Freedom of speech also let's us sit around and discuss how wrong "Those People" are.

For those who don't know it, "Those People" was the term General Robert E. Lee used when speaking of the Union army.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country. It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.

Robert E. Lee wrote:

Robert E. Lee was not in favor of slavery.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

That's... An interesting way of interpreting that quote.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 

Probably because it wasn't an interpretation of the quote at all. I don't believe what I said was something new, most people familiar with Civil War and history of that time frame are aware of it.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

It is true Lee wasn't "in favor" of slavery. Yet he was a dichotomy. He didn't free his family's slaves. He prefered to stay with Virgina instead of the Union. He led open rebellion. Even if he didn't believe in slavery, he didn't feel the Black man was his equal either.

Duty and honor of the nineteenth century Southern plantation owner were chains that tied them too.

I was recently reading how Mr Lincoln was very much surprised when there wasn't a counter revolt in the South. He truly expected the majority of people to shout down the few who advocated secession. Instead roughly 80-90% of the people supported secession in one way or another instead of the 10-20% he thought it would be. He misunderstood how strong their traditions and society were.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

Without the Civil War slavery would have remained in the South until the 20th century. It wouldn't have been expanded into the territories but it would have existed in the deep South.

With mechanization it would have been less viable. More Blacks would have been given their freedom. Landowners would have realized it's cheaper to give them a subsistence wage (and then charge for rent and supplies) than it was to feed and clothe them. Plus keep men around in case of an escape.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

Yes, I do believe the Civil War, regardless of Emancipation Proclamation, was the beginning of the end of slavery. However, back to my inquiry/wonder -- I don't believe it can be safely assumed because since cause of the Civil War was not to end slavery, it was about the power of the national government over territories not yet slave states. If the war ended prior to the Emancipation Proclamation, just when would slavery have ended? 10 years? 20? 50?

I just believe that if Lee lead the military for Union (assuming Virginia did not secede) that Lee would have crushed Confederacy swiftly and we don't get to the Emancipation Proclamation, which was instituted because the North needed more soldiers and to change the narrative of the war from political to moral.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool