Were Southern American Confederates traitors and paranoid fools or were they right?

[Hialt]

The South has no monopoly on that. Go soak your brainwashed head in a toilet full of diarrhea.

I’ll go do that, just for you!

[Richmondbread]

Don't lie buddy. Slavery was abolished in the North decades before the war.

Incorrect. Slavery still existed in the north. Grant had slaves.

[Smitty]

Many very effective arguments have been employed to explain the War Between the States as not being about slavery. But slavery, itself, is so indefensible, and miserably tortuous a state, that it ought to be banished...let it take the illustrious Southern states with it, too, down the toilet of history, THAT is how horrible a thing slavery is.

Slavery has existed since time immemorial. It is not nearly so abhorrent as our robotic generation considers it to be. There were evil aspects of slavery in the US (breaking up of families, abuse, rape, etc.), but slavery itself is just a social system and had both its upsides and downsides.

[Smitty]

I read that it was thought by many even in the 19th century that it was impossible or at least extremely difficult and expensive to ship them anywhere and then replace them as a work force. Maybe he should just have tried to take a moderate Southerner as his running mate, like he had Andrew Johnson as his vp in his second term and condemn John Brown and radicals. Campaign as a pro-Union above all and don't care about slavery.

Repatriation was tried and didn't work out so well. Blacks actually did not want to go back to Africa, for obvious reasons. It was considered at one point to settle them in Oregon. I think that might have been the best solution.

[TheForeigner]

Incorrect. Slavery still existed in the north. Grant had slaves.

He had them in Missouri from where his wife was. Missouri and the other "border states" were considered Southern back then. Missouri was settled by Southerners. Maybe Delaware would be the only actual Northern state that still had some slaves.

[Anglo-Celtic]

I’ll go do that, just for you!

Don't do it. It's not as fun as it sounds.

[Hialt]

Don't do it. It's not as fun as it sounds.

Instead of "brainwashed," I'd call myself educated and mature on the issue. I have thought about this a long time. There wasn't anybody in a thousand-mile radius who was as pro-South as me, when I was a kid. But I learned that there is no excusing slavery. I know, I know, I know, the South didn't fight the war to simply defend slavery, but instead had several legitimate reasons to want to kick Yankee ass. And Lincoln may have employed clever Yankee art to rhetorically redefine the struggle as over slavery, successfully. And the South may have been subject to humiliation and subordination in Congress in the decades prior to the War, etc., etc.
But there is no excusing slavery.

[lei.talk]

Repatriation was tried and didn't work out so well.
Blacks actually did not want to go back to Africa, for obvious reasons.

It was considered at one point to settle them in Oregon.
I think that might have been the best solution.

some folks are glad that never happened:

"The Northwest Tricolor flag consists of three vertical bars of equal length,
similar to the French, Irish, and Italian tricolors.

Left to right, the bars are navy blue, white, and emerald green,
with the blue bar to the flagstaff.

They symbolize blue for the Northwest sky,
green for the land,
and white for the people who will dwell in between the two."

[Anglo-Celtic]

Instead of "brainwashed," I'd call myself educated and mature on the issue. I have thought about this a long time. There wasn't anybody in a thousand-mile radius who was as pro-South as me, when I was a kid. But I learned that there is no excusing slavery. I know, I know, I know, the South didn't fight the war to simply defend slavery, but instead had several legitimate reasons to want to kick Yankee ass. And Lincoln may have employed clever Yankee art to rhetorically redefine the struggle as over slavery, successfully. And the South may have been subject to humiliation and subordination in Congress in the decades prior to the War, etc., etc.
But there is no excusing slavery.

Who excuses slavery? I mean other than people who pretend that the old South had a monopoly on it as they ignore the practice in other places and other times.

[Richmondbread]

Owning a slave back in the 19th century was the modern equivalent of having a laptop computer or a Lexus. Granted, not everyone could afford one, but it wasn't thought of like today. It was a different time before electricity even. We can't compare those people by today's morality. With all the modern conveniences we have now, we don't need any slave labor. We have machines to pick the cotton for us.