- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Andrew Jackson's letter on Secession
Posted on 7/5/25 at 12:19 pm to prplhze2000
Posted on 7/5/25 at 12:19 pm to prplhze2000
Yesterday we celebrated our secession from Great Britain.
Posted on 7/5/25 at 12:21 pm to HueyLongJr
quote:
I must have missed the memo when the Democrats “became” the Republican Party.
The Democratic party was the conservative party, while the Republican party was the liberal party. This changed with the election of 1912 when Wilson took over the mantle of Progressivism from T. Roosevelt.
Posted on 7/5/25 at 12:33 pm to Fat and Happy
quote:
I don’t remember exactly but something like 80% of the world’s cotton.
It was closer to 1/3.. So that's about 33%,
Posted on 7/5/25 at 2:25 pm to CSATiger
quote:
several states only ratified the constitution with the expressed right to revoke the joining in the future
Virginia in its ratifying document reserved the right to secede from the Union for whatever reason the people of Virginia saw fit.
Posted on 7/5/25 at 3:44 pm to Riverside
quote:
the dems have fabricated a total lie that they “switched” positions with the GOP in the 1960s, when nothing could be further from the truth
Oh please enlighten me on the truth
Posted on 7/5/25 at 4:21 pm to prplhze2000
Jackson was 100% correct.
Posted on 7/5/25 at 4:23 pm to prplhze2000
The usage of seceded and succeeded in this thread
Is essentially the meme of multiple Spider-Mans pointing at one another.
Is essentially the meme of multiple Spider-Mans pointing at one another.
Posted on 7/5/25 at 5:34 pm to dawgfan24348
Sorry, dude. The switch started post WWII as the South became less agrarian and more industrialized and the economy became more similar to other regions in the US. As that happened, the GOP began to run more candidates in the South and the electorate was more open to GOP economic messages. Prior to this the GOP didn't bother to even run candidates in numerous elections.
Democrats also began moving left on a wide range of social and economic issues, leaving Southern values behind on religion, abortion, unions as you mention, and other things.
Anytime someone mentions the "Southern strategy", I laugh. It's a term used exclusively by Democrats and liberal historians who hate the GOP. Kind of weird that such an important part of the GOP's success has never actually been promulgated by members of the GOP, nor is there any GOP document that uses the term Southern Strategy.
Here's a book you might enjoy that goes into the broader trends.
End of Southern Exceptionalism
Finally, don't you think it kind of sucks that Democrats and FDR turned a blind eye to Jim Crow to keep Southern Democrats on their side of the ticket? Puts the moral legitimacy of the New Deal on the back of old Jim Crow.
Democrats also began moving left on a wide range of social and economic issues, leaving Southern values behind on religion, abortion, unions as you mention, and other things.
Anytime someone mentions the "Southern strategy", I laugh. It's a term used exclusively by Democrats and liberal historians who hate the GOP. Kind of weird that such an important part of the GOP's success has never actually been promulgated by members of the GOP, nor is there any GOP document that uses the term Southern Strategy.
Here's a book you might enjoy that goes into the broader trends.
End of Southern Exceptionalism
Finally, don't you think it kind of sucks that Democrats and FDR turned a blind eye to Jim Crow to keep Southern Democrats on their side of the ticket? Puts the moral legitimacy of the New Deal on the back of old Jim Crow.
Posted on 7/5/25 at 8:34 pm to Fat and Happy
quote:Here's the sources for federal income from 1820 - 2020. The primary sources of revenue during that period were tariffs, taxes on whiskey, and public land sales. None of that was related to the South's production of cotton, except in that southern White farmers may have purchased land from the federal government in order to grow more cotton, but that had squat to do with "the income in taxes for the US."
The south made up about 3/4th the income in taxes for the US.
quote:Around 75%, but thanks to Article I, Section 9, Clause 5 of the US Constitution the gov can't tax (levy tariffs on) exports, so there was no "income in taxes for the US" to be made from the export of cotton. They did often exchange the cotton for European manufactured goods (primarily English), but northern politicians wanted to stop this trade and passed tariffs to discourage southern cotton producers from buying European goods, meaning they weren't making much in taxes off this trade in the first place and were actively attempting to stop it, so secession would have had little impact in terms of revenue generation from cotton production.
I don’t remember exactly but something like 80% of the world’s cotton.
There is some truth to northern textile manufacturers wanting to retain access to southern cotton, which was cheap and gave them something of a competitive advantage in world markets, but that advantage was based on the efficiencies gained through the use of enslaved labor and northern mill owners were in no hurry to harm slavery, so this whole argument about Yankees wanting to keep milking the southern cotton cow as a motivation for war is really flimsy.
quote:
The southern states were extremely wealthy back then
Yes, they were. Want to guess what their primary asset was that accounted for that wealth?
quote:Exactly what "taxes on agriculture" did DC "up"? Andrew Jackson eliminated excise taxes, including the Whiskey Tax, and they weren't reinstituted until the Civil War.
when Washington DC decided to up the taxes on agriculture, the southern folks told the north that their mother was a lady of streets and that the northern folks could go F themselves because DC wanted more money and didn’t like that they southern states were quite boujie up in this bitch.
quote:Just ridiculous/counterfactual/wrong. I love the South and am proud of my Confederate ancestors, but the fact of the matter is that the southern states left the union in order to protect their enslaved property. There's an argument to be had about whether any of this justified waging a war to return them to the union, but it's a moot point because it happened and the Yankees won, whether I like it or not.
So, when the south succeeded, the north couldn’t let go of its gold mine and had to fight for that
Posted on 7/6/25 at 1:39 am to Harry Boutte
quote:
At that point they could have left,
so you concede they had the right too, case closed
Posted on 7/6/25 at 1:44 am to riverparish
quote:
Which means the war probably wouldn't have been over after Appomattox. You would've seen fighting continuing and probably guerrilla groups being formed.
That did happen after Appomattox
Posted on 7/6/25 at 2:07 am to CSATiger
quote:
they had the right to
Actually, no. There's no such things as "states' rights".
They didn't have to sign, but they did sign.
And thanks for the source I requested.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 3:12 am to TutHillTiger
quote:
MAGA will not like this they are already ready to succeed
Secede you dumbass, lol
Posted on 7/6/25 at 5:31 am to TutHillTiger
quote:So is CA ... or so they say.
MAGA will not like this they are already ready to succeed
Posted on 7/6/25 at 7:28 am to prplhze2000
frick Andrew Jackson.. he did my boy Jean Lafitte dirty
Popular
Back to top


0












