[allmendream]

And even if they were willing to sell, who says they wouldn't use the proceeds of the sale to import more slaves.

Ron Paul is a nutjob kook, as are his supporters.

[rabscuttle385]

And even if they were willing to sell, who says they wouldn't use the proceeds of the sale to import more slaves.

The importation of slaves into the United States was prohibited by an Act of Congress, signed into law by then Pres. Jefferson, in Mar. 1807, and effective on 1 Jan. 1808, the earliest date allowable under the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 9.

[littleharbour]

I’m not in the slightest a Ron Paul supporter and I think the slave purchase idea is ridiculous, but he’s correct in his assessment of Lincoln. Lincoln freed the slaves to help win the war, he did not fight the war to free the slaves (i.e. Lincoln’s preferred solution was to ship the slaves back to Africa, a solution which turned out to be logistically impractical). The North did not want free blacks in their cities (see NYC riots) and when tens of thousands of the former slaves eventually migrated to Northern cities, they were treated like dirt and dumped into ghettos. Lincoln destroyed the independent authority of the States and ensured the dominance of the Federal behemoth that continues to grow its power every day.

Slavery would have died a natural death in the South just as it did in the North, through time and education. Vermont abolished slavery in 1777, but it wasn’t until 1804 that New Jersey became the last northern state to follow suit. Nobody suggested making war against NJ to force them into compliance.

I have no time for those who “see the light” and then demand that all others immediately follow suit. The Northern elite were like a life long smoker who suddenly quits and then becomes an anti-smoking zealot hounding as pariahs all those who disagree (and no, I’m not trying to equate smoking with slavery).