JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
You think they might have been fighting for their country, their state, their brothers??? Perhaps they were fighting against somebody, rather than for something. It's an interesting thought to me. Many of the vets I have spoken to that were in combat have talked about fighting to protect their fellow vets. Maybe part of it?
Young men looking for adventure....patriotism....'cause Federal troops were down there....
I really don't know....
( I can say why I fought....but I wouldn't say for sure why someone else did....)
I know that they fought at :
Shiloh
Murfreesboro
Chickamauga
Chattanooga
And the Siege of Atlanta
Andy
 
Think about this, exactly WHO did the fighting, who showed up to muster with his own musket powder and shot!

I can assure you it wasn't Southern Gentelmen, or wealthy land owners, nope, it was the common man who likely didn't "Own" anybody!

So...... How did the South manage to get all the those men to fight? It wasn't the threat of the northmen taking their slaves, nope! Try again!
Of all the southern losses, how many were men or any wealth? How many were small farmers who may or may not even own the land they farmed?
 
The Civil War was about taxes...

Yet there were many people in the North that were plenty racist and supported slavery; and many people (although a lesser number) in the South that neither owned nor supported slavery.
This is actually a large number in the south. Very few could afford slaves overall. I am the descendant of Southerners who were far too poor to afford slaves. At least one was an abolitionist preacher who fought for the South. I am aware of being named (by accident) for one of Pinkerton's men. His secret remained for over a century. A relative found some things that indicated he was a spy.
Stonewall Jackson had prior to the war, began education in the trades for his slaves so they could make a living on release. There was a plan for him to release them as freedmen.

The story is complex, and complex characters abound.
 
Something else to think about, the Owning of slaves was not an inexpensive cost to those wealthy enough to afford to own them, having slaves required the owner to care for them, feed them, house and clothe them, and when they died or were no longer able to work, they had to be replaced! That couldn't have been cheap, and would have required other costs, like a taskmaster and support personal to maintain the work flow! The logistics alone would have been pretty complicated and expensive! Exactly how many wealthy plantation owners in the south could actually have such operations and be successful at it?
 
The logistics alone would have been pretty complicated and expensive! Exactly how many wealthy plantation owners in the south could actually have such operations and be successful at it?

Great question. Conservative estimates place the number of slave owners in the south around 25% of households (with a high estimate of 35%).

About 50% of the Officers of the Confederate Army owned at least one slave.

Those numbers don't include the leasing of slaves. Often a wealthy plantation owner would possess multiple slaves and lease them out to small farmers, craftsman, and businesses.

The entire economic engine of the South was dependent on slavery.

Ironically this is also one of the (several) downfalls of the Confederacy during the war.

The Northern States were, for the most part, free territories and could not rely on slave labor for production. What happens when you can't force someone to work for you and you don't want to work harder? You work smarter! The North industrialized their economy. Because the North had established industry they were able to create war material on a large scale. The South had no significant industrialization and therefor could not produce the war material needed to sustain the conflict.

The very lifestyle many were trying to protect in the South ultimately ended up being their undoing.

Slavery was the kingpin that held the South together. Some soldiers may have fought for their own reasons, love of State, because the Northerners were in the South, maybe some just liked fighting. But at the end of the day the fighting they did was also a fight that would ensure the preservation of slavery...even if they didn't own a slave themselves.

I empathize with the men loyal to their home and wanting to be left alone. But I cannot overlook the hypocrisy of wanting to be free from the thumb of Federal tyranny while fighting for a cause that continues the enslavement of our fellow men.
 
For those interested in learning more about the Civil War but don't have time to pour through primary documents and sources the Gettysburg National Parks Service has excellent lectures on a variety of topics. I highly recommend starting with their Winter lecture series.

 
Stonewall Jackson was an interesting story, from what I read he did own slaves, but only did so to help them. He also would teach slaves to read in a time where it was illegal.
but skirted the law by teaching them the bible which was legal.
He even treated his slaves as family. He took care of them and had them eat with him as

So even though some men owned slaves in the south it wasn't always for ill purposes.
 
I remember touring Thomas Jefferson's home when my Dad lived in Virginia and seeing the slave quarters.

It was a place you could feel the dread and sorrow.

similar to the battlefields of the Civil War.
standing there looking over those foggy fields you could feel the death in the air.

That always stuck with me.
 
So even though some men owned slaves in the south it wasn't always for ill purposes.

Stonewall Jackson was a devote and religious man. He believed the bible charged him with taking good care of what he owned... particularly slaves.

In comparison to other slaveholders he treated the men and women he held in bondage well... but they were still not free.

I can't say I or any one of us would do anything different if we grew up in Stonewall's shoes; but treated well or poorly slavery is still slavery and should not be excused in any form.
 
Is there any documentation of the slaves he owned?
From what I read he bought one slave to set him free and he bought a few more because it was a mother and kids so they wouldn't be split up. He took care of them knowing if he set her free she wouldn't be able to get work being a black woman of the time.
so he gave her work in return for room and board and helped educate her children.

while his family were slave owners he seemed to be quite conflicted with it, and the slaves he did purchase were to help them, and set them free.
I could be wrong as I'm not expert but that was the information I remember about him.
 
I am aware of being named (by accident) for one of Pinkerton's men.

Wombat Pinkerton... what an interesting, but unfortunate, name!!! :p;):D


I empathize with the men loyal to their home and wanting to be left alone. But I cannot overlook the hypocrisy of wanting to be free from the thumb of Federal tyranny while fighting for a cause that continues the enslavement of our fellow men.

I don't personally know anybody that says any different. You?

It is worth noting, IMO, that people tend to see others thru the lens of modernity rather than what it was like in the time. In those days, slavery was rampant, worldwide, and in many areas was considered normal. Black people were unfortunately considered to be subhuman by many whites, as were Native Americans, indigenous South Americans, Asians, etc etc etc, and by other Africans. That is not to say that it was good and right, but that those peoples should not be judged the same as the KKK, neo-nazis, et al, of today's more enlightened world.

I would not "own" a man. Any more than I think I own my wife or my kids. Nor do I believe that a woman "owns" her unborn baby and therefore can do anything she wants. It is a life, it has it's own DNA, therefore it is not a part of her body, and it is certainly more than "tissue". If one wants to discuss abuse of humans, I would be happy to start there...
 
Some interesting comparisons here, but the tax thing....the state of Oregon is fast approaching taxation without representation with the one party rule we have. It may take a while, but if Korrupt Kate has her way with cap and trade taxes, you will see pretty much all first tier producers and resource extraction business's collapse since they will not be able to make a profit and stay in business.

Combine that with all the gun control freaks and this will be a socialist state. I went to the valley for a Drs appointment Thursday and to see the grand kids. Left yesterday afternoon and came back here, thankful for our decision to move to Central Oregon since I saw more homeless, more criminals, more filth in the Hillsboro Forest Grove area than I remember since I was last there 3 months ago.
 
Some interesting comparisons here, but the tax thing....the state of Oregon is fast approaching taxation without representation with the one party rule we have. It may take a while, but if Korrupt Kate has her way with cap and trade taxes, you will see pretty much all first tier producers and resource extraction business's collapse since they will not be able to make a profit and stay in business.

Agreed!!

The Corporate tax passed in 2019 is now adding to the cost of materials in each stage of production. The increase in the cost of lumber already driving up the price of housing and remodels. The Fuels tax is going up; the auto sales tax going up; supposedly to fund the cost of electric charging stations that few people use... there is one at our local Walmart and NOBODY EVER uses it!!! Most Oregonians don't want electric cars that can't make it across the state. Home transfer and development taxes are being proposed to help fund "affordable housing". Sure taxing homes makes them more affordable!!! They want to keep the kicker. And now Queen Brown wants to get together with King Inslee to tear out the dams for steelhead and salmon recovery that the Orcas can then eat. Which will require replacing the electrical capacity.. more taxation required. The windmills are being supplemented with taxpayer monies... if they ever stop doing so, rates will skyrocket because they have mandated buying such "green" power at ten times normal rates.

They don't really do "tax and spend" any more... they do tax tax tax tax tax, give us your money you rubes!!!
 
The real taxes will come in products that pass through several value added companies, and the tax will be better than 2% at the final end. A friend who has a specialty construction business that does about 5 million a year. None of his employees makes less than 60K a year. He will have to pay an ADDITIONAL $ 26,000 or more in additional taxes on the " Corporate Activity Tax". His prices are going up for sure.
 
And now Queen Brown wants to get together with King Inslee to tear out the dams for steelhead and salmon recovery that the Orcas can then eat. Which will require replacing the electrical capacity.. more taxation required. The windmills are being supplemented with taxpayer monies... if they ever stop doing so, rates will skyrocket because they have mandated buying such "green" power at ten times normal rates.

Don't forget shutting down gas and coal fired plants in the future.

Neat little interactive map of various power producing plants. Map of power generation in the Northwest | Northwest Power and Conservation Council
 
Don't forget shutting down gas and coal fired plants in the future.

Neat little interactive map of various power producing plants. Map of power generation in the Northwest | Northwest Power and Conservation Council

I have no problem with clean coal tech. Keep em going! Shutting down gas plants for CO2 emissions is nuts!!! China is building something like 387 new coal plants. India is as dirty as it gets. Whatever we do here and in Berkeley will make no difference. And that's if you believe in Anthropogenic Climate Change... and I don't.
 
I have no problem with clean coal tech. Keep em going! Shutting down gas plants for CO2 emissions is nuts!!! China is building something like 387 new coal plants. India is as dirty as it gets. Whatever we do here and in Berkeley will make no difference. And that's if you believe in Anthropogenic Climate Change... and I don't.

That's what I'm talkin' about!

I was looking at this a couple of weeks ago. Mapped: The world's coal power plants in 2019
Two small coal fired plant in the entire northwest. And dicktater brown wants US to pay .22 a gallon more on gasoline in the near future and many more $$ on all sorts of other stuff when WE are ones producing a tiny little bit of carbon compared to the eastern part of the U.S..
 
That's what I'm talkin' about!

I was looking at this a couple of weeks ago. Mapped: The world's coal power plants in 2019
Two small coal fired plant in the entire northwest. And dicktater brown wants US to pay .22 a gallon more on gasoline in the near future and many more $$ on all sorts of other stuff when WE are ones producing a tiny little bit of carbon compared to the eastern part of the U.S..

What a great map! Thx for sharing!!!

I looked at those coal fired plants region by region. U.S. and Europe use is going down. A few places are slightly up. surprisingly Russia and India are flat. The China use on the graph goes almost straight up!!! BTW, they are the ones throwing garbage into their rivers and out of ocean going vessels that makes those huge rafts of plastic floating out there on the ocean. (Well, besides Carnival and Princess lines.) I've no problem with less plastic bags out on our landscape, but now I have to beg for a straw when I buy a soda at McD. What a PITA!!!
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top