I might have come off as if I thought all the racism and oppression was contained within the slave states. I do not. I understand that the U.S. as a whole has been and continues to be oppressive and racist in some ways. But speaking strictly on the issue of slavery and racism, I charge that the confederacy was and the southern states are far worse than the north ever was.

>The US was built on the backs of slaves.
>I find it hard to pin the blame solely on
>the failed govt of the confederacy when
>the federal US govt promoted, maintained,
>and encouraged slavery in America from its
>inception

I'm at work right now and don't have any of my history sources with me so I might not be 100% accurate in everything I say, but except for border states like kentucky, I believe all the northern states had already abolished slavery either in the last years of the 18th century or the first 20 years of the 19th century. And that had to do with a mixture of idealism and the growth of industry. So the U.S. (counting from 1789 on)was built on the backs of southern slaves. And to say the federal government prompted, maintained and encouraged slavery from its inception is not entirely accurate. Many people in the govt wanted to end the slave trade immediately, but because of the south they had to comprimise and wait till 1807. Many people wanted all new territories acquired to be free but because of the south they had to comprimise. Basically, when the U.S. as a whole maintained or encouraged slavery, it is only representative of the southern states wishes. I think someone said in the 1830's that eventually there would be no comprimise and that the north and the south would have to fight.

>He was also overruled by many northern
>delegates as well. The north is just as
>notoriously racist as the south is.

I might not be remembering correctly but I think if there had been no southern delegation the clause that was deleted from the constitution recoginzing the humanity of africans might have been included. And of course the north was as racist as the south but if I had to choose, I would rather deal with people who hate the black man as a person but acknowledge that he is a human being (the north), than with people who like the black man as a individual(like you would a dog) but think of him as an animal (the south).

>Many of the large plantation owners still
>retained their money and political clout and
>kept their slaves in the form of sharecroppers.
>The US federal govt did very little to correct
>the situation. So it was a poor man's war cause
>the rich stayed rich and powerful.

>To me, that greater oppressor still has more
>control over the course of our lives than the
>confederacy ever would have (especially since
>the confederacy didn't want a centralized power
>conglomerate like we have now). The US still
>bears the stigma of racism and slavery. In my
>opinion, this place (the US) has not made the
>kind of attempts at rectifying the situation
>that it created and allowed to flourish. I
>hope this clarification will explain

I agree with most of this, however, you seem to think that the U.S. is worst than the confederacy and that is where we diverge. The U.S. has done many bad things but I do sincerely believe that the country continues to improve and progress. And at a point in its history when it was trying to progress by acknowledging the humanity of africans, the confederacy left the union because it would not recognize this. So that is why I think the confederacy is worse than the U.S. as a whole becuase it symbolizes reactionism, racism, and slavery. The U.S. stumbles and damn near falls down but it continues to move forward. The confederacy represents slavery and intolerance first and foremost, if you want you can say it represented resistance to big government second, but similar to what I said earlier, I'll take a big government that recognizes my humanity than a less intrusive one that doesn't.
Peace.