Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

The red/blue divide very closely tracks the slave/free divide at the time of the Civil War

Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

by Anonymousreply 4311/09/2012

For a long time now, I've maintained that Lincoln should have let the South secede.

Their ingrained conservatism, bigotry, and backwardness has been pulling the country to the right ever since, and has kept us from true greatness. We were wrong to keep them.

by Anonymousreply 111/07/2012

chilling

by Anonymousreply 211/07/2012

Would we really have been better off to wash our hands of slavery rather than end it? I'm not so sure. However, today I have long believed that we should let them go off and form Jesusland.

by Anonymousreply 311/07/2012

r1, do you realize what you are saying? Do you realize the pain and misery that would have ensued? Do you realize that without the end of slavery, the birth of reconstruction, and the ability of black Americans to freely move throughout the U.S., we would never know if the civil rights struggles of the last 150 years might ever have occurred?

by Anonymousreply 411/07/2012

Yes, r4, we could have annexed Canada.

by Anonymousreply 611/07/2012

Slavery would have ended one way or the other regardless of the Civil War. I think the war was justified and necessary because of slavery, but it accelerated the inevitable.

by Anonymousreply 711/07/2012

They'll never get over themselves.

Most of them think they're rich white folk but the truth is they're just trash. Their color and sexuality is the only thing they have to show for their self-proclaimed "superiority".

That breed can't die off fast enough.

by Anonymousreply 811/07/2012

It created a victimization dynamic among southern whites that we're still living with.

See also: Mormons and their persecution myth.

by Anonymousreply 911/07/2012

Interesting that Virginia, which was the home of the capital of the Confederacy, has turned blue in the past two elections, while West Virginia, which split from Virginia during the Civil War to join the Union, is red.

I think the real red/blue divide is between educated/uneducated, and religious/secular.

by Anonymousreply 1011/07/2012

They do not refer to it as the civil war in the south. They call it the war of northern aggression.

by Anonymousreply 1111/07/2012

'Cause the North really wanted to take over their backwards-ass lives.

by Anonymousreply 1211/07/2012

[quote]If the South had been allowe to secede there would be a lot fewer problem blacks and Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Phillly, Baltimore, and DC would never have become a black cities. Freeing the slaves brought about more problems for the North and West than it did for the South.

Well, at least you cop to your prejudice with black folks, unlike so many of the "let the South secede" people.

by Anonymousreply 1411/07/2012

I forgot, my pussy stinks!

by Anonymousreply 1511/07/2012

I don't think the number of blacks in Northern states would have been much different if the South seceded. Their reasons for migrating would have been the same. Most of that migration took place in the 20th century long after slavery would have ended.

by Anonymousreply 1611/07/2012

r16 - it's unlikely Southern blacks would have been allowed to migrate to the north if the north and the south had become their own countries.

In any case, the migration patterns of blacks since the 1960s have been southward, not northward; here's just one article about it.

by Anonymousreply 1811/07/2012

[quote] it's unlikely Southern blacks would have been allowed to migrate to the north if the north and the south had become their own countries.

I disagree. The North needed the labor.

by Anonymousreply 1911/07/2012

The Confederate States would have proven folly that building a wall would keep people IN.

by Anonymousreply 2011/07/2012

You have to admit, the entire civil war was waste of money and lives. The only ones who got anything out of all the death and distruction were a few of the slaves. Sure, with defeat the slaves were free, but that didn't educate the poor souls so many were worse off with freedom than under slavery. Those young enough to have a future were not provided training and education to cope with freedom, most remained as free people doing what they were doing before the war. If the North had really been fighting a war to free the slaves, they would have indepted the confederate states by holding them liable for the education and day to day support of the slave families for at least 50 to 75 years. This never happened because the North never really cared about slavery except when they were in church.

by Anonymousreply 2111/07/2012

Much of that failure was due to the assassination of Lincoln and his replacement with the pathetic Andrew Johnson, R21.

by Anonymousreply 2211/07/2012

"They call it the war of northern aggression."

Well, around here we call it the War of Southern Pure Evil, which is a rather more accurate description.

by Anonymousreply 2311/07/2012

You have to admit, the entire civil war was waste of money and lives. The only ones who got anything out of all the death and distruction were a few of the slaves.

As with many wars, the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. Some Northern business tycoons were made far wealthier by the war.

by Anonymousreply 2411/07/2012

I often feel the same frustration about the perpetual backwardness of the south, but it's more complicated than that. Obama carried Virginia, once the heart of the Confederacy, and if you look at southern states where Obama lost, he still got 40/45% of the vote. Are you willing to write off all those people? I don't think we're where we could have been without the Confederate states, but I think their invincible ignorance is eroding, year by year. By the time Obama leaves office, there will be a generation of whites in the south who only know a black president. Think about that.

by Anonymousreply 2511/07/2012

R1, if the south and successfully succeeded then they would have become in the next century the very closest foreign ally of the National Socialists in Germany, then instead of bombs just raining down on London, they would have likewise on NYC and Philadelphia.

by Anonymousreply 2611/07/2012

[quote]many were worse off with freedom than under slavery.

I don't even know where to start with this.

by Anonymousreply 2711/07/2012

[quote]I often feel the same frustration about the perpetual backwardness of the south, but it's more complicated than that. Obama carried Virginia, once the heart of the Confederacy, and if you look at southern states where Obama lost, he still got 40/45% of the vote. Are you willing to write off all those people?

Howard Dean wasn't, but the current Democratic Party seems to be.

Anyway, it's an old argument, usually advanced by white "progressives" who are totally comfortable jettisoning black and poor folks.

The states in the Midwest are just as red -- in fact, out of the five states with the highest number of GOP voters, none of them are in the South (see link) -- but the people there are overwhelmingly white.

by Anonymousreply 2811/07/2012

It tracks almost exactly with states that allow unionization and those that don't.

The Union project was not just about the moral evil of slavery, but also the economic evil of slavery in its theft of the labor of human beings. Thus, the abolition of slavery was the first minimum wage.

And then when you look at what the Northeast and the West and the industrial Midwest have in common nowadays, and how Indiana has fell out of things, it's all about the modern-day Union that supports workers rights to organize and fight for economic dignity in the face of greedy employers.

by Anonymousreply 2911/07/2012

R25, there's another thing to consider. The Southern redneck lifestyle is very unhealthy so the worst of that culture die young. They drink rotgut, smoke heavily, shoot and stab each other, and eat the worst diet imaginable. Some rednecks are kind of cute when they're in their teens and early twenties, but they age fast and hard.

Last I knew, the father of a friend from Pegram, TN was in prison for the third time for the same crime, killing one of his friends in a drunken fight over a toothless barfly.

by Anonymousreply 3011/07/2012

that's just a bit over the top, r31.

Mary!

by Anonymousreply 3211/08/2012

OP here's one even better. A map of the county by county breakdown of the 2008 results compared to 1860 cotton production. The places where the cotton production was the highest (and thereby the slave population highest) were the areas where Obama did best.

by Anonymousreply 3311/08/2012

It's an urban vs. rural divide. You'll see that even in red states, the Democratic areas are in the cities.

by Anonymousreply 3411/08/2012

The "liberal" part of Florida (except Key West) was virtually uninhabited at the time of the Civil War.

by Anonymousreply 3511/08/2012

Jon Stewart announced on election night that the Daily Show projected that Mitt Romney had won "most of the Confederacy."

by Anonymousreply 3611/09/2012

Sally Field for Best Supporting Actress!

by Anonymousreply 3711/09/2012

best>

by Anonymousreply 3811/09/2012

We need to split Florida in two.

by Anonymousreply 3911/09/2012

Someone on this board is totally unaware that slavery existed in Europe. England just outlawed it before the US did but it just made way for indentured servantry.

by Anonymousreply 4011/09/2012

That map fails to show the slave state that exists in San Francisco's Castro area. And the many trains for those slaves.

by Anonymousreply 4111/09/2012

[quote]We need to split Florida in two.

Ouch! You'd do that to America's Wang? It would be like an adult circumcision.

by Anonymousreply 4211/09/2012

totally relevant:

by Anonymousreply 4311/09/2012
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.