The Racist Roots of Georgia's Gun Laws (page 4)

betteroffdead

I think there's racism anywhere you are you may just be expecting it more in "stereotypical places" i.e. midwest, down south, etc.

snowbird

Farkel, is this what you're referring to?

The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution officially abolished and continues to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. It was adopted on December 6, 1865, and was then declared in a proclamation of Secretary of State William H. Seward on December 18.

At the time of its ratification, slavery remained legal only in Delaware, Kentucky and Missouri. In New Jersey, former slaves born before 1804 could still legally be held as "apprentices," a condition essentially equivalent to slavery; former border slave state Maryland had banned slavery in the constitution it had passed the previous year. Everywhere else in the United States slaves had been freed by state action or Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

Sylvia

Junction-Guy

But what I am wondering is if the people/government of the South even recognized the emancipation proclamation? I have asked this before and the answer was that the the slaves were not freed until the Union soldiers freed them, or the owners voluntarily freed them. What do you think?

snowbird

JG, I don't think even Lincoln recognized the Emancipation Proclamation as being any good.

The consensus is that it wasn't worth the paper on which it was written.

I'm doing some research on Lincoln, and it seems that he was not the noble, benign soul that some of us believe him to be.

He was a master politician - cunning, wily, and manipulative - and issued this proclamation only as a last resort to further fuel the flames of war in the North. He knew that it didn't have any teeth and would not free a single slave!

20-20 hindsight is something else, isn't it?

Sylvia

Farkel

snowbird,

:At the time of its ratification, slavery remained legal only in Delaware, Kentucky and Missouri. In New Jersey, former slaves born before 1804 could still legally be held as "apprentices," a condition essentially equivalent to slavery; former border slave state Maryland had banned slavery in the constitution it had passed the previous year. Everywhere else in the United States slaves had been freed by state action or Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

Yes, that is what I'm talking about. It clearly states that slavery had been abolished in all but those states mentioned by the time the 13th Amendment was ratified. But as soon as that Amendment was ratified, it became the law of the land, and those laws in Delaware, et.al. which made slavery legal were nullified and thus slavery in ANY state became ILLEGAL at ratification of the Amendment.

Farkel

Farkel

snowbird,

:I'm doing some research on Lincoln, and it seems that he was not the noble, benign soul that some of us believe him to be.

It is sad how little our younger generation knows about how our Republic works. But it's not their fault. It is the fault of the educational system, which I think conspires to keep our children as ignorant about the Constitution and the roles and duties of Government as possible. I learned about how the three branches of our Federal Government worked in the 5th grade and in high school there were two years of classes on Government and America's Role in World Affairs that were mandatory in order to graduate.

:JG, I don't think even Lincoln recognized the Emancipation Proclamation as being any good.
:The consensus is that it wasn't worth the paper on which it was written.

Lincoln was a lawyer and he knew the President was not a King and could not write a piece of paper by himself that would overturn laws in the States. It takes Congress to write the law, the President to sign it, and the Supreme Court to ensure that the law does not violate the Constitution. The Emancipation Proclamation was never intended to have the force of law, but rather to affirm to the people that the President believed all Citizens should be free and equal.

:He was a master politician - cunning, wily, and manipulative - and issued this proclamation only as a last resort to further fuel the flames of war in the North. He knew that it didn't have any teeth and would not free a single slave!

I partially agree about using the proclamation to rally the Northern troops to be successful in preserving the Union. As for being cunning, wily and manipulative, I disagree.

If you really want to educate yourself on Lincoln, I suggest you read Carl Sandburg's Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of the man. It is six volumes, but will shed a lot more light on the man than inane sound bites like "cunning, wily, and manipulative."

Cheers!

Farkel

snowbird

Farkel, I am speaking from a Black perspective, and of course, you and I won't see eye to eye on this issue.

I suggest that you read Forced Into Glory - Abraham's Lincoln White Dream by Lerone Bennett Jr.

If you do, you will see that the descriptive adjectives that I used (cunning, wily, manipulative) reflect my more charitable spirit.

Sylvia

BurnTheShips

I'm doing some research on Lincoln, and it seems that he was not the noble, benign soul that some of us believe him to be.

I read several biographies of him written for childreb when I was young. He was a hero to me. Honest Abe. The log splitter. The boy that would walk miles to get a book to read. The harsh wilderness life. I felt disillusioned when I found out about his flaws at an older age. Sort of like finding out Santa Claus is a fairy tale. Kids need someone to look up to, to live up to. Culture heroes. Our society takes more pleasure in tearing down these days than building up. I guess men never live up to it.

BTS

snowbird

I felt disillusioned when I found out about his flaws at an older age.

I had the same experience.

I suppose I really shouldn't view Old Abe in such a jaundiced manner. After all, he only reflected the mores of his time.

Interestingly, at one time I also looked up to and admired Dr. MLK, Jr.

Just sayin.'

Sylvia

undercover

What's often overlooked is that Reconstruction played a hand in the rascism that was to spring up in the aftermath of the war. The South was being punished for their rebellion during war thru the Reconstruction. Their one hope had ironically been assisinated. Lincoln wanted to bring the Union back together as quickly as possible. He wasn't so concerned about slavery or equal rights...he didn't want his legacy to be the president who allowed the Union to be divided.

During Reconstruction, Carpetbaggers flooded the South to take advantage of the new governments being put in place by the Republicans from the North. Scaliwags of the South turned on their own to take advantage as well. Part of what the carpetbaggers and scaliwags did was to buy the votes of the Freedmen, thus stacking local governments in their favor.

Southerners hated capretbaggers and scaliwags worse than most freedmen. But amongst the freedmen were some who took to violence against their former masters. Because of that violence along with the crooked governments of the invading Northern carpetbaggers and their lackeys, the KKK was born. At first it was to protect those that were being attacked by the violent members of the freedmen and to put a scare into carpetbaggers and scaliwags. Once the worst of the Reconstruction was over, the original KKK disbanded. It was resurrected by some of the original members along with some new ones and became the hate group that most people think of today.

Not only did the South lose the war but they were degraded and humiliated by having rights and property taken away. They learned to distrust the North even more, they resented the freedmen who were now claiming some of the goods and rights previoiusly held by themselves. It was the perfect melting pot to stir up hate and racism.

The Racist Roots of Georgia's Gun Laws

Share this