Teaching about the Civil War

KenH,

A few comments about size of government. It seems to me that you would have to agree that some government is necessary, the only question is how much. The attacks on New York should convince anyone, if previous history has not, that a strong central government is necessary and a strong military is necessary. These are not cheap and therefore taxation at about the present rate is necessary in order to remain strong. This provides security that helps everyone maintain a very high standard of living compared to the rest of the world. It won't help to have a low tax rate as suggested by Libertarians, if one's property and home is not secure from bandits or the Saddaam Husseins of this world. I vote for a strong security system even if it means high taxes.

Besides, as a practical matter, Libertarian ideas are not selling in the market place. The party has been around a long time and still has elected hardly anyone to state or national office. The vast bulk of the population wants taxes and the size of government to stay much as it is, or they would be voting for Libertarians. Libertarians are ignored - that should tell you something.

 

>>>>>However, a study of economic conditions will reveal that slavery would have been proven an unsound practice. <<<<<<<

That may or may not be true, I think it is obvious that it was sound enough to last 200 years and then it did not end because it was economically unsound. But whether that is true or not, the southern slave holders thought it was not true and acted on the basis that it was sound economic practices, so it makes little difference that possibly it might ultimately have gone extinct due to economics. I think it is correct that the number of slaves in 1860 was the largest number ever in American history, so if the practice was not profitable, one has to wonder why it was increasing. I think you would have a stronger case if you could show that the number of slaves was decreasing from 1840 to 1860. In spite of the often repeated claims that slavery would have died out, the people who repeat such claims never provide any numeric data to support their claim.

 

Dr. Bob writes:
>>>>I have simply quit beating my head against a wall against an abolitionist that defies logic and redefines truth.<<<<<

It seems that you have abandoned the field without providing any support for your original claims. For instance, when you say that the south was motivated not by slavery but by States Rights, you could provide some quotes from the southern leadership to support your position. I have done so to support my position, and it has gone unrefuted.

When you say that there were thousands of black soldiers who fought for the south and if that is a fact, then it should be possible to support it with solid data. You have not done so. I have posted an article by a historian which directly contradicts your claim.

Of course you could simply admit that you were mistaken about both of these important topics. What do you do? You simply resort to name calling *yankeescum* or to attacks on the character of Abraham Lincoln. These are so obviously low and disreputable tactics, that I found it hard to believe that they are coming from a Baptist Pastor who thinks of himself as a scholar. You only hurt your own reputation by behaving this way.

 

>>>>>>After great debate, it was not until March 1865 that a bill was passed to allow arming negroes for combat service in the CSA. Two regiments [a regiment had 1000 negroes with 120 white line and field officers] were raised in Richmond alone, with other recruitment efforts spread across the dwindling Confederacy.<<<<<<

And I suppose you know that in March, 1865, the confederacy was only a few short weeks away from total collapse. So the attempt to recruit blacks in March, 1865 was simply a frantic effort to stave off the collapse.