Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereMilitary Forum, History, Guns, Survival topics › new civil war thread
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2  Send TopicPrint
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) new civil war thread (Read 3,366 times)
Elmer Fudd
LNF House Leader
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
****
Offline


Posts: 7,791
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
new civil war thread
Oct 16th, 2013 at 8:54pm
Print Post  
1.  the war began because the south seceded.
2.  the overwhelming reason the south seceded (the ONLY reason mentioned in their secession speeches) was the perceived threat to slavery. 
3.  the emancipation proclamation was issued during the war to bolster the will of a north growing tired of it AND to permanently abolish slavery so that no future secession would ever occur over any perceived threat to the institution. 
4.  most northerners cared no more for freeing slaves than the average southerner did.  but, as is the case with most issues, the ones that DO care make a lot more noise than the ones that DON'T.  Why would anybody make a lot of noise over something they don't care about?
5.  There were more than a few southerners who hated slavery.  But they were not in charge.

Executive summary - the north did not join the battle to free slaves.  They joined the battle to restore the union.  The union was rendered asunder by secession, the main cause of which was the perceived threat to slavery.  Not no stinking tariffs.
  

non sumus stulti
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Frank1
LNF Majority Leader
***
Offline


Posts: 6,659
Joined: May 18th, 2005
Gender: Male
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #1 - Oct 16th, 2013 at 9:45pm
Print Post  
Not much to disagree with there.

Outside of slavery, the south did have some good anti-industrial, agrarian values, and values of localism, but these were not why they seceded.

The powerful men in the South were slave owners and they felt threatened by ol' Abe Lincoln.
  


To say homo sapiens, is to say Homo religiosus; there is no man without God. ~Frithjof Schuon
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TowardLiberty
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

anti-state, anti-war and
pro-market

Posts: 29,918
Location: Houston
Joined: Apr 6th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #2 - Oct 25th, 2013 at 11:04am
Print Post  
Old Abe's threat of invasion if his tax increases were not accepted definitely stoked the fires of rebellion.

The Civil War was about power and politics. It was regional economics.
« Last Edit: Oct 27th, 2013 at 12:37pm by TowardLiberty »  

"Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist." J M Keynes

"In the first place, the dichotomy between "theoretical" and "practical" is a false one. In economics, all arguments are theoretical. And, since economics discusses the real world, these theoretical arguments are by their nature "practical" ones as well." M Rothbard
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Elmer Fudd
LNF House Leader
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
****
Offline


Posts: 7,791
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #3 - Oct 25th, 2013 at 11:03pm
Print Post  
TowardLiberty wrote on Oct 25th, 2013 at 11:04am:
Old Abe's threat if invasion is his tax increases were not accepted definitely stoked the fires of rebellion.

The Civil War was about power and politics. It was regional economics.


Many things stoked the fires.  But the perceived threat to slavery is what lit it.
  

non sumus stulti
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PaleoCon
LNF Staffer2
**
Offline

Ne sutor ultra crepidam.
Ubi dubium ibi libertas

Posts: 55
Joined: Sep 18th, 2013
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #4 - Dec 12th, 2014 at 1:03pm
Print Post  
Elmer Fudd wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 8:54pm:
1.  the war began because the south seceded.


No, the war began because Lincoln illegally tried to maintain an armed occupation force in the harbor of the LEGALLY seceded and independent state of South Carolina.

Elmer Fudd wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 8:54pm:
2.  the overwhelming reason the south seceded (the ONLY reason mentioned in their secession speeches) was the perceived threat to slavery. 


Slavery was not the reason for the South's LEGAL secession; if it was, the North surrendered on March 2, 1861. Google the "Corwin Amendment".  All a LEGALLY seceded state had to do to make slavery constitutionally permanent was to revoke their secession, return to the union and ratify this amendment. None did because the real reason that the South seceded was the ever increasing federal takeover of power facilitated by the Northern states. The war was not about slavery. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment

Elmer Fudd wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 8:54pm:
3.  the emancipation proclamation was issued during the war to bolster the will of a north growing tired of it AND to permanently abolish slavery so that no future secession would ever occur over any perceived threat to the institution. 


Have you ever read the EP?  Roll Eyes Tyrant Lincoln freed NO slaves with this. Had Sherman been less successful in his despicable "march", Lincoln would have lost the 1864 election over this proclamation.

Elmer Fudd wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 8:54pm:
4.  most northerners cared no more for freeing slaves than the average southerner did.  but, as is the case with most issues, the ones that DO care make a lot more noise than the ones that DON'T.  Why would anybody make a lot of noise over something they don't care about?


The (still pending) Corwin Amendment, passed almost exclusively by NORTHERN legislators, proves that point. Lincoln and the North could care less about the slaves.  Blacks were props that they used to try to justify the evil of their illegal invasion of the LEGALLY seceded South.

Elmer Fudd wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 8:54pm:
5.  There were more than a few southerners who hated slavery.  But they were not in charge.
Ninety three percent of CSA soldiers owned no slaves. Again, slavery was not the reason.

Elmer Fudd wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 8:54pm:
Executive summary - the north did not join the battle to free slaves.  They joined the battle to restore the union.  The union was rendered asunder by secession, the main cause of which was the perceived threat to slavery.  Not no stinking tariffs.


Secession was perfectly legal under the 10th Amendment, making the North the illegal aggressor. The Corwin Amendment showed that there was no threat to slavery, meaning that slavery was not the reason for the war.  And you think tariffs didn't play a role? Ever heard of the 1831 Nullification Crisis? S.C. threatened to secede....over a tariff!
  

“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.” — P.J. O’Rourke
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PaleoCon
LNF Staffer2
**
Offline

Ne sutor ultra crepidam.
Ubi dubium ibi libertas

Posts: 55
Joined: Sep 18th, 2013
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #5 - Dec 12th, 2014 at 1:06pm
Print Post  
  

“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.” — P.J. O’Rourke
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PaleoCon
LNF Staffer2
**
Offline

Ne sutor ultra crepidam.
Ubi dubium ibi libertas

Posts: 55
Joined: Sep 18th, 2013
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #6 - Dec 12th, 2014 at 1:07pm
Print Post  
That "terrible cause" of the South is usually thought of as the defense of slavery. This is what we are all taught in school; and the idea is strongly entrenched today. In the April 10, 2011, Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. defined the Civil War as a conflict over property rights, the property being of course four million slaves living in the South at the time. He concludes that the "Civil War was about slavery, nothing more."

I disagree. Yes, slavery was of course the central point of contention, but as an example of state sovereignty versus federal authority. The war was fought over state's rights and the limits of federal power in a union of states. The perceived threat to state autonomy became an existential one through the specific dispute over slavery. The issue was not slavery per se, but who decided whether slavery was acceptable, local institutions or a distant central government power. That distinction is not one of semantics: this question of local or federal control to permit or prohibit slavery as the country expanded west became increasingly acute in new states, eventually leading to that fateful artillery volley at Fort Sumter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schweitzer/slavery-and-the-civil-war_b_849066...
  

“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.” — P.J. O’Rourke
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PaleoCon
LNF Staffer2
**
Offline

Ne sutor ultra crepidam.
Ubi dubium ibi libertas

Posts: 55
Joined: Sep 18th, 2013
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #7 - Dec 12th, 2014 at 2:18pm
Print Post  
That "terrible cause" of the South is usually thought of as the defense of slavery. This is what we are all taught in school; and the idea is strongly entrenched today. In the April 10, 2011, Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. defined the Civil War as a conflict over property rights, the property being of course four million slaves living in the South at the time. He concludes that the "Civil War was about slavery, nothing more."

I disagree. Yes, slavery was of course the central point of contention, but as an example of state sovereignty versus federal authority. The war was fought over state's rights and the limits of federal power in a union of states. The perceived threat to state autonomy became an existential one through the specific dispute over slavery. The issue was not slavery per se, but who decided whether slavery was acceptable, local institutions or a distant central government power. That distinction is not one of semantics: this question of local or federal control to permit or prohibit slavery as the country expanded west became increasingly acute in new states, eventually leading to that fateful artillery volley at Fort Sumter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schweitzer/slavery-and-the-civil-war_b_849066...
  

“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.” — P.J. O’Rourke
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Danny Borden
LNF Representative2
LNF Bunker
***
Offline

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Posts: 2,350
Location: Alabama
Joined: Apr 11th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #8 - Dec 25th, 2014 at 12:39am
Print Post  
South Carolina's Declaration of Secession plainly states that the Northen states' nonenforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act as their major reason for leaving. The other states' declarations mention the same act, the danger to the institution of slavery, or the limitation of the institution to the new territories. Dance around the subject all you like, but it's clear that the people of the time period felt that there was a clear and present danger to the institution of slavery once Lincoln was elected.

The same proud Southerners whining about the fugitive slave act didn't say a damn word about Andrew Jackson whiping his ass with a Supreme Court order and using the US Army to ethnically cleanse the Southeast. That translates to, "We Sutherners agree with the federal government abusing its powers when we get what we want."

Frankly,  Sherman should have kept the old fires burning longer and the North should have tried and executed the ringleaders of the Confederacy for treason and insurrection just as the South did with John Brown.
« Last Edit: Dec 25th, 2014 at 12:58am by Danny Borden »  

&&&&Si vis pacem, para bellum
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PaleoCon
LNF Staffer2
**
Offline

Ne sutor ultra crepidam.
Ubi dubium ibi libertas

Posts: 55
Joined: Sep 18th, 2013
Re: new civil war thread
Reply #9 - Jan 8th, 2015 at 1:09pm
Print Post  
Danny Borden wrote on Dec 25th, 2014 at 12:39am:
South Carolina's Declaration of Secession plainly states that the Northen states' nonenforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act as their major reason for leaving. The other states' declarations mention the same act, the danger to the institution of slavery, or the limitation of the institution to the new territories. Dance around the subject all you like, but it's clear that the people of the time period felt that there was a clear and present danger to the institution of slavery once Lincoln was elected.

The same proud Southerners whining about the fugitive slave act didn't say a damn word about Andrew Jackson whiping his ass with a Supreme Court order and using the US Army to ethnically cleanse the Southeast. That translates to, "We Sutherners agree with the federal government abusing its powers when we get what we want."

Frankly,  Sherman should have kept the old fires burning longer and the North should have tried and executed the ringleaders of the Confederacy for treason and insurrection just as the South did with John Brown.


I see that we have a Sherman/John Brown groupie here. Sherman was a terrorist...the kind of Northern filth that was more animal than human. John Brown was a also a terrorist who was properly put down by hanging.

As far as trying the Confederate leaders after the war, I wish that they had....unlike the garbage above that you worship, the leaders of the South were constitutionally correct in seceding....I would have enjoyed seeing the Yankee bastards trying to justify their evil and illegal invasion and occupation of the South.

  

“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.” — P.J. O’Rourke
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Send TopicPrint
 
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereMilitary Forum, History, Guns, Survival topics › new civil war thread

LNF Home - Political Opinion Page
LNF Forums

Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Sports Forum - Entertainment - House
Military, History - Cooking and Crafts - Creative Writing
Off the Wall News - Science Forum - Tech Gadgets - Financial News - Humor
Bunker - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Chat Room





Drudge Report - News Max - Rush Limbaugh - FrontpageMag
Advertise on the LNF - Twitter LNF - LNF Archive - LNF News
LNF Blog
News and Political Links
Political Blogs
Add your website or blog
Political Columnists
Political Humor
News forum posting, privacy policy and member rules