Why 2012 election looks a lot like 1860

Dakota Voice ^ | June 4, 2011 | Star Parker

[Vor Lady]

Democracy is one man, one vote. The most votes wins and usually lords it over the losers, in other words, mob rule.

[RKBA Democrat]

“But IMO Lincoln, with what I think were good motives, did what he did to save the union and the nation and succeeded, unlike the present usurper.”

And in the process killed a mere 600K plus Americans, laid waste to large parts of the south, and essentially gutted the notion of states having the right to self-governance.

“But he doesn’t have the biggest and most impressive monument in Washington for nothing.”

Dictators often have large monuments.

There are other figures in U.S. history far more admirable and unifying in their message. We’ve had one in my lifetime; Ronald Reagan. Let’s hope we get a second.

[PeaRidge]

BillyBoy>>>>>>

Please, stop what you are doing....NOW...and pick up a copy of Plato's “Republic”.

Better yet, visit youtube and search for ‘Commanding Heights’.

[luvbach1]

So do you agree with what John Wilkes Booth did?

[RKBA Democrat]

“So do you agree with what John Wilkes Booth did?”

No. I don’t. I think things would have been much better if he had lived. If for no other reason than he would have had to have cleaned up his own mess. Andrew Johnson would have never been President.

And rather than endure this sort demigod mystique we’ve had to ever since as a result of his assassination, we would have a more objective writing of history.

[nathanbedford]

As ideologically impure as this betrays me to be, to this day I remain ambivalent about the wisdom of TARP. Some time ago I posted a compendium of 2 replies we set out my ambivalence:

I think most FReepers are well aware that I am no uncritical fan of George Bush. I posted lengthy and vituperative reply and even vanities complaining of his leadership and his spending. But I think the man is getting a bad rap on this thread on this issue.

Here are two posts, the first in which was published on September 30, 2008 in an attempt to balance ideology and practicality. To this day I do not know if the bailout done under Bush was well-founded or not. I suspect no one was published on this thread knows either.

The second post was published with the perspective of time.

I have not yet posted on the wisdom of the bail out because, frankly, I do not know what to say. I do not know what to say because of the things I do not know. First, I do not know if the bailout plan will work. Second, I do not know if the entire world system will crash without such a plan. Third, I do not know what the odds are of either a successful bailout or a world crash so I cannot weigh the severity of potential harm against the likelihood of the harm occurring.

I know what my ideology is, I am opposed to government meddling in the economy on the way up and on the way down either by picking winners or by rescuing losers. On the other hand, I recognize the extreme danger to the very survival of my ideology should the country descend into a depression. I am well read enough to know about the Great Depression and what it did to other democracies around the world and how close our own American democracy came to descending into communism. So, I do not know in which direction lurks a greater danger to the ideal of conservatism.

I do know that the Constitution as written prohibits virtually every facet of the proposed bailout plan. I know that no federal court that I can think of will conceivably declare any part of the plan to be repugnant to the constitution. Therefore, I know I cannot rely on the courts to protect the Constitution. However, I also know that the political will will triumph regardless of the Constitution and it is bootless to fall on one's ideological sword to no purpose.

I do not know what it is like to live through a depression although my father has described what it was like in the rural South when people literally had no money and had to contrive a barter economy. On the other hand, I do not know what it is like to live through a raging inflation such as was sustained here in Germany during the Weimar and even today in Zimbabwe. I do not know if doing nothing will generate a depression. I do not know if these bailouts will generate hyperinflation.

I do know that if abandoning my ideology long enough to countenance the bailout would save the country from a depression, I would do it in a heartbeat.

I am not sure that those people on these threads who on claim to know the answers to all these questions really know what they're talking about. I do not know if they are so sure about their facts only knew because they are so certain in their ideology. I do not know all if those people who are so certain in their bailout do so because otherwise their ox gets gored. So I do not know how to come down on one side or the other based on the motives of the partisans on either side of the bailout question. I simply do not know what their motives really are.

I do know that economics is called the dismal science and now I know why.

Given the state of my ignorance, I am going to embark on a new course, I am going to practice humility.

Here's the second post:

I have often put myself in Bush's moccasins when he is told by his Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve that if he does not act within hours the entire financial system of the Western world will crash, that nation will be devastated, millions will be thrown out of work, that the implications extend even to starvation and rioting in the streets.

If one acts precipitously one sets a bad precedent and wastes a couple of hundred billion dollars. On the other hand, if one fails to act when required, the consequences are horrible. You cannot investigate the situation and determine who is right in a few hours available, you can only look into the eyes of the man who implore you to act and hope what your read is more accurate than when you looked into Vladimir Putin's eyes.

Given that scenario, I think I would have made the same choice Bush made.

[PeaRidge]

Outstanding post!

But it should be considered as a primary truth that the Republican party of the 1850s and particularly in 1860 was drastically manipulating the slavery issue beyond its limits, and amplifying its alleged threat to the morality of distant people, (but more truthfully their labor), so as to generate voter support of the Lincoln party. This was in direct opposition to Southern capitalism, and nothing more than propaganda politics to get the votes.

We have exactly the same construct today with Obama stoking the fires of class jealousy and guilt. As more and more media outlets repeat this propaganda, the masses become convinced.....mental manipulation by availability cascading.

We must be mindful that the threat is not racial or class warfare, but the Democrats use of these issues to overturn the liberties originally guaranteed by the Constitution.

If class warfare or the economy cannot get Obama reelected, then the liklihood of a "black swan" looms larger.

When you can't get elected on the issues, you create a "crisis" that needs you as the solution.

A repeat of 1860.

[fightinJAG]

I agree. A “real” third party movement, however, will be one that either (1) displaces the GOP (takes over the party’s structure and remakes the party) or (2) replaces the GOP (forms a new party structurea).

Either way, a “third” party works in our system only once it has become popular and strong enough to become, essentially, one of the two MAJOR parties. The GOP, as we know it, either evolves into a true Tea Party or the GOP withers away as the Tea Party advances.

I’ve also been struck by the many similarities of this time in history to the 1860 election.

[RichInOC]

If Barack Obama is the solution to the problem…it’s a pretty stupid problem.

[PeaRidge]

Stupid problem or an electorate that does not know what it does not know??

[GOPsterinMA]

Yes, that’s true. Thank you for the ping.

[nathanbedford]

Good point!

[Jack Black]

CWII PING!

The CWII Ping List is short for Civil War II. It is NOT a list of people advocating another Civil War in America. It is a list of people who are interested in the parallels between the Civil War (or War Between the States, if you prefer) and our current situation, or more generally are noting the references to a 'coming Civil War' that are made in the press.

Of course sometimes this is merely a figure of speech, such as "The Tea Parties are fighting a civil war for the heart of the GOP". This would not merit a CWII ping.

On the other hand someone saying something like "The events in California are reminiscent of what happened in Yugoslavia in the period proceeding the Civil War" would merit a ping.

FR rules do not permit advocating for the overthrow of the Republic, and I am not aware of anyone doing so on the list. Still many do see that as the political climate worsens we may be heading in a direction that makes such a conflict all but inevitable, particularly if other avenues for resolving our differences are taken away. Such as widespread vote fraud by leftists making elections meaningless, or a small cadre of judges over-ruling all attempts to end destructive policies over the clear will of the people.

The correct keyword tag for the Civil War II ping list is "CWII".
Please Freep Mail me to get on the list

[catfish1957]

With the pending economic doom, two distinct possiblities are (1) government seizure of personal property, and (2) Suspension of 2012 election in the name of national security.

Thus CW...Part 2

I now this sounds extreme, but the economic news of the past few weeks shows indications of a perfect storm of doomsday that we all fear. (1) Foreign divergence treasuries (2) Possible devaluation of several currencies (3) Near across the board decrease in credit ratings of soverign debt, (4) economic sinking after even historical captial infusion. Hang on folks, the ride is getting ready to get rough.

[wardaddy]

wrong election..Johnson was 1864

a Southern collaborator, he saw the light when he realized what they were really up to after our defeat...and God bless him

and as a Southerner I’m glad to give thanks to him everyday for that...had he failed he would have never recovered and it took long enough as it was

he is about all that kept the Radical Republicans from utterly destroying my homeland..after we were already defeated...and had accepted more moderate terms like those offered by Sherman, Grant and Lincoln had desired...not the scorched earth and disenfranchisement and confiscations of the Radicals...this notion around here that the Radical Reconstruction Republicans were heroes of conservatism is inconsistent with those desiring less government intrusion

I know Sumner, Stevens, and the other Northern avengers are popular here but I’ll pass

thanks

in any event if we have another such pivotal election as 1860, let’s just hope the Winner gets more than the 38% of the popular vote Abe got

[wardaddy]

nice especially about those who feel they are all rascals...they are but some worse than others

and the differences are stark over social issues and taxation and foreign policy

this is where times are very different from my youth

there actually is a profound difference in ideology

in the 60s when I grew up..socially southern Democrats and the Goldwater-Reagan GOP had more in common just as did the Rockefeller-Weicker GOP with the greater Kennedy style Democrats...and those two branches each voted more alike which gave an impression they were not much different..after LBJ, the GOP under Nixon started to resemble a more traditional values outfit and southerners(and others) abandoned by the LBJ democrats went GOP...Tower, Lott etc...if that had not happened the GOP would have never had the successes it had in the 70s, 80s and so forth...that shift...espcially with the population growth in the South and rise in electoral votes

granted beltway GOP are soft but there is a division today that is stark between folks

I would say we are at a division as stark as anytime since 1860 ...on par with FDR and Union socialist turmoil in the 30s and the youth revolt and Vietnam conflict of the 1960s

it's just the issues that we disagree on as a nation are hard to compromise on and all reflect a complete different idea of freedom and government role and values

we don't have slavery or what to do with frontier lands/new states as issues like in 1860 but we are at the same type of crossroads...in fact we are more like at a pivotal U-turn

[wardaddy]

I'm ambivalent about Lincoln.

But if you want to avert a Civil War then he would not be my first pick now would he?

And to prosecute a war ?

that is debatable

to give inspiring speeches and do WHATEVER it took to win...unlike today say when we prosecute wars...then yes...you might have a point.

to offer decent terms to the states he defeated...well there he does have my undying respect and that sets him apart from the jackals that were chomping at the bit behind him to destroy the south as punishment...I believe his written desires at the end of the war prove he did want reconciliation which I admire about him...had he not been cowardly assassinated we might have avoided the pleasures of Reconstruction

[Jack Black]

It is my judgment that his conduct as Commander-in-Chief was not so unreasonable given the political pressures on him and the very grave threat to his vision of the Union which vision, after all, has come to be accepted throughout the land as it was decided of the field of strife.

But there was law, and a Constitution, and a tradition of independent states, none of which Lincon followed, instead following his "vision" as you put it. That is the method of the tyrant. Some tyrants are good, such as Octavius and others are evil, such as Pol Pot, but all of them put there vision above the existing order.

As to whether his vision is "accepted throughout the land", well so is abortion. Just because something is accepted does not make it right.

Lincoln freed the slaves and enslaved free men. Whereas before the Civil War men were citizens of their states today we are all federal citizens, and 5 people in black robes tell us what kind of lightbulbs we must buy. Lincoln is the most central character in the ending of the Old Republic and the establishment of the increasingly despotic central state that we all must serve today.

[wardaddy]

good point

[fabian]

...There is no issue at play in America today which comes close to duplicating the matter of slavery which tore the Union apart a century and a half ago ...really?
How about the excessive taxation and domination of the federal government and the states too? So bad now that many pensions and wages of state and federal employees are close to double of those in the private sector. We are litterally slaves to a partial socialist system and that is similar to the slavery issue back before the civil war. Enter into the mix the murder of millions of unborn babies as promoted by the feds, and you have a an even more volatile and split nation today. When we do not own our own wages and can be put in jail for not paying that tribute, and our homes can be taken away from us for not paying a huge property tax which supports a socialist school system...sorry, we have already lost our nation and it is going to have to be rewon.