- Joined
- Dec 6, 2011
- Messages
- 6,248
- Reaction score
- 2,439
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
so you think because we was set free we are treated as equals? you gotta lot to learn little boy. blacks have suffered well beyond slavery, thats why we still got NAACP, ACLU, EEO, and afffirmative action. we need protected from all the racism alive today
Actually I did answer the question. Property acts in the same manner in nature and society and people treat such property in the same exact fashion. Ownership is about the exclusive control over a certain thing and when this is taken away in either place, be it society or nature violence must occur for this to happen. The law you are supporting violates this control and as a result a violation of property rights.
Property does not act. People act.
Fort Sumter was federal territory. Therefore the CSA was the aggressor.
A belligerent status is not the same as recognition. Lincoln was obviously bluffing.
Slavery implies a loss of rights. What rights did any state or person in the Union lose because of the Civil War?
You said it doesn't matter if secession was legal or not legal. Since SCOTUS ruled that it is illegal, and them being the final arbiter of the meaning of the Constitution, the CSA committed a crime.
If it makes you feel better replace it with the word behaves.
same difference
Um, the Emancipation Proclamation? Thirteenth Amendment?
The Emancipation Proclamation was empty and hollow rhetoric. Don't tell me that you can't see that.
I guess you think Bush "liberated" Arabs too?
The Emancipation Proclamation was an absolutely crucial pivot point in the American Civil War. That it only applied to Confederate States and rebels therein was irrelevant then and is irrelevant today. No longer was the war merely about the restoring the Union and subjugating the rebel states, it became irrevocably about abolishing slavery in way or another. Everyone knew that once the Emancipation Proclamation was passed abolitionism was in the ascendancy and the War could not end without the demise of slavery being made clear. This fact not only fired Northern moral and prompted a huge disgorgement of fundraising for the war effort, it effectively annihilated Southern political support in Europe by sending both the liberal elite and the working proletariat into the streets and newspapers railing against Confederate Slavepower. The notes and journals of prominent European leaders from Lord Russell to Napoleon III that the Emancipation Proclamation went further to kill Southern hopes for intervention than anything else.
Because despite what some apologists try and argue today, the world was generally unconcerned with Southern 'rights' arguments. What they say was the enslavement of millions and the battle between an aristocratic, slave power south in battle against an immigrant friendly, free-man, republican North.
The world was unconcerned with Southern rights, but they were also equally unconcerned with the slavery going on in the colonies. England fought us because they needed money and imperialistic power. France fought England because they have been fighting England directly and by proxy for centuries.
And the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round.
:2brickwal Why don't you just admit you're not interested in thinking about the topic?
Revisionist history from self serving and power mad men have convinced anyone who'd think different to be mistaken.
This dispersement would have actually been a crucial step toward eventual abolition.
Opening new markets doesn't mean your product is going away.
With all due respect, if anyone is "revising" history, it's those who believe that the Union could be split without war.
So said the Tyrant.
I think you've taken what I said out of context, but anyhow, that was ruled in 1868, which happened afterward. Ex post facto. But my orginal objection under its original context still stands.
It is a first step and an important one at that. Yeah, that's easy for you to say.
the right to self determination. The most important.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?