Civil War Revisionists, part 2 | Buy Reprint Rights | License Candorville | Get Candorville In Your Paper | Buy Candorville BOOKS
April 20th, 2010
Civil War Revisionists, part 2
Discussion (27)¬
…or via Paypal
COLLECT CANDORVILLE BOOKS
COLLECT POLITICAL CARTOON BOOKS by DARRIN BELL
COLLECT RUDY PARK BOOKS by DARRIN BELL
Oops, I overlooked your last snarky question: "Tell me again how many slaves did the Emancipation Proclamation free?"
The Emancipation Proclamation freed all the slaves in secessionist states. Almost all of those slaves exercised their new freedom and fled across Union lines whenever Union troops entered their territories. The Proclamation didn't free the million slaves in the North, but at the same time Lincoln issued it, Northern Senators introduced legislation to amend the Constitution and end slavery everywhere, but it stalled in the House. When that happened, Lincoln himself fought to include the anti-slavery amendment in the Republican platform; and once enough like-minded Republicans were elected a year later, the North reintroduced and passed the bill through both chambers, and Lincoln signed it. Then the Northern states ratified it the following year and it became law. All slaves everywhere were freed (although in parts of Texas, your heroes managed to keep that knowledge from black people for a few more months).
So… what was the point of your question again?
Oops, I overlooked your last snarky question: "Tell me again how many slaves did the Emancipation Proclamation free?"
The Emancipation Proclamation freed all the slaves in secessionist states. Almost all of those slaves exercised their new freedom and fled across Union lines whenever Union troops entered their territories. The Proclamation didn't free the million slaves in the North, but at the same time Lincoln issued it, Northern Senators introduced legislation to amend the Constitution and end slavery everywhere, but it stalled in the House. When that happened, Lincoln himself fought to include the anti-slavery amendment in the Republican platform; and once enough like-minded Republicans were elected a year later, the North reintroduced and passed the bill through both chambers, and Lincoln signed it. Then the Northern states ratified it the following year and it became law. All slaves everywhere were freed (although in parts of Texas, your heroes managed to keep that knowledge from black people for a few more months).
So… what was the point of your question again?
You're quickly turning into a personal hero, Professor.
Lincoln campaigned to end the expansion of slavery into new territories and wanted to get rid of it completely, but not through war. Had the south come back, he would have accepted them with their slaves, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have also continued to try to end slavery through legal means.
The south knew what Lincoln wanted, and that's why they started the war before he had even been sworn in to do anything about it. Talk about the Party of No!
Geez.. Gary, get a grip! It's a comic strip. (rhyme unintended) and a damn good one, probably the best one going. Of COURSE Lincoln SAID the war was not about slavery! (1) He had to say that, politically, b/c it was too bloody and often inter-familial a conflict to justify such a cause to the many fighting who did not ever own slaves. and (2) He really was fighting over preserving the union, not on behalf of enslaved people. But it was not LINCOLN who really started the war, was it? Just because declaring secession did not, in itself, need to be violent a, does not mean the South didn't know full well that Lincoln would fight to preserve the Union wherever states seceded. And for South, is was about slavery– lots of issues, but it all came down to protecting their "way of life," which could not have existed without putting it on the backs of enslaved labor. But I'm sure Mr. Bell could put it all more precisely than I, a mere former Civics teacher, could do, since he has a point of personal privilege over your name-calling.
If you are really dumb enough to believe the text books and think the war was over slavery you need to be cancelled. What did Lincoln say until the day he set foot in Richmond,” If they come back they can keep their slaves”.”The President went on almost angrily….the General should never have dragged the Negro into the war. It is a war for a great national object and the Negro has nothing to do with it”. Since you’ll never listen to a white southerner take a minute a read “Forced Into Glory” by Lerone Bennett or better yet read something from the times when they could say anything they want and what did they say then? Tell me again how many slaves did the Emancipation Proclamation free?
"If you are really dumb enough to believe the text books…"
I'm dumb enough to believe the Vice President of the Confederate States of America, who said "The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. ***This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.*** Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact."
For the millionth time, the motives and intentions of Lincoln and the North have nothing to do with the fact that the South believed slavery's days were numbered, their way of life that was predicated on slavery was going to wither away, and that's why they seceded.
This is what I'm saying. See, Gary? I knew Darrin would answer it better than I did. Great work, Darrin, as always. Yours is the only comic I absolutely must see every day. [& my oops on not hitting reply for my answer to Gary's inflammatory post.] (P.S. My pen name's Gaelic & Yiddish, not the "suthr'n" nickname of Bubba. So I don't call it The War of Northern Aggression.)
I love the notion that any comic strip that believes textbooks should be cancelled. This implies that comics have a higher standard of accuracy than textbooks. It's okay if textbooks are misleading– but comics must accurately retell our history?
This weird argument tells you all you need to know about how desperately someone is trying to distract readers from the failings of the South. I'm from the South and I've accepted the South's role in slavery. Other regions (and the entire nation) will have other moral lapses at other times. However, that form of moral relativism doesn't give Southerners a license to forget our own mistakes.
You're quickly turning into a personal hero, Professor.
You're quickly turning into a personal hero, Professor.
Oops, I overlooked your last snarky question: "Tell me again how many slaves did the Emancipation Proclamation free?"
The Emancipation Proclamation freed all the slaves in secessionist states. Almost all of those slaves exercised their new freedom and fled across Union lines whenever Union troops entered their territories. The Proclamation didn't free the million slaves in the North, but at the same time Lincoln issued it, Northern Senators introduced legislation to amend the Constitution and end slavery everywhere, but it stalled in the House. When that happened, Lincoln himself fought to include the anti-slavery amendment in the Republican platform; and once enough like-minded Republicans were elected a year later, the North reintroduced and passed the bill through both chambers, and Lincoln signed it. Then the Northern states ratified it the following year and it became law. All slaves everywhere were freed (although in parts of Texas, your heroes managed to keep that knowledge from black people for a few more months).
So… what was the point of your question again?
Okay, it took a while for news of emancipation to reach Texas. On the other hand, that delay created the best holiday between Memorial Day and July 4.
Just realizing. Lemont is flipping channels instead of paying attention in therapy. Oy. What a waste of Lemont's money!
Candorville Obsessive Disorder. COD. Yep, I've got it.
You know you have a Candorville addiction when you begin to act like either Lemont, Clyde, or Susan.
Yeah, well, ChayaFradle, you misspelled "Jonathan." (insert pout here)
Point taken. Also, didn't realize "in this world" was a Cosby quote. Thanks for the heads up, Mr. Bell. I was just taking Lemont's lead when he was correcting the grammar of the girls talking on the bus bench.
Aw, I miss "Bones"! RIP De Kelley.
What? Someone died on Bones? OMG. Have to find out which character was De Kelley.
Looked it up. You meant STAR TREK Bones who was the doctor. Yes, he died in 1999 in California. May he RIP.
No, no, no, Chaya! What would that have to do w/ this cartoon? Bones is the doctor shown in the 2nd panel — from Lamont's favorite show (see the triangle-y emblem on most of his shirts), Classic Star Trek, Leonard "Bones" McCoy! He was played by the late, great DeForest ("De") Kelley! HIS quote is from when he was told his split personality symptoms were b/c that green-blooded Vulcan, Mr. Spock, had used a mind meld to transmit his "katra" to McCoy before dying in "The Wrath of Khan."
Always wondered what the triangle-y emblem meant. Watched Star Trek but didn't pay attention to the details. Thanks! 🙂
Brilliant!
"brought you inTO this world", but that shows the ed'l degree of the father. Johnathon, "an Master's Degree" should be "A" not "N". Yes, Dr. Noodle IS a quack. Thus, the comedy. Just an opinion.
It's quoted from the first episode of the Cosby Show. "Into" this world would be grammatically correct, but it's not how the line goes.
Hey…the other day, didn't his door read "Dr Noodle?" And isn't that an Master's Degree hanging on his wall? What kind of a quack uses the title Dr when he doesn't have the appropriate credentials?
Dr D., Ph.D.