Posted on 09/02/2019 4:35:14 PM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
Why don’t you blame the perpetrators for the harm they did to this country!?!
The destruction you whine about was quite clearly caused by failed Presidential candidate John C Breckinridge and his fellow ‘fire eaters’
The democrats still controlled the Senate, had a strong position in the House, absolutely ruled he Judiciary.
Yet rather than accepting their first minority role in a long time, they commented a bloody civil war !
Lincoln wanted to send all blacks to Liberia, or Central America, after the war.
So why in the hell did he order the invasion and burning of the South ? Why did Lincoln really wage that horrible war ?
Answer : The winners write the history books.
Google : “ Lincoln-repatriation.
From the Brits. Fought the Dem’s to free them only to go into segregation and separate but equal under the Dem’s., and the KKK to intimidate and keep them submissive.
Check-it-out ping
I’ve spent 30 years in China and 29 in America. I observed this black and white thing from start. America made 2 mistakes on slavery. 1) import totally incompatible races into their living space over some cotton trade 2) they ended slavery in a wrong way. America should have relocated slaves out of country. From my reading consensus among blacks were over 90% of blacks wanted out of America. They did not do it.
I admire Americans ingenuity. No one in the world can be compared to Americans.
But as race or ethnic group(?) they are not as wise as Chinese
Given current demographics trend, they will lose this country in just one century or so. So unfortunate. I don’t know why they seem not able to attach themselves to this land culturally and spiritually, even though they had lost so many lives over it. They never call her motherland. God, it’s f$&king tragic to see that they lose their county over some cotton trade. What a tragedy. That’s why I really despise southern whites no matter how talented or gifted they are individually
The right of secession in response to tyranny is absolute. There just was no tyranny, as you point out.
I was pointing out that the Founders didn’t create slavery.
Lincoln’s point was that slavery was already here. Is this something you are intending on disputing?
Well, unless you count the slaves. They would agree that there was a tyranny.
For the corrupt democrats? Nope.
They were well positioned to ride out four years of minority government.
If they had not trashed their own party, splitting it in two, then even the election outcome could have been different.
But sore Gore loser Breckenridge took his second place finish badly and decided to tear down the country instead.
I believe that to this day, he is the only person expelled from the Senate for treason...
...and then he immediately went out and waged war against the country - as a Major General and then Secretary of war.
ah, if only this youh had had some maturity and wisdom!
I’ve always taken that statement that “all men are created equal” to be one pointed at King George. The monarchy held(holds) that they have a right to rule by virtue of their birth. So “all men are created equal” means that the king wasn’t created to lord over them. The idea that all men are otherwise created equal is patently absurd.
Diversity is our strength?
Wynyn need to chose wisely?
“That’s why I really despise southern whites no matter how talented or gifted they are individually”
That’s why I really despise people from Chang’an no matter how talented or gifted....
I have often pointed out Thomas Jefferson's hypocrisy on the issue, but I have also said many times that no one deserves more credit than he for setting in the motion the machinery that would eventually accomplish the task.
Those five words, said when they were, became like a snowball cast down the top of a mountain, and Thomas Jefferson was the man who threw it.
I do. Lincoln should have left them alone. They had a right to independence if they wanted it, and slavery would have withered and died eventually on it's own. It didn't need 750,000 people to be killed, and massive destruction across the states of people who just wanted to be left alone to accomplish it.
Yet rather than accepting their first minority role in a long time, they commented a bloody civil war !
They didn't commit a civil war. Lincoln turned their efforts to be independent into a war of subjugation. It was he that initiated the first aggressive action against them by sending that war fleet to attack them.
Had Lincoln not sent that fleet of warships, Sumter would have been evacuated peacefully, and there would have been no war. Lincoln needed a war, and so he started one.
Lincoln himself was a flaming racist - even by the standards of his own day. His numerous public statements amply demonstrate this.
I can tell you in one word. "Money."
An independent South represented a horrible financial threat to the wealthy interests of the North East. (Same people controlling the nation today.)
The South produced 73% of all export trade to Europe, but the laws had been jiggered to funnel all that money back through New York, where Washington DC collected it's cut.
With the South leaving, that 230 million dollars per year in trade would move out of New York, and land in Southern port cities, thereby seriously damaging New York shipping, banking, insurance, warehousing, and so forth.
Not only that, but with the South going independent, European goods would be flooding the Southern port cities, and would be distributed along all the transportation networks then in existence, like the Mississippi, where it would then be shipped to all the midwestern states, seriously hurting the manufacturing industry in the North Eastern part of the country.
The Wealthy Liberal money powers of the North East would have been badly hurt if the South became independent, so they exerted their influence over Lincoln to get a war they very badly needed to stop the south from ruining their businesses.
It was about money the North would lose as a result of the South cutting them out of the European trade, and destroying their protectionist laws.
Took me some years to piece all of this together, but that is exactly what the economic evidence shows. The existing money powers in the North would have been destroyed had the South kept it's independence.
He didn't nibble at the Constitution. He comprehensively trashed it. Its difficult to think of a single one of the Bill of Rights he did not trample.
No. I didn't really take any issues with what you posted. I can see what Lincoln is saying on this matter, and I have no objection at all to it.
But I don't think Lincoln was as supportive of the founders and what they created as he is talked up to be. He clearly did much damage to constitutional law, and he utterly destroyed the principle embodied in the Declaration of Independence.
I believe you are articulating it the way the signers of the Declaration (representing their states) intended it to be understood.
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.