Would you support Texas in its secession?

[caketastydelish]

So we have your morals to thank for 600,000 dead and millions maimed physically and or mentally?

Dont try to throw slavery into this, the North was living off slavery too and the Repubs used Congress to push tariff rates from 15% to 37% (later 47%) with the South paying most of the tax. You think its moral to raise taxes on people because they wont sell you their stuff? Thats what this is about...

The south struck first in the civil war. What did you want the north to do? Not fight back?

 

[Berzerker]

Maybe if they had tried without starting a war first. But they decided on having a war instead of a legal dispute. And that set the precedent. They specifically and deliberately chose treason over the rule of law. And so they got what they deserved. In fact, they got off way light.

Jesus H Christ, the bloodiest war we ever fought and they got off light? Starting a war is not precedent for secession, but the fact remains the South and the Founding Fathers fought wars based on the exact same principle - the right of secession. And both did some "appropriating" of lands considered within their natural jurisdiction. Now if South Carolina tried to invade a neighboring state or Washington, then I'd agree with you on that. But they didn't, they captured a fort used by the Feds to enforce tariffs on the people of Charleston - imagine that? Even the symbolism is hard to miss...

 

[Berzerker]

The south struck first in the civil war. What did you want the north to do? Not fight back?

I wanted the North to let them go... Of course, thats 20/20 hindsight.

and "struck first" was a few federal installations in the South. Our Founding Fathers appropriated 13 colonies

 

[Mowque]

So what? The Founding Fathers were wrong too but their circumstances were completely different.

 

[Berzerker]

No, this was about slavery. And the fundamental evil which is the mind and soul of the slave owners. This was about the fact that they wanted to go on being evil. They liked being evil.

No, it wasn't about slavery. Well, many people wanted it to be about slavery, but the North didn't invade the South to end slavery. What did Lincoln say? If I can save the Union without ending slavery, so be it. Or something like that... The South didn't want to keep paying high taxes, so a secession movement began in Charleston SC - the birthplace of an earlier secession movement based on tax policy. Lincoln said the only reason he'd send federal troops southward was taxes, that says it all...

C'mon, you've watched President after President lie us into war based on what sounds best to the masses and you're still buying into last century's BS?

600,000 dead, millions maimed...

or

two nations (or 1 if the Repubs dropped the protectionism) with slavery in one for another 10-30 years

You do believe slavery was on the way out, right? Banned in the North and much of Europe, new inventions making it less efficient, the abolitionist movement winning the battle of ideas... You know, by your morality George Bush could have sacrificed many many more Americans to oust Saddam

 

[choxorn]

For crying out loud, the South was the one to start the War! They attacked the flippin' fort, they started the war.

Yes, it was in Charleston Harbor. Many countries own military bases in other countries, and if those countries unilaterally decided to seize those bases, there'd be war, how is this any different?

 

[Berzerker]

For crying out loud, the South was the one to start the War! They attacked the flippin' fort, they started the war.

Yes, it was in Charleston Harbor. Many countries own military bases in other countries, and if those countries unilaterally decided to seize those bases, there'd be war, how is this any different?

any different from how the Founding Fathers seized England's lands and installations in a war of secession?

if a state votes to secede and the Feds wont leave, the state has the right to kick them out. This was a union of states, not a federal dictatorship.

 

[choxorn]

any different from how the Founding Fathers seized England's lands and installations in a war of secession?

That was different, because the war had already started. In the case of the South, the war hadn't started yet.

 

[Imperialmajesty]

any different from how the Founding Fathers seized England's lands and installations in a war of secession?

You can only compare yourself in a positive light to the Revolutionary War when your cause is actually justified.

 

[Berzerker]

The U.S. House of Representatives had passed the Morrill tariff in the 1859-1860 session, and the Senate passed it on March 2, 1861, two days before Lincoln’s inauguration. President James Buchanan, a Pennsylvanian who owed much of his own political success to Pennsylvania protectionists, signed it into law. The bill immediately raised the average tariff rate from about 15 percent (according to Frank Taussig in Tariff History of the United States) to 37.5 percent, but with a greatly expanded list of covered items. The tax burden would about triple. Soon thereafter, a second tariff increase would increase the average rate to 47.06 percent, Taussig writes.

So, Lincoln owed everything--his nomination and election--to Northern protectionists, especially the ones in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. He was expected to be the enforcer of the Morrill tariff. Understanding all too well that the South Carolina tariff nullifiers had foiled the last attempt to impose a draconian protectionist tariff on the nation by voting in political convention not to collect the 1828 "Tariff of Abominations," Lincoln literally promised in his first inaugural address a military invasion if the new, tripled tariff rate was not collected.

At the time, Taussig says, the import-dependent South was paying as much as 80 percent of the tariff, while complaining bitterly that most of the revenues were being spent in the North. The South was being plundered by the tax system and wanted no more of it. Then along comes Lincoln and the Republicans, tripling (!) the rate of tariff taxation (before the war was an issue). Lincoln then threw down the gauntlet in his first inaugural: "The power confided in me," he said, "will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property, and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion--no using force against, or among the people anywhere" (emphasis added).

"We are going to make tax slaves out of you," Lincoln was effectively saying, "and if you resist, there will be an invasion." That was on March 4. Five weeks later, on April 12, Fort Sumter, a tariff collection point in Charleston Harbor, was bombarded by the Confederates. No one was hurt or killed, and Lincoln later revealed that he manipulated the Confederates into firing the first shot, which helped generate war fever in the North.

With slavery, Lincoln was conciliatory. In his first inaugural address, he said he had no intention of disturbing slavery, and he appealed to all his past speeches to any who may have doubted him. Even if he did, he said, it would be unconstitutional to do so.

But with the tariff it was different. He was not about to back down to the South Carolina tariff nullifiers, as Andrew Jackson had done, and was willing to launch an invasion that would ultimately cost the lives of 620,000 Americans to prove his point. Lincoln’s economic guru, Henry C. Carey, was quite prescient when he wrote to Congressman Justin S. Morrill in mid-1860 that "Nothing less than a dictator is required for making a really good tariff" (p. 614, "Abraham Lincoln and the Tariff").

http://mises.org/story/952

600,000 dead and millions maimed so northern politicians could squeeze money from the south

 

[Imperialmajesty]

The U.S. House of Representatives had passed the Morrill tariff in the 1859-1860 session, and the Senate passed it on March 2, 1861, two days before Lincoln’s inauguration. President James Buchanan, a Pennsylvanian who owed much of his own political success to Pennsylvania protectionists, signed it into law. The bill immediately raised the average tariff rate from about 15 percent (according to Frank Taussig in Tariff History of the United States) to 37.5 percent, but with a greatly expanded list of covered items. The tax burden would about triple. Soon thereafter, a second tariff increase would increase the average rate to 47.06 percent, Taussig writes.

So, Lincoln owed everything--his nomination and election--to Northern protectionists, especially the ones in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. He was expected to be the enforcer of the Morrill tariff. Understanding all too well that the South Carolina tariff nullifiers had foiled the last attempt to impose a draconian protectionist tariff on the nation by voting in political convention not to collect the 1828 "Tariff of Abominations," Lincoln literally promised in his first inaugural address a military invasion if the new, tripled tariff rate was not collected.

At the time, Taussig says, the import-dependent South was paying as much as 80 percent of the tariff, while complaining bitterly that most of the revenues were being spent in the North. The South was being plundered by the tax system and wanted no more of it. Then along comes Lincoln and the Republicans, tripling (!) the rate of tariff taxation (before the war was an issue). Lincoln then threw down the gauntlet in his first inaugural: "The power confided in me," he said, "will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property, and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion--no using force against, or among the people anywhere" (emphasis added).

"We are going to make tax slaves out of you," Lincoln was effectively saying, "and if you resist, there will be an invasion." That was on March 4. Five weeks later, on April 12, Fort Sumter, a tariff collection point in Charleston Harbor, was bombarded by the Confederates. No one was hurt or killed, and Lincoln later revealed that he manipulated the Confederates into firing the first shot, which helped generate war fever in the North.

With slavery, Lincoln was conciliatory. In his first inaugural address, he said he had no intention of disturbing slavery, and he appealed to all his past speeches to any who may have doubted him. Even if he did, he said, it would be unconstitutional to do so.

But with the tariff it was different. He was not about to back down to the South Carolina tariff nullifiers, as Andrew Jackson had done, and was willing to launch an invasion that would ultimately cost the lives of 620,000 Americans to prove his point. Lincoln’s economic guru, Henry C. Carey, was quite prescient when he wrote to Congressman Justin S. Morrill in mid-1860 that "Nothing less than a dictator is required for making a really good tariff" (p. 614, "Abraham Lincoln and the Tariff").

http://mises.org/story/952

600,000 dead and millions maimed so northern politicians could squeeze money from the south

600,000 dead and millions maimed because the south declared independence, then ATTACKED the North.

 

[cardgame]

600,000 dead and millions maimed because the south declared independence, then ATTACKED the North.

The root cause of which was being taxed to death.

Hmm let's take a gander at New England, '63 to '75... taxes, taxes, taxes and more taxes.

 

[Imperialmajesty]

The root cause of which was being taxed to death.

Hmm let's take a gander at New England, '63 to '75... taxes, taxes, taxes and more taxes.

Yea, fear of losing the institution of slavery wasn't the casus belli of secession at all. . It was peripheral to the cause, not the cause of the Civil War.(Taxes)

 

[Miles Teg]

Too late to respond to Bezerker, but this stood out to me

The root cause of which was being taxed to death.

Hmm let's take a gander at New England, '63 to '75... taxes, taxes, taxes and more taxes.

Wait, are you actually suggesting that the Revolutionary War was about taxes? It was about allot of things, but taxes (or at least the rate of them) was not the subject.

 

[bhsup]

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

 

[Holycannoli]

Berzerker gets two thumbs up from me for being quite well read about the Civil War. It's refreshing to see someone so informed (my father is a HUGE Civil War buff, I've grown up hearing all of that)

People, please don't believe the politically correct version of the Civil War they teach you in school. Unless you get an excellent teacher who's willing to go above and beyond the curriculum, you're gonna get a skewed and ultimately false teaching of it's causes.

 

[cubsfan6506]

He copy and pasted that.

 

[cubsfan6506]

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

All those non red ones are important too.

 

[Bill3000]

Please take your crappy what-caused-the-civil-war arguments out of my thread, please. It is off topic from my hypothetical scenario. You can start a new thread if you want.

 

[admiral-bell]

600,000 dead and millions maimed so northern politicians could squeeze money from the south

The War of Southern Aggression freed 3.5 million people from slavery. The deaths of our soldiers were not for nothing.