489 réponses à ce sujet

[Jehuty]

Please, the battle flag was raised in the 60s as opposition to the Civil Rights movement. Before that, it played little role in "Southern Heritage". It is also used by the KKK as a symbol of racism against black people. The Civil War was about slavery and white supremacy. That flag and all the Confederate flags represent bigotry and have no purpose raised above a government building. Keep them in your homes, sell them in stores, I don't care.

Wrong, you need to retake history. It was over the South wanting to break away from the North. 

[Jehuty]

He's still a teenager. That's what teenagers do.

 

 

1: No, they do not think differently than you. You're not "special". You're just a teenager that has the usual "I'm different than everyone else" mindset. You'll grow out of it.

 

2: There are two forms of the term antisocial in psychology. The first meaning avoiding interaction with other people, and the second would be being a sociopath/psychopath (or the more correct form antisocial personality disorder). A person with ASPD (usually the acronym is ASD) does not necessarily avoid people since that would limit their negative interactions with other people (which they usually take some joy from). They have absolutely no empathy, or (as later research showed) if they do have empathy they just don't care. You're too young to be diagnosed with ASPD, and you're confusing the two versions of the term "antisocial" the exact same way the rest of the public does.

 

3: That's not why he's calling you dumb.

1: I'm not the one going against the Confederate flag here, like a good chunk of the thread. Thus my opinion goes against others.

 

2: You really don't know me in person. Yes I do have Aspergers, and yes I prefer to be in my room over interacting with the rest of the world, but I'm not going to go into detail on what events made me this way. 

 

3: Enlighten me. 

[PhroXenGold]

Wrong, you need to retake history. It was over the South wanting to break away from the North. 

 

And the only reason they wanted to break away from the North was that the latter was attempting to restrict slavery with the ultimate intention of abolishing it. From the South's perspective, the war was about one thing, and one thing alone: slavery.

[Dio Demon]

2: You really don't know me in person. Yes I do have Aspergers, and yes I prefer to be in my room over interacting with the rest of the world, but I'm not going to go into detail on what events made me this way. 

 

What Dermain is saying the opposite of being social isn't avoiding social events by keeping by yourself. The opposite of social and the meaning of anti-social is a person that interacts in a negative way that drives people away. Hence the term anti-social.

 

You aren't anti-social Melan. You're reclusive.

[Jehuty]

What Dermain is saying the opposite of being social isn't avoiding social events by keeping by yourself. The opposite of social and the meaning of anti-social is a person that interacts in a negative way that drives people away. Hence the term anti-social.

 

You aren't anti-social Melan. You're reclusive.

Ah, that is the term I have been searching for! Thank you. I feel... reclusive... is a far more accurate way to describe me. 

[Han Shot First]

Wrong, you need to retake history. It was over the South wanting to break away from the North. 

 

....and why did the Southern states want to break away from the North?

 

Slavery.

 

They said so in the declarations of secession. It isn't even debatable.

[Jehuty]

 

....and why did the Southern states want to break away from the North?

 

Slavery.

 

They said so in the declarations of secession. It isn't even debatable.

It was still over the South breaking away from the North, and the fact that the North wanted the country to be one, while the South didn't. 

 

It's easy to say the civil war was over slavery. It wasn't. Was it part of it? Yes, later on. 

[Fast Jimmy]

It was still over the South breaking away from the North, and the fact that the North wanted the country to be one, while the South didn't.

It's easy to say the civil war was over slavery. It wasn't. Was it part of it? Yes, later on.

Did you even read the link provided? In the secession statements where Southern states said they wanted to leave the North and why, it specifically says slavery and only slavery.

Just read the first sentence or two of ANY state on the link provided. The word slavery is used.

[Jehuty]

Did you even read the link provided? In the secession statements where Southern states said they wanted to leave the North and why, it specifically says slavery and only slavery.

No, not really. Slavery wasn't the only cause.

 

And like I said, the North had it's fair share of slaves... called immigrants. Who worked in horrible conditions for low pay.

[Han Shot First]

No, not really. Slavery wasn't the only cause.

 

And like I said, the North had it's fair share of slaves... called immigrants. Who worked in horrible conditions for low pay.

 

It was the only cause.

 

The leaders of the Confederacy said so repeatedly, in their own words. That doesn't become any less true no matter how often you thrust your head in the sand and pretend otherwise.

 

Immigrants weren't slaves.

[Jehuty]

Immigrants weren't slaves.

Bulls**t! Utter, complete bulls**t! You really need to open your eyes, immigrants worked in horrible conditions, with little to no pay, Irish, German, Scottish, it didn't matter. 

 

Keep pretending the North was all good. Go on ahead. 

[Sigma Tauri]

Keep pretending the North was all good. Go on ahead. 

 

He didn't make that statement.

 

You didn't read the link.

 

Tsk tsk.

[Han Shot First]

Bulls**t! Utter, complete bulls**t! You really need to open your eyes, immigrants worked in horrible conditions, with little to no pay, Irish, German, Scottish, it didn't matter. 

 

Keep pretending the North was all good. Go on ahead. 

 

...and people still work in horrible conditions many places around the word, for low pay. That makes them poor and possibly exploited by their employers, but that doesn't make them slaves. A slave is owned by another person like livestock and has no rights beyond those granted him or her by their master. A factory worker in 1860s New York could always quit and seek employment elsewhere. That was a luxury a slave didn't have, short of risking his own life by becoming a runaway. Immigrant factory workers also didn't have to worry about being raped by their employers, and should such a crime occur...they had the legal system in their corner. Slaves were frequently raped and had no legal protection at all.

[Jehuty]

He didn't make that statement.

 

You didn't read the link.

 

Tsk tsk.

I am in the process of reading the link in fact. 

 

I am tired of the "North good guys and South bad guys" act, something I cannot abide by. 

[Draining Dragon]

Bulls**t! Utter, complete bulls**t! You really need to open your eyes, immigrants worked in horrible conditions, with little to no pay, Irish, German, Scottish, it didn't matter. 
 
Keep pretending the North was all good. Go on ahead.

They still technically weren't slaves.

But yeah, the North had its fair share of issues. Poor working conditions were one. Many Northern states were also complicit in slavery, because they would help capture escaped slaves.

Also, the North's war tactics were... morally questionable. For example, Sherman's "total warfare" destroyed the private property of countless Southern citizens, thus devastating the Southern economy.

I think it's fair to say that the North and South both sucked. The Civil War was by no means a morally black-and-white conflict.

[Sigma Tauri]

I am in the process of reading the link in fact. 

 

I am tired of the "North good guys and South bad guys" act, something I cannot abide by. 

 

No one's making that claim.

 

Your claim that immigrants are slaves, however, is rejected.

[Jehuty]

...and people still work in horrible conditions many places around the word, for low pay. That makes them poor and possibly exploited by their employers, but that doesn't make them slaves. A slave is owned by another person like livestock and has no rights beyond those granted him or her by their master. A factory worker in 1860s New York could always quit and seek employment elsewhere. That was a luxury a slave didn't have, short of risking his own life by becoming a runaway. Immigrant factory workers also didn't have to worry about being raped by their employers, and should such a crime occur...they had the legal system in their corner. Slaves were frequently raped and had no legal protection at all.

They had families to feed. They were forced to work long shifts, for low pay, and in horrible conditions. They couldn't simply just get a job elsewhere. 

[Jehuty]

They still technically weren't slaves.

But yeah, the North had its fair share of issues. Poor working conditions were one. Many Northern states were also complicit in slavery, because they would help capture escaped slaves.

Also, the North's war tactics were... morally questionable. For example, Sherman's "total warfare" destroyed the private property of countless Southern citizens, thus devastating the Southern economy.

I think it's fair to say that the North and South both sucked. The Civil War was by no means a "battle between good and evil."

Both sides have their fair share of problems. 

[PhroXenGold]

I am in the process of reading the link in fact. 

 

I am tired of the "North good guys and South bad guys" act, something I cannot abide by. 

 

That the North wasn't perfect doesn't mean that the South was in any way less abhoerent, or that the war was started for any reason other than the preservation of the institution of slavery.

[Fast Jimmy]

...and people still work in horrible conditions many places around the word, for low pay. That makes them poor and possibly exploited by their employers, but that doesn't make them slaves. A slave is owned by another person like livestock and has no rights beyond those granted him or her by their master. A factory worker in 1860s New York could always quit and seek employment elsewhere. That was a luxury a slave didn't have, short of risking his own life by becoming a runaway. Immigrant factory workers also didn't have to worry about being raped by their employers, and should such a crime occur...they had the legal system in their corner. Slaves were frequently raped and had no legal protection at all.

As a side bar, when an immigrant had a child, the factory didn't own the child.

[Han Shot First]

They had families to feed. They were forced to work long shifts, for low pay, and in horrible conditions. They couldn't simply just get a job elsewhere. 

 

They could and quite often did. You're as incorrect there as nearly every statement you've made thus far in this thread.

 

In any case the discussion of the working conditions of immigrants in 19th Century America has absolutely nothing to do with the cause of the American Civil War. You're attempting to deflect away from the real issue, which is that the Confederacy was founded purely in defense of the institution of African slavery, and that the Confederate battle flag was designed by white supremacists for white supremacists.

[Jehuty]

They could and quite often did. You're as incorrect there as nearly every statement you've made thus far in this thread.

 

In any case the discussion of the working conditions of immigrants in 19th Century America has absolutely nothing to do with the cause of the American Civil War. You're attempting to deflect away from the real issue, which is that the Confederacy was founded purely in defense of the institution of African slavery, and that the Confederate battle flag designed by white supremacists for white supremacists.

Don't even play the "I'm right and you're wrong" game with me.

 

Keep thinking whatever, I'm no Yankee nor do I have any intention of becoming one. Keep bashing on a nation that had far bigger balls then both of us combined. 

 

May the South rise again. 

[PhroXenGold]

Oh, and just because the Conferdacy apologists usually try it, I'll preemt any claims of the South fighting for "States' Rights", by pointing people at the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, probably the most egregious attack on "States' Rights" America had seen at the time, brought in by the leadership of the South to, surprise surprise, protect slavery.

[PhroXenGold]

May the South rise again. 

 

And may the North raze again.

[Sigma Tauri]

Don't even play the "I'm right and you're wrong" game with me.

 

No one is. Han Shot First is making an argument. That's why he presented a link. He's presenting empirical evidence of his claim.

 

You don't know how to argue, and you're emotional.