Reply to Why is ante bellum racist?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Why is ante bellum racist?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]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.[/quote]

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.  
[/quote]

3. Myth #3: Only a small percentage of Southerners owned enslaved people.

Closely related to Myth #2, the idea that the vast majority of Confederate soldiers were men of modest means rather than large plantation owners is usually used to reinforce the contention that the South wouldn’t have gone to war to protect slavery. The 1860 census shows that in the states that would soon secede from the Union, an average of more than 32 percent of white families owned enslaved people. Some states had far more slave owners (46 percent of families in South Carolina, 49 percent in Mississippi) while some had far less (20 percent of families in Arkansas).

From:

https://www.history.com/news/5-myths-about-slavery[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics