Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
One of the main tenants of Leftism IS equality of outcomes, but it is a big lie. Leftism only leads to elitism and inequality.
And yes, we agree that there is no equality of opportunity today. That is what I am stating. This is because America is about cronyism...we have a kleptocracy today.
Damn...I thought EVERYONE knew equality of outcomes is a main tenet of leftism.
All you have to do you is search Google, but I did it for you.
This from wikipedia.
Far-left politics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Ultra-leftism, Hard left, and Radical left
The far left (also known as the extreme left) refers to the highest degree of leftism in left-wing politics. The far left seeks equality of outcome and the dismantlement of all forms of social stratification.[1] Far leftists seek to abolish all forms of hierarchy, particularly the inequitable distribution of wealth and power.[1] The far left seeks a society in which everyone is provided equal economic and social opportunities, and no one has excessive wealth or power over others.[1]
Why?
Because I support breaking up the United States Federal Government and support the right of secession and self determination.
If a country was going to emerge based on following the Confederate Constitution, I would support it because that government would more likely be in line with the Founders of the United States.
Though I am not crazy about the Founding Fathers, would prefer living in a society with a decentralized republican form of government based on the principles of Federalism then what we have today.
Why would you think the Confederate government would be any different though? The Confederate Constitution had some improvements, but not that many.
One possible ideal. I prefer to think of liberty and independence as being the bedrock of Americanism. The fact that we can all come up with different answers, however, indicates that the idea of being "anti-American" is meaningless.
The hope for this country to break apart and be destroyed IS anti-American, and anything but meaningless, except to the haters of what it stands for. Al Qaeda says they want liberty and independence too. Yours is the same.
Yes, al-Qaeda is big into property rights.
Because I support breaking up the United States Federal Government and support the right of secession and self determination.
If a country was going to emerge based on following the Confederate Constitution, I would support it because that government would more likely be in line with the Founders of the United States.
Though I am not crazy about the Founding Fathers, would prefer living in a society with a decentralized republican form of government based on the principles of Federalism then what we have today.
Why would you think the Confederate government would be any different though? The Confederate Constitution had some improvements, but not that many.
Why would it be different? I guess I couldn't assume that with certainty over the long term, all electoral governments eventually slide into decadent and tyrannical welfarism/parasitism. But at least in the short term, why would one secede from the US if they just wanted to do the same thing the Federal Government is doing right now?
The hope for this country to break apart and be destroyed IS anti-American, and anything but meaningless, except to the haters of what it stands for. Al Qaeda says they want liberty and independence too. Yours is the same.
Yes, al-Qaeda is big into property rights.
The Taliban actually has a more generous taxation system than the US Federal Government. Only a 2.5% tax on wealth and a 10% tax on opium production. I would prefer the Taliban tax code, at least it is simple and straight forward, and not as much of an economic burden.
Taliban generated USD 400mn in revenue last year | Wadsam
Why would you think the Confederate government would be any different though? The Confederate Constitution had some improvements, but not that many.
Why would it be different? I guess I couldn't assume that with certainty over the long term, all electoral governments eventually slide into decadent and tyrannical welfarism/parasitism. But at least in the short term, why would one secede from the US if they just wanted to do the same thing the Federal Government is doing right now?
Why did the colonists secede from the British only to turn around and essentially do the same thing, and worse over time? That's just the way it goes.
Why would it be different? I guess I couldn't assume that with certainty over the long term, all electoral governments eventually slide into decadent and tyrannical welfarism/parasitism. But at least in the short term, why would one secede from the US if they just wanted to do the same thing the Federal Government is doing right now?
Why did the colonists secede from the British only to turn around and essentially do the same thing, and worse over time? That's just the way it goes.
It took time though. You can't deny the decentralized republican system pre-civil war was superior to what we have today. Like I said, I oppose electoral government all together. But I would prefer a libertarian style minimalist state over this giant federal behemoth in the short term, and support all efforts to break up the United States Government. I believe all people haver a right to self determination politically and economically. To this end, I support the Vermont secession movement(primarily of Socialists), the Texas Nationalist Movement(primarily conservative and libertarian), the Alaska Independence Movement(primarily conservative and libertarian ), and the Northwest Secession Movement(White Nationalist).
Why did the colonists secede from the British only to turn around and essentially do the same thing, and worse over time? That's just the way it goes.
It took time though. You can't deny the decentralized republican system pre-civil war was superior to what we have today. Like I said, I oppose electoral government all together. But I would prefer a libertarian style minimalist state over this giant federal behemoth in the short term, and support all efforts to break up the United States Government. I believe all people haver a right to self determination politically and economically. To this end, I support the Vermont secession movement(primarily of Socialists), the Texas Nationalist Movement(primarily conservative and libertarian), the Alaska Independence Movement(primarily conservative and libertarian ), and the Northwest Secession Movement(White Nationalist).
Not really. The Hamiltonians turned the U.S. into Little Britain fairly quickly, and it didn't take that much effort.
It's time to take an official USMB headcount on this issue. So here's exactly what I'm asking:
Do you wish the Confederate States of America had won the Civil War?
Do you hope that the south secedes and once again reestablishes the Confederate States of America?
What I am not asking:
Your position on slavery.
Your position on Abraham Lincoln or his policies.
Your position on secession.
So I'm basically asking whether you have some kind of attachment to the government that called itself the Confederate States of America, and whether you would like to see it reestablished.
It took time though. You can't deny the decentralized republican system pre-civil war was superior to what we have today. Like I said, I oppose electoral government all together. But I would prefer a libertarian style minimalist state over this giant federal behemoth in the short term, and support all efforts to break up the United States Government. I believe all people haver a right to self determination politically and economically. To this end, I support the Vermont secession movement(primarily of Socialists), the Texas Nationalist Movement(primarily conservative and libertarian), the Alaska Independence Movement(primarily conservative and libertarian ), and the Northwest Secession Movement(White Nationalist).
Not really. The Hamiltonians turned the U.S. into Little Britain fairly quickly, and it didn't take that much effort.
You can't compare the scope of government under the Federalist Party of Washington, Adams, and Hamilton, to the US Government today. I would prefer the Hamiltonians to the Republicans or Democrats of today.
However, now that you mention it....business practices in the US, aren't much different than those of the CS; it's just not as obvious.
However, now that you mention it....business practices in the US, aren't much different than those of the CS; it's just not as obvious.
What?
However, now that you mention it....business practices in the US, aren't much different than those of the CS; it's just not as obvious.
What?
Banking. War financiers. Follow your nose to the BS.
Where were the Hamiltonians in the Confederate Government?Not really. The Hamiltonians turned the U.S. into Little Britain fairly quickly, and it didn't take that much effort.
You can't compare the scope of government under the Federalist Party of Washington, Adams, and Hamilton, to the US Government today. I would prefer the Hamiltonians to the Republicans or Democrats of today.
That's not what I'm doing. I'm comparing them to the British of the time, and then extrapolating that the Confederacy, had it successfully become fully independent, would likely have followed a similar model and become essentially a mirror of the United States.
What?
Banking. War financiers. Follow your nose to the BS.
How is that specific to the Confederates?
Where were the Hamiltonians in the Confederate Government?You can't compare the scope of government under the Federalist Party of Washington, Adams, and Hamilton, to the US Government today. I would prefer the Hamiltonians to the Republicans or Democrats of today.
That's not what I'm doing. I'm comparing them to the British of the time, and then extrapolating that the Confederacy, had it successfully become fully independent, would likely have followed a similar model and become essentially a mirror of the United States.
Banking. War financiers. Follow your nose to the BS.
How is that specific to the Confederates?
1. Who funded the war?
2.What interest did the financiers have in funding the war?
3.What were some of the reasons for the war; besides the liberation of slaves?
4.New Orleans, LA had an intriguing interest in the Confederacy. Its history (to me) answers many questions pertaining to the CS.
Name the politicians that supported Hamiltonian policies, specifically.Where were the Hamiltonians in the Confederate Government?That's not what I'm doing. I'm comparing them to the British of the time, and then extrapolating that the Confederacy, had it successfully become fully independent, would likely have followed a similar model and become essentially a mirror of the United States.
They were the ones who inflated the Confederate currency until it was completely worthless.
How is that specific to the Confederates?
1. Who funded the war?
2.What interest did the financiers have in funding the war?
3.What were some of the reasons for the war; besides the liberation of slaves?
4.New Orleans, LA had an intriguing interest in the Confederacy. Its history (to me) answers many questions pertaining to the CS.
Again, how is any of this specific to the Confederates? There are bankers and war financiers behind every war.
