• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is there any hope for serious public discussion?

Politics1234

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
99
Reaction score
10
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No, there isn't. Because at all times to have a serious discussion you need mature intelligent adults. When I do not sense those ingredients I walk away every time, whether I am right or not does not matter in such instances.
 

Ancient Herald

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
2,637
Reaction score
668
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't believe so, not as a nation anyway. A few scant individuals, maybe, but most people are just too concerned about their own interests and can not be objective or unbiased. It's all about themselves and to hell with everybody else.
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Maybe in Lincolns day though I doubt there have been a lot of honest politicians since. It's just the way it is. I think Ross Perot was trying to be truthful but his picking of such a seemingly inept running mate killed his chances.

It didn't happen in Lincoln's day either. Even the slavery issue was wholly contrived, it was an issue created in the public mind, as initially voiced in northern churches, and the plank Lincoln adopted to get elected. Had it not been for politics it would never have been a divisive issue. And one of two things would have happened: Either slavery would have folded under its own weight; which is very likely because there is no such thing as "free" labor, or, as integral to economy, we would own slaves to this day. But think about that: Would it have survived industrialization and agrarian mechanization? I doubt it.

Two forces opposed: Northern puritan women adamant that society could not live this lie of "all created equal" and free black intelligentsia, that gradually gained sufficient political clout with the approbation of the party seeking to self-empower. It was politics.
 
Last edited:

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It didn't happen in Lincoln's day either. Even the slavery issue was wholly contrived, it was an issue created in the public mind, as initially voiced in northern churches, and the plank Lincoln adopted to get elected. Had it not been for politics it would never have been a divisive issue. And one of two things would have happened: Either slavery would have folded under its own weight; which is very likely because there is no such thing as "free" labor, or, as integral to economy, we would own slaves to this day. But think about that: Would it have survived industrialization and agrarian mechanization? I doubt it.

Two forces opposed: Northern puritan women adamant that society could not live this lie of "all created equal" and free black intelligentsia, that gradually gained sufficient political clout with the approbation of the party seeking to self-empower. It was politics.

Well, no.

[h=3]The Road to Disunion: Secessionists at Bay, 1776-1854[/h]www.amazon.com › ... › Colonial Period


Amazon.com, Inc.


The Road to Disunion, Vol. 1: Secessionists at Bay, 1776-1854 [William W. Freehling] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Far from a ...



[h=3]The Road to Disunion: Volume II: Secessionists Triumphant ...[/h]www.amazon.com › ... › United States › Civil War




Amazon.com, Inc.


The Road to Disunion: Volume II: Secessionists Triumphant, 1854-1861 [William W. Freehling] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Here is ...
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, no.

[h=3]The Road to Disunion: Secessionists at Bay, 1776-1854[/h]www.amazon.com › ... › Colonial Period


Amazon.com, Inc.


The Road to Disunion, Vol. 1: Secessionists at Bay, 1776-1854 [William W. Freehling] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Far from a ...



[h=3]The Road to Disunion: Volume II: Secessionists Triumphant ...[/h]www.amazon.com › ... › United States › Civil War




Amazon.com, Inc.


The Road to Disunion: Volume II: Secessionists Triumphant, 1854-1861 [William W. Freehling] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Here is ...

It looks interesting. And truthfully I've been looking for a new book, so I will consider it.

All political issues begin somewhere; they originate and find a voice, right? A matter is voiced, it gains momentum in the cultural mindset, eventually it is adopted by those with political aspirations. It becomes an "issue," even a central plank, utilized by those seeking to gain office. Such was slavery in the case of Lincoln. But what I had eventually concluded studying all of these events was that abolitionism had found its voice amongst the women of our northern churches. Why this occurs is a whole nuther matter. But it all started when I came across evidence dated to the 1840s of an abolitionist society in my own little town. (These community associations, or societies, form the basis of status which in the days of localized economy were very important.) And then realized how common they really were; every town had an abolitionist society. In fact every town had any number of organizations; they were a relatively common form of social entertainment. And to the extent that they created elite little enclaves, all afforded some relevant status.

You know where I'm going with this right? Had abolitionism never gained a voice... Etc.

I also eventually concluded that this was a political war; it was Republican versus Democrat. It's also worth noting that Northern Democrats were NOT abolitionists. And they owned Wall Street.
 
Last edited:

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It looks interesting. And truthfully I've been looking for a new book, so I will consider it.

All political issues begin somewhere; they originate and find a voice, right? A matter is voiced, it gains momentum in the cultural mindset, eventually it is adopted by those with political aspirations. It becomes an "issue," even a central plank, utilized by those seeking to gain office. Such was slavery in the case of Lincoln. But what I had eventually concluded studying all of these events was that abolitionism had found its voice amongst the women of our northern churches. Why this occurs is a whole nuther matter. But it all started when I came across evidence dated to the 1840s of an abolitionist society in my own little town. (These community associations, or societies, form the basis of status which in the days of localized economy were very important.) And then realized how common they really were; every town had an abolitionist society. In fact every town had any number of organizations; they were a relatively common form of social entertainment. To the extent that they created elite enclaves, all afforded some relevant status.

You know where I'm going with this right? Had abolitionism never gained a voice... Etc.

I appreciate your angle, but I disagree about Lincoln, who I believe opposed slavery on principle.
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I appreciate your angle, but I disagree about Lincoln, who I believe opposed slavery on principle.

He didn't seem to have a problem with Grant owning them. And if he was so adamantly opposed, how do you reconcile that? My personal feeling is that slavery was largely a plank Lincoln adopted early in his career. Because he had political aspirations.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
He didn't seem to have a problem with Grant owning them. And if he was so adamantly opposed, how do you reconcile that?

Grant's wife brought the slaves into the family, and Lincoln was willing to overlook much (Grant's drinking, for example) to achieve victory. He knew that victory in the Civil war would end slavery.
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Grant's wife brought the slaves into the family, and Lincoln was willing to overlook much (Grant's drinking, for example) to achieve victory. He knew that victory in the Civil war would end slavery.

I don't think Lincoln was overly concerned about the state of the blackman. He searched high and lo for a place to colonize: Delaware and Texas were both considered; he eventually discarded Liberia for fear of the logistics. He was concerned that with too few numbers, they would simply devour each other. Or, otherwise self-destruct.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't think Lincoln was overly concerned about the state of the blackman. He searched high and lo for a place to colonize: Delaware and Texas were both considered; he eventually discarded Liberia for fear of the logistics. He was concerned that with too few numbers, they would simply devour each other.

He was better than his time, but not entirely free of it. The language of his second inaugural address shows the moral elevation he achieved by the end.
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
He was better than his time, but not entirely free of it. The language of his second inaugural address shows the moral elevation he achieved by the end.

I think Lincoln was a great writer. And great with metaphor and analogy, which is good because it affords understanding. But he was a key player. And in the second inaugural he consigns this responsibility to the greater agent of divine providence; it is intended then as an emotional appeal. So the question is, do we permit him this success?

It's been estimated that as many as 750,000 may have died in the Civil War; there were millions of casualties, many permanently disabled. And a national economy that was completely devastated. People starved in the streets of Richmond. There was generational economic impact even in the North because those returning disabled were unable to maintain their farms. All for Lincoln's moral elevation?
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I think Lincoln was a great writer. And great with metaphor and analogy, which is good because it affords understanding. But he was a key player. And in the second inaugural he consigns this responsibility to the greater agent of divine providence; it is intended then as an emotional appeal. So the question is, do we permit him this success?

It's been estimated that as many as 750,000 may have died in the Civil War; there were millions of casualties, many permanently disabled. And a national economy that was completely devastated. People starved in the streets of Richmond. There was generational economic impact even in the North because those returning disabled were unable to maintain their farms. All for Lincoln's moral elevation?

All to preserve the Union, erase slavery and change United States are to United States is. He was our greatest POTUS.
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
All to preserve the Union, erase slavery and change United States are to United States is. He was our greatest POTUS.

This thing of preserving the Union can be traced I suppose to Vattel. One can even create perfect analogy to gain understanding. In fact, one must create analogy to gain understanding. But in the context of present "morality" there is no way one can justify the loss of 750,000 lives to free an estimated 420,000 slaves. And I say this as a northerner whose ancestors volunteered in duty to community, rather than see neighbors conscripted. Our greatest POTUS in my mind is still Washington, whom I view as our nation's greatest administrator. Without a doubt Washington is the father of our country; Abigail Adams, her mother, and Increase Mather, her grandfather.

PS: have you read Jaffa? He's difficult to read, very repetitive, but he makes a good case for Lincoln's liberty. Which was a place I myself had found, arrived at, before finding Jaffa. But he helps to reinforce it.
 
Last edited:

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This thing of preserving the Union can be traced I suppose to Vattel. One can even create perfect analogy to gain understanding. In fact, one must create analogy to gain understanding. But in the context of present "morality" there is no way one can justify the loss of 750,000 lives to free an estimated 420,000 slaves. And I say this as a northerner whose ancestors volunteered in duty to community, rather than see neighbors conscripted. Our greatest POTUS in my mind is still Washington, whom I view as our nation's greatest administrator. Without a doubt Washington is the father of our country; Abigail Adams, her mother, and Increase Mather, her grandfather.

PS: have you read Jaffa? He's difficult to read, very repetitive, but he makes a good case for Lincoln's liberty. Which was a place I myself had found, arrived at, before finding Jaffa. But he helps to reinforce it.

As long as we're debating whether Washington or Lincoln is the greatest we are on well worn paths.
I have not read Jaffa. On Lincoln my taste runs to David Herbert Donald and Eric Foner.
The Civil war exacted a high price, but what was won is, in my estimation, priceless.
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
As long as we're debating whether Washington or Lincoln is the greatest we are on well worn paths.
I have not read Jaffa. On Lincoln my taste runs to David Herbert Donald and Eric Foner.
The Civil war exacted a high price, but what was won is, in my estimation, priceless.

I can't tell you precisely what I've read on Lincoln; I've read so many I no longer remember. Slavery was a huge issue. I still have a few books lined up on that one. Long story but I had moved from a later study of the Brown family and others into considering NY's role. I'd like to spend more time in that area. But there are other areas of history I'm currently focused on, too. I like history A LOT.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I can't tell you precisely what I've read on Lincoln; I've read so many I no longer remember. Slavery was a huge issue. I still have a few books lined up on that one. Long story but I had moved from a later study of the Brown family and others into considering NY's role. I'd like to spend more time in that area. But there are other areas of history I'm currently focused on, too. I like history A LOT.

My favorite Civil War subject is W.T. Sherman.
 

JC Callender

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
6,477
Reaction score
3,269
Location
Metro Detroit
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This thing of preserving the Union can be traced I suppose to Vattel. One can even create perfect analogy to gain understanding. In fact, one must create analogy to gain understanding. But in the context of present "morality" there is no way one can justify the loss of 750,000 lives to free an estimated 420,000 slaves. And I say this as a northerner whose ancestors volunteered in duty to community, rather than see neighbors conscripted. Our greatest POTUS in my mind is still Washington, whom I view as our nation's greatest administrator. Without a doubt Washington is the father of our country; Abigail Adams, her mother, and Increase Mather, her grandfather.

PS: have you read Jaffa? He's difficult to read, very repetitive, but he makes a good case for Lincoln's liberty. Which was a place I myself had found, arrived at, before finding Jaffa. But he helps to reinforce it.

420,000 plus all future slaves and all of this misery involved in slavery from the slaves to their owners and everyone who had to witness it.
 

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
420,000 plus all future slaves and all of this misery involved in slavery from the slaves to their owners and everyone who had to witness it.

Slavery's not as black and white as you suppose. But in any case, I definitely do not see the Civil War as a moral revolution. To do that is to ignore all that death and destruction.
 
Last edited:

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why Sherman?

A man of purpose, and a military visionary whose campaigns prefigured the mobile armored warfare of the 20th century. He was also an extraordinary writer and, after the war, the country's second most sought after speaker (after Mark Twain).
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why Sherman?

A man of purpose, and a military visionary whose campaigns prefigured the mobile armored warfare of the 20th century. He was also an extraordinary writer and, after the war, the country's second most sought after speaker (after Mark Twain). And of course there's his emphatic refusal to run for President.
 
Last edited:

betuadollar

Banned
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
237
Location
Eastern Long Island
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A man of purpose, and a military visionary whose campaigns prefigured the mobile armored warfare of the 20th century. He was also an extraordinary writer and, after the war, the country's second most sought after speaker (after Mark Twain). And of course there's his emphatic refusal to run for President.

I'm not really a civil war buff; I'm generally more into colonial history. But I'll take a look.
 

Risky Thicket

Sewer Rat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
31,173
Reaction score
32,420
Location
With Yo Mama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. . . . A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details." --George Orwell

Orwell wrote that a long time ago, and things don't seem to have improved in the interim. Yet this is a country that once produced the Lincoln-Douglas debates, to cite only one example. Will we ever again see (or hear) clear, meaningful, thoughtful political discussion and debate by our leaders and candidates?:peace

That is an excellent question. How did we reach this point?

1. Mass communications via broadcast and digital media. In fact, it is difficult to avoid mass media. Information comes at you whether you want it or not. As your family, friends, co-workers and neighbors are affected by it you are exposed through them. Mass information, right or wrong, wanted or not, is relentless and almost inescapable.

2. The internet provides an easily accessible soapbox for almost anyone in the world. Any idea, argument, point of view can be shared with the world in minutes at almost no cost.

3. Many governments, certainly the U.S. Government, purposely direct "weapons grade" propaganda to the world. In fact, it is now legal for the U.S. Government to direct extremely powerful propaganda toward its own citizens. In essence it is legal for the U.S. Government to purposely manipulate the American people through the use of highly sophisticated propaganda. What U.S. citizens see, how and where we obtain information, and the verity of the information may not at all be what it seems.

Is it effective? You damned skippy! It is proven and actually it is no secret. The facts are easily available online. Hell, they teach graduate classes about it.

3. Media interpretation. If they make me king of America tomorrow, and right now that ain't looking to good, one of the first things I will do is require that students are taught classes in media interpretation and all levels of school beginning in elementary school.

On a daily basis U.S. citizens enter the war for credible information largely unarmed. And they are not winning. If ever there has been a time when Americans need to be savvy information consumers it is now.

Until Americans learn and practice deductive reasoning skills there won't be, can't be, serious public discussion. The speakers with the most sophisticated message and media strategy, and the speakers with the biggest microphone (most money) will control most of the information whether the information is true or not.
 
Top Bottom