Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death'

Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

slvemike4u -> Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 4:28:32 AM)
Former President Jimmie Carter comments in a new Lincoln book:In Lincoln's Hand:His Original Manuscript's With Commentary By Distinguished Americans. Carter comments on a passage in which Lincoln wrote"I am almost ready to say this is probably true-that god wills this contest,and wills that itshall not end yet" Carter found the statement troubling stating"He (Lincoln)ignores the fact that the tragic combat might have been avoided altogether,and that the leaders of both sides,overwhelmingll Christian,were violating a basic premise of their belief as followers of the Prince of Peace."He concluded with "a legitimate question for historians is how soon the blight of slavery would have been terminated peacefully in America,as in Great Britain and other civilized societies". Britain banned the slave trade in 1807 and abolished slavery altogether in 1833....by 1861 America had not followed suit.How much longer would this immoral institution have gone on in America?Is this just further proof that Former President Carter was and is too moral a man for the office he once occupied?Is there any evil in this world this man would see as worth the scourge of war....or does he beleive one can pray their way through anything?

DesFIP -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 6:40:17 AM)
Looking at slavery from an economic standpoint only, it would have pretty much ended shortly after the invention of the cotton gin. Slavery was an economic solution for field work that required many hands every day. Once inventions came about that made that unnecessary, it would have slowly died out. However not without destroying the Union. And that's what the Civil War was fought over, preserving the Union. Ending slavery was the easiest way to decimate the South economically so they couldn't try to secede again.

RealityLicks -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 7:22:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP Looking at slavery from an economic standpoint only, it would have pretty much ended shortly after the invention of the cotton gin. Slavery was an economic solution for field work that required many hands every day. Once inventions came about that made that unnecessary, it would have slowly died out. However not without destroying the Union. And that's what the Civil War was fought over, preserving the Union. Ending slavery was the easiest way to decimate the South economically so they couldn't try to secede again. Surely the cotton gin was invented in the 1700s? Because it made the cloth cheaper to produce, cotton became more desirable and therefore ever more people were forced onto plantations to grow and harvest the stuff. Far from eradicating slavery, it was the cotton gin which increased the desire to exploit slave labourers in the antebellum south. A cotton gin is little use without bales and bales of raw material.

UncleNasty -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 9:45:54 AM)
Too moral to be President? That's quite a slope all by itself. Uncle Nasty

slvemike4u -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 11:59:12 AM)
Too moral to ever see a justifiable reason for war.Yes,uncle nasty ....too moral for President As covered in a previous post the cotton gin,far from aiding in the economic failure of slavery.....led to a need for more slaves.Cotton doesn't pick itself...The biggest economic forces affecting slavery was the inability to diffuse the slave population thru expantion into new lands,Without such diffusion slave values could do nothing but drop.Simple supply and demand,hence a war fought over the right to spread slavery to new territories....or eradicate it where it allready existed.The status quo suited niether side.

Aylee -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 12:08:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RealityLicks Surely the cotton gin was invented in the 1700s? Because it made the cloth cheaper to produce, cotton became more desirable and therefore ever more people were forced onto plantations to grow and harvest the stuff. Far from eradicating slavery, it was the cotton gin which increased the desire to exploit slave labourers in the antebellum south. A cotton gin is little use without bales and bales of raw material. Modern cotton gin, yes, 1793-94. But an increase in the overall industrialization of the south would have led to an eradication of slavery eventually. We hope. This is one of the favorite topics of Alternate History.

aravain -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 12:18:16 PM)
That's certainly... the most interesting reason I've ever heard for why Carter wasn't right for the presidency.

corysub -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 12:57:51 PM)
For a guy who graduated fom the Naval Academy, Jimmy Carter had no ability to lead, no ability to instill pride, no ability to understand the pain people were suffering during his time at the helm when we all lived with a "misery index" suffering from both high inflation and obscene interest rates. To moral a man? Possibly, but I have no idea what Carter did or still does in the shadows. He was a good man over his head in the job...a man who was elected becasue people wanted "change". For Carter to write that slavery would have ended in time might be correct but certainly not a good thing if you were a slave in 1865...or the children of slaves in 1900, grandchildren of slaves in 1920..or great, great greandchildren of slaves in 2009. It's a silly arguement for the man to make, but pure Jimmy Carter. Let the old guy talk and write what he would like. Very few people care about what he has to say...and he can't hurt anyone...anymore.

slvemike4u -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 1:41:08 PM)
Averain just one of many reasons Carter wasn't right for the Presidency.Perhaps the most fundamentally good person elected to that office (IMO)in my lifetime,yet a total disaster as Commander in Chief.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 1:44:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Averain just one of many reasons Carter wasn't right for the Presidency.Perhaps the most fundamentally good person elected to that office (IMO)in my lifetime,yet a total disaster as Commander in Chief. couldnt have said it better myself...

DomKen -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 3:00:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Averain just one of many reasons Carter wasn't right for the Presidency.Perhaps the most fundamentally good person elected to that office (IMO)in my lifetime,yet a total disaster as Commander in Chief. Got to disagree with you there. Carter wasn't a disaster as POTUS. You've just bought into the relentless propoganda aimed at him. The economy was a mess before he took office, oil embargo and bad monetary policy under Nixon and Ford as well as the inevitable post war recession, and he did the right long term things to get us out of the mess. Consider if we had continued pursuing alternative energy sources between 1980 and 2009, might we have avoided much of the trouble we're in now? Internationally he made real progress on peace in the ME and was strongly opposing the USSR in precisely the manner that eventually saw us through to the end of the cold war. And on top of that he was a decent man who tried his best. Not something that can be said for the next 4 office holders.

pahunkboy -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 4:21:20 PM)
It isnt that simple. The civil war was placed into the national agenda by off shore banks. Loans to both sides were made by the Bank of England. We can endear our good friend Rothschild for his "help" in it. A few of the states in the South had ended slavery prior to the civil war. The civil war, was also an attempt to re-establish the British Empire unto America. As you recall, we left the motherland due to taxation with out representation. Conveniently, England needed to assess us more tax- so as to pay its war debt. We rebelled in 1776. This off shore bank rule is a perennial theme in America and indeed the world. US presidents have even been assassinated by agents for the British Empire. After the civil war, humans needed birth certificates. This places you and I under Maritime Law, rather then Commen Law. Which is not good. The British had a kick azz Navy, hence "maritime". The USA actually has already bankrupted many decades ago. As have a handful of states. Currency runs and bank collapses were quite ordinary in the prior centuries. Anyone who has a Social Security Number, is listed as an asset. Their life earnings is subject to tax and debt, as in the National debt. IE- you actually OWE a % of that- connected to YOUR SOCIAL Security number. Around this same time, corporate personhood became legal. So today- we have almost no common law governance. You and I are chattel for the nations war debt. and prior bankruptcy. And- unless you hold allodial title to your house, you are not the actual owner of it. Only Texas has land parcels that carry allodial title. The Amish do not have SSNs, hence are not liable for the nations war debt. Incidently, the off shore banks, held loans of Germany. Well- Germany simply increased its money supply. The banks would not hear of that. They demanded and recieved repayment of war debts in GOLD.

Vendaval -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 4:25:07 PM)
I do not think that slavery in the US would have ended as a the result of natural social progress. Witness the amazing amount of underpaid laborers that built this country and the illegal immigration problems of today.

slvemike4u -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 4:34:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy It isnt that simple. The civil war was placed into the national agenda by off shore banks. Loans to both sides were made by the Bank of England. We can endear our good friend Rothschild for his "help" in it. A few of the states in the South had ended slavery prior to the civil war. The civil war, was also an attempt to re-establish the British Empire unto America. As you recall, we left the motherland due to taxation with out representation. Conveniently, England needed to assess us more tax- so as to pay its war debt. We rebelled in 1776. This off shore bank rule is a perennial theme in America and indeed the world. US presidents have even been assassinated by agents for the British Empire. After the civil war, humans needed birth certificates. This places you and I under Maritime Law, rather then Commen Law. Which is not good. The British had a kick azz Navy, hence "maritime". The USA actually has already bankrupted many decades ago. As have a handful of states. Currency runs and bank collapses were quite ordinary in the prior centuries. Anyone who has a Social Security Number, is listed as an asset. Their life earnings is subject to tax and debt, as in the National debt. IE- you actually OWE a % of that- connected to YOUR SOCIAL Security number. Around this same time, corporate personhood became legal. So today- we have almost no common law governance. You and I are chattel for the nations war debt. and prior bankruptcy. And- unless you hold allodial title to your house, you are not the actual owner of it. Only Texas has land parcels that carry allodial title. The Amish do not have SSNs, hence are not liable for the nations war debt. Incidently, the off shore banks, held loans of Germany. Well- Germany simply increased its money supply. The banks would not hear of that. They demanded and recieved repayment of war debts in GOLD. I don't know where to begin.I will keep it simple,please name me one southern state(border states don't count)which abolished slavery prior to the Civil War......just one.

Vendaval -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 4:38:51 PM)
Hunk boy, Do you have some documentation on this? Is it a new angle on the Civil War? quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy It isnt that simple. The civil war was placed into the national agenda by off shore banks. Loans to both sides were made by the Bank of England. We can endear our good friend Rothschild for his "help" in it. A few of the states in the South had ended slavery prior to the civil war.

slvemike4u -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 4:47:41 PM)
Ven,there is no new angle on the Civil War in that post.Bank of England made loans to both sides......so what.....lending money is a time honored method of making money.Both sides in a war sounds like they made a lot of money.

Vendaval -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 5:06:18 PM)
There is a passage from Gone With the Wind that is appropriate here. "Scarlett: But you are a blockade runner. Rhett: For profit, and profit only. Scarlett: Are you tryin' to tell me you don't believe in the cause? Rhett: I believe in Rhett Butler, he's the only cause I know. The rest doesn't mean much to me." http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gone_with_the_Wind (edited to fix quote formatting)

slvemike4u -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 5:08:53 PM)
Ven ,Rhet was cool....Scarlet was a spoiled bitch....and Ashley was a milksop....Great book,fantastic movie.

pahunkboy -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 5:35:05 PM)
and in 2009, talk ...about reparations. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-40

Owner59 -> RE: Jimmie Carter...slavery would have died a "natural death' (3/23/2009 5:38:41 PM)
There was nothing un-natural about the way slavery ended, in any case.It was just one issue settled by the Civil War,of many.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125