Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

MODERATOR's NOTE Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Joseph E. Johnston

Expand Messages
  • ks
    Please take this to private email. The thread on Joe Johnston can continue, but this concerning slavery is off limits. Thank you. Pat ... From: Tom Mix To:
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 5 3:26 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Please take this to private email.   The thread on Joe Johnston can continue, but this concerning slavery is off limits.
       
      Thank you.
       
      Pat
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Tom Mix
      Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 2:50 PM
      Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: Joseph E. Johnston

      So, youÂ’re counting slave ownership as property and property as a means to achieving the middle class standard then I guess they were.  If you want to count that as middle class go ahead. But they sure were not middle class when those slaves were no longer property.  That was not nor could it ever be viewed as developing a middle class when they went straight to the bottom with out the slave labor and with the need to pay workers, which led to the poverty stricken share croppers throughout the South. They sure were not middle class. You ever seen share croppers homes?  Sure some isolated ones would be considered nice but most about 80-90% were poverty level shacks.  Where as the North was in the process of developing a thriving middle class that would get better as time wore on where as the South took about another 50-60 years to get a defined middle class.

       

      No reason to get in a snit though.  If your values are the type to reflect the southern aristocracy and total class based system as a fine society, go ahead.

      Tom  

       

      -----Original Message-----
      From: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:civilwarwes t@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of James W. Durney
      Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:04 AM
      To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroupscom
      Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Joseph E. Johnston

       

      --- In civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com, "Tom Mix" <tmix@...> wrote:
      >
      > They had a developing one, yes. True growth would come in the later
      decades
      > but it was clearly on its way in New England and else where, like
      the steel
      > mills in Pennsylvania and Indiana for example. They provided
      livable wages
      > so a middle class could develop as opposed to slave labor in the
      South.
      > When, T.R. took over as President his trust busting efforts
      increased this
      > growth. The advent of the assembly line affording more work
      opportunities
      > in Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and Illinois created employment
      opportunities and
      > enhanced the growth of the middle class and was a great part of the
      mass
      > exodus of black southerners to the north for these better paying
      jobs. It
      > all started around this time period. The South on the other would
      not have a
      > fully developed middle class until after WW II.
      >
      > Tom
      >
      >

      Tom, you damned the South for having no middle class prior to the
      war. Yet you say that New England had a "developing one" and it
      would not be until TR that this happens in much of the nation. The
      South had a higher average income than the North in 1860. Slave
      ownership, a major sign of wealth, was more common than ownership of
      stock was in the 1950s. The shops, businesses and factories were
      owned and managed by the middle class just as they were in the rest
      of the nation.

    • James W. Durney
      ... continue, but this concerning slavery is off limits. ... Pat, I am sorry for continuing this. I read from where I left off and answered then read your
      Message 2 of 2 , Aug 5 4:04 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "ks" <ks@...> wrote:
        >
        > Please take this to private email. The thread on Joe Johnston can
        continue, but this concerning slavery is off limits.
        >
        > Thank you.
        >
        > Pat

        Pat, I am sorry for continuing this. I read from where I left off and
        answered then read your message. Please delete my prior post.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.