Your argument is pretty much "Hooray! Union!"
No depth, no attempt to grasp an alternate perspective, just mindless cheer leading for what you wish to believe.
Posted on 08/11/2015 1:11:21 PM PDT by iowamark
Your argument is pretty much "Hooray! Union!"
No depth, no attempt to grasp an alternate perspective, just mindless cheer leading for what you wish to believe.
Fighting for his country, right or wrong is a motivation you reject? I think you misspoke. Even though I disagree with you constantly, I do not believe you to be against the concept of fighting for your country even when they are wrong.
BTW: Did you notice the buzzing of a gnat?
Christie vetoes NJ bill that would allow transgenders to change their birth certificates
They are simply not content with any society that isn't changing it's moral positions. This is why concepts such as "change" and "equality" are so ubiquitous on the left.
They always want to force society to "change" and they always want to force "equality" on it. (that's what communism is.)
"Change" and "Equality" is more or less their mantra, and this is not *MY* recent observation, this is the thesis of the book "Leftism Revisited" by Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihin.
It has a foreword by William F. Buckley, so it's conservative pedigree is well earned. I suggest more people read it because it gives great insight into the forces with which we are contesting.
I am pro-USA. I am anti-slavery. I am glad that we won our independence and I am glad that the USA survived the 1860's intact.
There is no cognitive dissonance. See post 933 above. I apply those same rules to both struggles.
The US FedGov is a "Titanic", and the math says it's going to sink.
If we are creating a Titanic, it is our fault. I see no point in trying to blame dead people for what we do.
This is no comfort to those of us who want to escape the sinking should the need arise.
This is not a jail and you have a right to leave anytime you want. But, you can only take with you the people who want to join you. Leave your neighbors out of it.
As a practical matter, you can even declare independence and stay here. Put on a wig and post a declaration on your gate. So long as you're not deemed a danger to yourself or others, I don't think anyone will bother you. It will be when you try to interfere with the operation of the government that you'll run into trouble. So, leave the mailman alone.
That I am unhappy that 600 thousand people were unnecessarily killed 150 years ago is completely beside the point.
I join you in wishing things had been different. I am also unhappy that slavery was once legal. It's normal for us to wish that we could change our history, but we need to accept that we can't.
I’ll try to read it when I get back. ;-)
What was the Federal Government telling the states they had to do before secession?
NO ... and HELL NO
Why won’t DoodleDawg answer that question?
One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease.
A. Lincoln
I can’t speak for DD ... However I for one will be glad when the south rises again against the Federals. I suspect that the outcome will be somewhat different in CW2. Oh ... and for the record, I am very anti-slavery.
Maybe you should try refraining from hijacking the threads.
Allow occupation and payment of tribute.
Where was the occupation and payment of tribute taking place in December of 1860 when the states began declaring secession?
They also almost never give a frame of reference about where they are from or what they are
I think many are retreads and fly from the same nest
It’s no coincidence 10 years back when it was discovered to be a black GOP group in Maryland who was sending out racist freepmail to known black Freepers all the while pretending to be from Stormfront
Likewise there was a homosexual black poster sometime back caught stirring up crap here
And #3fan and many many others busted for being not what they appeared or just a lib after all...,I can name 7-10 off my head
Anyone ask if they like
It’s a concerted effort to bash Dixie here mostly by lefties and occasionally minorities of some sort
And just a few young stupids
Plus just look how many fled to wideawakes in 2007
Same ilk
Actually he's asking the question from the Confederate point of view. What were the Confederates goal in waging their war? To defend slavery. I would have thought that was obvious.
There was absolutely no reason for Southern plantation owners to move North with their slaves, and they had no inclination to do so. There was also evidence that slaveholders would not migrate into the Territories.
However, they were actually demanding the preservation of equal guarantees of application of federal laws.
Slavery was dying in the rest of the world. It had little chance of spreading further into new territories of the continent. If slavery spread, then it would take the slaves out of the United States.;
Slavery had reached the limits imposed on its expansion by geography and crop climate as Kansas, New Mexico, and Utah amply showed.
The census of 1860 verified this and revealed that there were precisely two slaves in Kansas, and only a handful more in all the remaining territories.
Slavery was not a genuine issue and there was no need to go to war over it. The men of 1860-1 allowed an academic argument about an imaginary slave in an impossible place to end in a bloody civil war.
If the question was merely one of slavery in the territories, then competent political leadership would have been able to cope with it.
Instead, the Northern political class, seeing that the South was steadily becoming a minority in the United States, remained frustrated at the South's ability to cling to power. Not only was the Northern stand against the threat of slavery in the territories an act , but Northern expressions of moral repugnance towards slavery were just hypocritical self-serving grandstanding.
Whether he is asking the question from the Confederate's point of view is irrelevant. They did not have control over the prosecution of the war. It is not their choice to keep the war going, it was the Union reasons that kept the war going.
Once again I point out to you, that if "slavery" was the reason and the only reason why the confederates fought, then why didn't they simply rejoin the Union? Lincoln was saying they could keep their slavery, and they had it before Lincoln became President, so why would they fight for something which the other side was willing to give them?
Again, why would they need to fight for something which the other side was willing to give them?
The facts simply do not support the contention that either side was fighting over slavery, because slavery was not being threatened by the war. (at first.)
What was being threatened by the war was Independence. That was the non negotiable. Slavery was an acceptable compromise for the Union, an Independent South was not.
Maybe South haters like you should expose yourselves for the liberal idiots that you really are. Oh did miss cowardly too.
Well, if Pea Ridge's postings on the finances are accurate, and I believe them to be the most accurate I have yet seen, then the Federal Government was telling 20% of the population (the Southern States) to pay for 50%-80% of the Government.
Apparently the Southern states payed the vast majority of all the tariffs which funded the nation, and they didn't like it. Who would?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.