- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: History Debate: Ulysses S. Grant vs. Robert E. Lee
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:19 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:19 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
The assumption is that the right to secede is a power...reserved to the individual states.
Yes, that is my contention.
quote:
how would the power to secede even be granted to the federal government? Could it secede from itself?
Irrelevant. Simply because it is a power that cannot be wielded directly by the fed gov doesn't mean they cannot grant that power. That would be like saying a priest can't marry a couple just because he can't be married himself. It is not a tautology. My understanding of a tautology is a circular argument. That is a statement that cannot be proven false without contradicting part of the statement.
However, this statement:
it was the people who ratified the Constitution and thus the people are sovereign, not the states.
Is quite interesting and would be in the same line of reasoning as the DOI:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government
However, isn't that what was being attempted? There was a segment of the People that deemed the state of government to be destructive to their pursuit of happiness, and so they took action to alter or abolish it. And just as in 1776, it wasn't a majority of the People. In one case they succeeded, and the other failed (fortunately, I might add).
0
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:22 pm to goatmilker
quote:
And your flat wrong in that slavery was used as the conveniant excuse to invade the South at all. It is lazy teaching these days that support that view. It was not till 1863-4 that the reason to keep fighting began to change by adding the cause of freedom for the Southern slaves on top of holding the Union together.
Not what I claimed at all.
The real cause of the war in my view was regional jockeying for power. Slavery just happened to be the dividing line used at the moment. I think the regional rivalry was the real root cause of the war, not slavery, which I believe could have in theory been replaced by any number of other issues used to exert regional influence.
The country had reached a tipping point and just needed something to provide the push.
Example: DC does something like outlaw domestic cotton...boom, war starts.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:38 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
1) There were serious questions regarding the legality of secession, even back in 1861.
Not really, according to the constitution the states had every right to secede. In fact secession was nothing new. Several northern states threatened to secede in 1858 over the fugitive slave act.
There was many a family fortune made in the NE shipping slaves. The south outlawing the importation of slaves also hurt the north economically.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:41 pm to RollTide1987
quote:Madison answered that indirectly
how would the power to secede even be granted to the federal government?
quote:The Federal government was not granted a Constitutional right to eject states from the Union.
if one State can at will withdraw from the others, the others can at will withdraw from her
You have asserted the Federal Government never recognized Southern States as having separated. If we are to take your arguments regarding secession at face value, then postbellum actions restricting southern Congressional representation were thoroughly unconstitutional.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:44 pm to theunknownknight
quote:
Great question
eh no.
Of course the CSA existed.
But the reasons against recognition and its consequences here and abroad were legal/diplomatic that would not advance the Unions cause.
The South of course wanted it very much. Its why Lincoln refused to meet the Ambassadors from the CSA as this would be acceptance of that very fact.
Really the more simple and correct answer is that the North won so they could do or say any thing they wanted to.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:47 pm to NC_Tigah
A great book concerning the right of secession is The South Was Right. I cant remember the authors first names but it was two brothers and their last name was Kennedy.
Any people whatever have the right to abolish the existing government and form one that suits them better.
Abraham Lincoln, congressional record 1849.
Any people whatever have the right to abolish the existing government and form one that suits them better.
Abraham Lincoln, congressional record 1849.
This post was edited on 3/31/14 at 5:13 pm
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:50 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
If we are to take your arguments regarding secession at face value
Which we should as it's pretty much common knowledge that Lincoln would not recognize the CSA. For one reason, he needed the war to be recognized as a Rebellion so as to be granted certain particular powers by the Constitution - suspension of Habeas Corpus , for one.
quote:
postbellum actions restricting southern Congressional representation were thoroughly unconstitutional.
Uh, YEAH, they most certainly were. But what were the Southern State going to do, sue?
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:56 pm to weagle99
quote:
I think the regional rivalry was the real root cause of the war, not slavery
Interesting theory.
But of the millions of first hand accounts in diaries, newspapers, speeches and countless volumes written before during and since the war I find little to support your assertion.
I find few arguing for freedom from rivalry in the 1860 election.
I find few demanding restitution for the enfringemant of one's right to rival another.
I also find few proclamations demanding the return of people's right to rival if it has escaped.
But as I said a interesting theory.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:59 pm to goatmilker
quote:
I find few arguing for freedom from rivalry in the 1860 election. I find few demanding restitution for the enfringemant of one's right to rival another. I also find few proclamations demanding the return of people's right to rival if it has escaped.
I don't even rival - I'm an LSU fan.
...wrong board?
Posted on 3/31/14 at 4:59 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Nah. Its all over the place in this thread any way 
Posted on 3/31/14 at 5:16 pm to goatmilker
The attributes of sovereignty are now enjoyed by every state in the union.
Alexander Hamilton.
Alexander Hamilton.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:00 pm to goatmilker
quote:
Really the more simple and correct answer is that the North won so they could do or say any thing they wanted to.
This is obviously correct.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:00 pm to bencoleman
quote:
The attributes of sovereignty are now enjoyed by every state in the union.
Alexander Hamilton.
Interesting quote to use for a man who wanted an American monarch
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:13 pm to goatmilker
quote:
Interesting quote to use for a man who wanted an American monarch
You got to know that he said it in a most bitter fashion. He certainly wasn't happy about it.
Another good book is The Origins of the late War, By George Lunt. He was a Boston Lawyer and newspaper editor, who describes very plainly the causes of the war and they are stunning. I think if some of these people would read the two books I have mentioned it would open their eyes.
This post was edited on 3/31/14 at 6:14 pm
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:29 pm to bencoleman
The South Was Right is a terrible book.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:32 pm to RollTide1987
Every board or computer wargame I've ever seen rank Grant and Lee as equals, if I remember correctly.
I can't recall any conflict simulation I've ever seen that doesn't "grade out" Grand and Lee as equals.
Of course, this doesn't make it Gospel Truth.
I can't recall any conflict simulation I've ever seen that doesn't "grade out" Grand and Lee as equals.
Of course, this doesn't make it Gospel Truth.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:33 pm to bencoleman
If I remember right Mr Lunt blames abolitionists in the North for causing the War?
Seems simple enough. But things are never that simple.
Which would explain his blaming them for all the loss of life,property and liberty over the course of the war?
Also Found this quote from a reviewer of the book:
These actual outcomes of the War seem to support Mr Lunt's view that the War was a war of aggression, and ultimate conquest, by the abolitionists in the North.
Unfortunately, for those who would argue that this was a good outcome, Reconstruction was a tragedy for the slaves.
Seems simple enough. But things are never that simple.
Which would explain his blaming them for all the loss of life,property and liberty over the course of the war?
Also Found this quote from a reviewer of the book:
These actual outcomes of the War seem to support Mr Lunt's view that the War was a war of aggression, and ultimate conquest, by the abolitionists in the North.
Unfortunately, for those who would argue that this was a good outcome, Reconstruction was a tragedy for the slaves.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:39 pm to FT
quote:
The South Was Right is a terrible book.
Not a terrible book a tedious and aggravating book but I was glad I read it.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:42 pm to bencoleman
quote:Was a basic premise that "after the South declared its independence, the Union ruthlessly invaded, leaving Southerners no choice but to defend themselves?"
Not a terrible book a tedious and aggravating book but I was glad I read it.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 6:43 pm to goatmilker
quote:
Unfortunately, for those who would argue that this was a good outcome, Reconstruction was a tragedy for the slaves
He discusses the dismal future awaiting the former slaves, remember he wrote the book in 1866.
Page 13 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News