- 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: Confederate Flag vs. US Flag
Posted on 5/20/16 at 9:03 am to Breesus
Posted on 5/20/16 at 9:03 am to Breesus
I never got less than an A in history and anyone who thinks that slavery was not a root cause is a moron.
Sure it was states rights. You CAN say that, but what was the right that started the fight? The right of newly admitted states to own slaves or not. Sure two union states had slaves, and it can even be said Maryland was forced to stay in the Union when many wanted to join the confederacy. That is all relevant, but the fact remains the southern economy was based on slave labor. It was not ready at that time to go to a wage based system for agriculture. Yes modern economists can show that had they simply paid low wages instead of buying the slaves it may not have been much more of an investment, especially if they used a system like serfdom or sharecropping. Even so, slavery was the status quo and the only way plantation owners knew to make money. The plantation class got the middle and business classes to buy into states rights, and "smart" history teachers in the south will tell their classes that it was states rights that started the war. Yet ask that teacher, which 'right pushed it over the edge, which ignited the fire?
Why did states leave the union as soon as an abolitionist was elected? The economies of the two northern slave states were not as dependent on the slavery as the southern states, Atlanta, New Orleans, Charleston, they were built by plantation owners. The ruling class at that time was doing all they could to maintain their way of life. The average confederate was little effected by slavery, yet by believing in his states rights, he was more willing to fight. Then believing this after defeat made dealing with the defeat easier. Let's face it, had the north had no intention of ever abolishing slavery and there were no limits on new slaves states the south would have never left. Charleston's mumblings would have been a footnote in History like the South Carolina nullification decades earlier.
Sure it was states rights. You CAN say that, but what was the right that started the fight? The right of newly admitted states to own slaves or not. Sure two union states had slaves, and it can even be said Maryland was forced to stay in the Union when many wanted to join the confederacy. That is all relevant, but the fact remains the southern economy was based on slave labor. It was not ready at that time to go to a wage based system for agriculture. Yes modern economists can show that had they simply paid low wages instead of buying the slaves it may not have been much more of an investment, especially if they used a system like serfdom or sharecropping. Even so, slavery was the status quo and the only way plantation owners knew to make money. The plantation class got the middle and business classes to buy into states rights, and "smart" history teachers in the south will tell their classes that it was states rights that started the war. Yet ask that teacher, which 'right pushed it over the edge, which ignited the fire?
Why did states leave the union as soon as an abolitionist was elected? The economies of the two northern slave states were not as dependent on the slavery as the southern states, Atlanta, New Orleans, Charleston, they were built by plantation owners. The ruling class at that time was doing all they could to maintain their way of life. The average confederate was little effected by slavery, yet by believing in his states rights, he was more willing to fight. Then believing this after defeat made dealing with the defeat easier. Let's face it, had the north had no intention of ever abolishing slavery and there were no limits on new slaves states the south would have never left. Charleston's mumblings would have been a footnote in History like the South Carolina nullification decades earlier.
2
Posted on 5/20/16 at 9:14 am to Napoleon
quote:
Let's face it, had the north had no intention of ever abolishing slavery and there were no limits on new slaves states the south would have never left.
Right. Had the federal government never threatened to overstep it's bounds and trample the states the war wouldn't have happened.
After the war, slavery still existed but states rights were buttfricked.
100 years later people still weren't equal but you're damn sure the federal government consolidated it's power, grew to an enormous grotesque level, and trampled the states.
Posted on 5/20/16 at 9:16 am to Napoleon
Nothing about what you wrote is false. The reason why people say it is state's rights is because the fight was over whether the Constitution gave the federal government the power to regulate slavery in the several states. The battle is framed in this way because though slavery was the hottest issue, the state's realized that if the federal government was allowed to increase the scope if its power to those things not so enumerated in the Constitution, there would be virtually nothing it couldn't touch. That would mean, of course, that the states who enjoyed plenary power on issues of health, safety, welfare, and morality, would be left with only illusory power over those things because of the supremacy clause.
It didn't help that the federal government took the position that states could not secede from the union (the perpetual union doctrine). That idea is now the law of the land on the basis of Texas v. White and North v. South.
All of that being said, we talk about states rights in terms of the Civil War because that fight gave birth to the administrative state we now have with agencies, a nearly limitless federal government power, an expansive commerce clause, an expansive 14th amendment, incorporation of the bill of rights to the states, the 17th amendment and so on and so forth.
It didn't help that the federal government took the position that states could not secede from the union (the perpetual union doctrine). That idea is now the law of the land on the basis of Texas v. White and North v. South.
All of that being said, we talk about states rights in terms of the Civil War because that fight gave birth to the administrative state we now have with agencies, a nearly limitless federal government power, an expansive commerce clause, an expansive 14th amendment, incorporation of the bill of rights to the states, the 17th amendment and so on and so forth.
This post was edited on 5/20/16 at 9:24 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News