|
||||||
![]() |
Recent Posts | Search by username | ![]() |
Contact Us | ![]() |
Login | ![]() |
Register |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
| Moderated by: Aethelred |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
HARGIS Original500© Member
|
Posted: 01:26 am |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I posted a topic about Freemasons a while back because I was going to be doing my Senior Thesis on it. Well, due to the lack of solid evidence and the overwhelming amount of conspiracy theories I have changed my topic. Anyway, I am doing it on John Brown and the Pottawatomie Massacre. I am looking to say that John Brown was not a crazed terrorist, but more of a monomaniac raised in an atmosphere that hated slaveholders and he just got a little carried away before everyone else did. What say you? *This isn't me trying to get people to do my work for me, I am just interested to hear other points of view about it.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HARGIS Original500© Member
|
Posted: 05:33 am |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I finished my first semester of this paper and I have found that neither of my first two options were really true. He was not liked by the Southerners (obviously), but he was also not liked by the Free Soil Party. He was isolated as one of the few people that believed that African-Americans were equals. Also, I have concluded that John Brown did not commit the acts of violence for the cause of slavery, but rather the cause of his own survival.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
shirohniichan Original500© Member Obscurius per obscurum
|
Posted: 08:17 pm |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HARGIS wrote: Also, I have concluded that John Brown did not commit the acts of violence for the cause of slavery, but rather the cause of his own survival. I haven't read much about John Brown, so could you tell me what led you to your conclusion that he didn't commit acts of violence for the cause of slavery? I'd be interested to know. I can't hear the Battlehymn of the Republic without thinking of: John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave; John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave; John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave; His soul's marching on!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
shirohniichan Original500© Member Obscurius per obscurum
|
Posted: 11:06 pm |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It stated in chapter 151, section12 of the ruffian code that, “Any free person, by speaking or by writing, assert or maintain that persons have not the right to hold slaves in this Territory…shall be guilty of felony, and punished by imprisonment at hard labor for a term of not less than two years.” Gee, they didn't think much of free speech, did they? I don't sympathize with violent abolitionists, but I certainly don't sympathize with slave owners or those who committed violence to silence those who spoke out against it. I have to tip my hat to the Quakers for their part in running the Underground Railroad, even if I don't like their theology.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
foxglovepress Forum-Blogger© Original500© Member NON-PC!!
|
Posted: 12:12 am |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HARGIS wrote: I posted a topic about Freemasons a while back because I was going to be doing my Senior Thesis on it. Well, due to the lack of solid evidence and the overwhelming amount of conspiracy theories I have changed my topic. I go with a Patriot who was out of touch with reality. I think he may have been one of a few who really knew what was right, and also knew trying to work with his government, was a waste of time and energy! Kind of like todays patriots who are against the illegal invasion. I haven't read anything as of yet that tells me he was just a terrorist. Is that word used to describe him TODAY? Or did they call him a Terrorist back then? Interesting word, it kind of depends on who's using it. Are they meaning "someone against his country....or someone against his government?"
![]() Justice for Mark.....Imprison Employers Who Hire ILLEGALS! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HARGIS Original500© Member
|
Posted: 05:51 am |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shirohniichan wrote: It stated in chapter 151, section12 of the ruffian code that, “Any free person, by speaking or by writing, assert or maintain that persons have not the right to hold slaves in this Territory…shall be guilty of felony, and punished by imprisonment at hard labor for a term of not less than two years.” That is another interesting point. There were less than 200 slaves in the territory during this time. Very few, if any, of the men around Osawatomie were slave owners. Not only did John Brown disagree with the pro-slavery men, he also disagreed with many of the abolitionists. The Free Soil Party members only wanted abolition for the good of the white laborer (wages would increase w/out slavery). John Brown was for 100% equal rights for African-Americans (which was not really popular in 1856). The man that kicked Brown out of Kansas was a Free Soil leader. Last edited on 05:52 am by HARGIS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
jpd1975 Guardian1000© Member jpd1975
|
Posted: 08:04 am |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The term terrorist is oft applied to someone by an establishment or government that has a vested interest in the "status quo." IF you asked King George III, George Washington and the rest of the fonding fathers were terrorists. The Jews that fought the British Imperial presence in Palestine (Present day Israel) were labeled terrorists. Our current administration here applies the label not only to Muslims that intend to commit violent acts but also to citizens that believe that there may be US government complicity in 9/11. I guess the point of my post is, that the term "Terrorist" is subjective. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Site Supporters | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Posts Of The Day | Mock Forums | WowClassic | |