14th November 2012, 6:28 AM
You seem to be missing a LOT of the history of Oklahoma. No worries, us Oklahomans get our sad pathetic origin story drilled into us at a very young age.
Welcome to Oklahoma, last stop on the trail of tears. During the civil war, Oklahoma was native American territory. It's true that confed forces attempted to utilize Oklahoma, but no real strong presence was ever really set up there (especially after union forces showed up later and led a decisive charge). It was outsiders coming in and concripting aid from native American tribes, you see. There are no "had Oklahoma been a state" imaginings to be had, because Oklahoma was pretty much entirely inhabited by native Americans who wouldn't have wanted to be a state. The question of support of secession is nonsensical in this case. They were already an independent territory and didn't want to join the confederacy either. And yes, the native American tribes used slaves themselves, but that's got pretty much no bearing on Oklahoma after being forcibly settled by white Americans. They were two completely different societies, one stepping on the other to make room for themselves.
It's a sad and pathetic history, but my point is, Oklahoma was essentially a non-player in the civil war, and never really could have been one. Heck, when Oklahoma was first drafted as a state, it was a democrat leaning state. It actually stayed democrat for many decades at that, and it's relatively recent in it's history that it got to a 2/3 republican majority. This makes sense since immigrants to the state came from both above and below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_in..._Civil_War
Saying southern support is Oklahoma history is like saying thunder bird worship is part of American history. Technically true by region, but it ignores the vast changes in population and which society was in charge at the time. Oklahoma is, in many ways, a sort of mini-America.
Welcome to Oklahoma, last stop on the trail of tears. During the civil war, Oklahoma was native American territory. It's true that confed forces attempted to utilize Oklahoma, but no real strong presence was ever really set up there (especially after union forces showed up later and led a decisive charge). It was outsiders coming in and concripting aid from native American tribes, you see. There are no "had Oklahoma been a state" imaginings to be had, because Oklahoma was pretty much entirely inhabited by native Americans who wouldn't have wanted to be a state. The question of support of secession is nonsensical in this case. They were already an independent territory and didn't want to join the confederacy either. And yes, the native American tribes used slaves themselves, but that's got pretty much no bearing on Oklahoma after being forcibly settled by white Americans. They were two completely different societies, one stepping on the other to make room for themselves.
It's a sad and pathetic history, but my point is, Oklahoma was essentially a non-player in the civil war, and never really could have been one. Heck, when Oklahoma was first drafted as a state, it was a democrat leaning state. It actually stayed democrat for many decades at that, and it's relatively recent in it's history that it got to a 2/3 republican majority. This makes sense since immigrants to the state came from both above and below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_in..._Civil_War
Saying southern support is Oklahoma history is like saying thunder bird worship is part of American history. Technically true by region, but it ignores the vast changes in population and which society was in charge at the time. Oklahoma is, in many ways, a sort of mini-America.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)