Why is ante bellum racist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that asking this question invites all kinds of criticism. I am asking sincerely. Help me understand why wearing pretty dresses to a party is racist?

Thank you.

Antebellum means the period before war; Antebellum South means the American south pre-Civil War that was dominated by slavery, socially and economically. It's embarrassing to 'party' in this way. It's like having a Holocaust party with Nazi or Hitler Youth uniforms and asking why it's racist or anti-semitic.

Not the same thing at all. There was much in the antebellum South that was not dominated by slavery. And, FWIW, hoop skirts were also worn in the North.

Could you share more on the bolded please? Curious to know what you mean.

[Anonymous]

It romanticizes a culture that was terrorizing and abusing all but the wealthiest and whitest people in the south. It's something that should be looked back on reverently, if not with shame, not romanticized as the good Ole days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that asking this question invites all kinds of criticism. I am asking sincerely. Help me understand why wearing pretty dresses to a party is racist?

Thank you.

Antebellum means the period before war; Antebellum South means the American south pre-Civil War that was dominated by slavery, socially and economically. It's embarrassing to 'party' in this way. It's like having a Holocaust party with Nazi or Hitler Youth uniforms and asking why it's racist or anti-semitic.

Not the same thing at all. There was much in the antebellum South that was not dominated by slavery. And, FWIW, hoop skirts were also worn in the North.

Could you share more on the bolded please? Curious to know what you mean.

Yes please elaborate. Because pretty much everything during the era was touched by the atrocities that were taking place, and you can't divorce one from the other. Yes the dresses were pretty, but who sewed them? The houses and landscape were beautiful, but who tended them? The parties were nice, who served at them?

[Anonymous]

Not the same thing at all. There was much in the antebellum South that was not dominated by slavery. And, FWIW, hoop skirts were also worn in the North.


Could you share more on the bolded please? Curious to know what you mean.

While 25% of Southerners owned slaves (and that is too many, of course), 75% did NOT own slaves. Of course, the large plantations depended on slavery, but many other people did not. Slavery was outrageous and troubling, but it was not the ONLY thing in the South.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It romanticizes a culture that was terrorizing and abusing all but the wealthiest and whitest people in the south. It's something that should be looked back on reverently, if not with shame, not romanticized as the good Ole days.

Not up to you to decide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not the same thing at all. There was much in the antebellum South that was not dominated by slavery. And, FWIW, hoop skirts were also worn in the North.


Could you share more on the bolded please? Curious to know what you mean.

While 25% of Southerners owned slaves (and that is too many, of course), 75% did NOT own slaves. Of course, the large plantations depended on slavery, but many other people did not. Slavery was outrageous and troubling, but it was not the ONLY thing in the South.

Not owning slaves doesn't mean you didn't participate in their subjugation. Enslaved people and even free Blacks were treated terribly by society at large.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not the same thing at all. There was much in the antebellum South that was not dominated by slavery. And, FWIW, hoop skirts were also worn in the North.


Could you share more on the bolded please? Curious to know what you mean.

While 25% of Southerners owned slaves (and that is too many, of course), 75% did NOT own slaves. Of course, the large plantations depended on slavery, but many other people did not. Slavery was outrageous and troubling, but it was not the ONLY thing in the South.

Nobody throws an antebellum party where everyone dresses like a white sharecropper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It romanticizes a culture that was terrorizing and abusing all but the wealthiest and whitest people in the south. It's something that should be looked back on reverently, if not with shame, not romanticized as the good Ole days.

Not up to you to decide.

What? Lol. The first part of my post is fact, and is the answer to why many view the antebellum period as one we should not celebrate.

You can decide for yourself if you want to romanticize it, but you can't ignore the facts of what happened. It wasn't all pretty dresses and mint juleps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not the same thing at all. There was much in the antebellum South that was not dominated by slavery. And, FWIW, hoop skirts were also worn in the North.


Could you share more on the bolded please? Curious to know what you mean.

While 25% of Southerners owned slaves (and that is too many, of course), 75% did NOT own slaves. Of course, the large plantations depended on slavery, but many other people did not. Slavery was outrageous and troubling, but it was not the ONLY thing in the South.

This is embarrassing for you. Slavery was driving the economy for the south, the U.S., and even the globe.

By 1840, the South grew 60 percent of the world's cotton and provided some 70 percent of the cotton consumed by the British textile industry. Thus slavery paid for a substantial share of the capital, iron, and manufactured goods that laid the basis for American economic growth.


https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/teaching-resource/historical-context-was-slavery-engine-american-economic-growth#:~:text=By%201840%2C%20the%20South%20grew,basis%20for%20American%20economic%20growth.

It doesn't matter that only 25% of southerners owned slaves. Please do some research.

[Anonymous]

Because by referring to the slavery period as "bellum" it's saying boy, wasn't life beautiful then?
Ante bellum is after the beautiful time.

Just, no

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because by referring to the slavery period as "bellum" it's saying boy, wasn't life beautiful then?
Ante bellum is after the beautiful time.

Just, no

You Latin is bad. "Ante bellum" means "before the war."

[Anonymous]

Give me a break, this is a racist troll.

[Anonymous]

It is nostalgic for the Southern plantation culture that was built on slavery. "Gone With the Wind" has had a long-lasting terrible influence on Southern white people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is nostalgic for the Southern plantation culture that was built on slavery. "Gone With the Wind" has had a long-lasting terrible influence on Southern white people.

Yup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It romanticizes a culture that was terrorizing and abusing all but the wealthiest and whitest people in the south. It's something that should be looked back on reverently, if not with shame, not romanticized as the good Ole days.

Not up to you to decide.

What? Lol. The first part of my post is fact, and is the answer to why many view the antebellum period as one we should not celebrate.

You can decide for yourself if you want to romanticize it, but you can't ignore the facts of what happened. It wasn't all pretty dresses and mint juleps.

It isn't the period, it is the plantation culture that is shunned. "Little Women" is antebellum. Emerson and Thoreau are antebellum. Have a Trancendentalism-themed party.