servants I view such as either pathetic research or an indicator of racism; closet or otherwise doesn't matter to me.  The black man was an integral part to the destruction of the CS.  That anyone insists upon discounting them is their perogative and what I think of such actions really doesn't matter.  The USCT was composed largely southerners, Southerners who fought against the CS.  That they were black, white or green doesn't matter.  That they were viewed, at best, as second class citizens also doesn't matter.  As the opinions and views of poor whites didn't mean much to those behind Secession either.  What matters is that the contribution of the black man was very real and cannot be denied without resorting to tactics that are less than respectable.  It is evident that some refuse to view the contribution of the black man to the conflict in any meaningful way; it's true on every CW board I've ever frequented.  Call the way I see it as cultural condescension if you like; I call it experiance gleaned from better than a decade frequenting CW discussion boards and having been a mod on several.

[Catherine Hopley]

Nobody on this thread has tried to discount the military contribution of the USCT.

The question being discussed is different: is secession in the eleven states to be regarded as undemocratic - by the standards of the time - because Negroes did not get to vote on it?

Doubtless some of us would disagree with others on this question. But to suggest that any point of view on this narrow topic is "an indicator of racism" is vile...absolutely hateful. The individual who posted that should be thoroughly ashamed of himself. 

[ole]

Let's at least drop the racism angle. While not irrelevant, concentrating on it is quite unproductive.

Johan is not accusing anyone of racism. Nor am I. It was as it was. And that is the objective, isn't it? Just the facts?

Never mind. Thinking out loud again.

ole

[Catherine Hopley]

"Johan is not accusing anyone of racism."

Forgive me, Ole, but that is precisely what he's doing.