Why Did The South Secede?

[Sallow]

Apparently today it's PoliticalChic's turn to make Econchick look smart by comparison. I hope EC's turn is equally entertaining.

They are both hangin' with Albert Einstein's ghost letting him know where he went wrong on the "Theory" of relativity.

Like anyone should take a theory, seriously..duh.

Only educated folks.

Kinda leaves you out, huh.

You do know when you cut and paste other people's lies that's lying too?

What???

You haven't received enough of a beating?

OOOOOOOK....


So...resolved: slavery was not the precipitation for secession.

Rather, it was the widespread belief in the South that Britain would have to recognize, and support them, because of how heavily British industry was invested in cotton.



And this is one of those mistakes that often propel human events....somewhat like the election of Barack Obama.



8. So....it turned out Britain was not as concerned about the impact on the cotton trade as the South thought!

a. Lord Palmerston: Britain would refuse to recognize Southern sovereignty.

b. London Times: "....Southern rights are now more clearly understood, and in any case since war, though greatly to be regretted, was now at hand, it was England's business to keep strictly out of it and to maintain neutrality."
May 9, 1861



c. On May 14th, Queen Victoria issued Britain's "Proclamation of Neutrality." The proclamation was avidly reported in the American press, with Harper's Weekly summarizing it in its edition of June 8.

"THE proclamation of the Queen has been issued by the Privy Council at Whitehall, warning all British subjects from interfering, at their peril, with either party in the American conflict, or giving aid and comfort in any way, by personal service and supplying munitions of war, to either party. The proclamation announces it as the intention of the British Government to preserve the strictest neutrality in the contest between the Government of the United States and the Government of those States calling themselves the Confederate States of America."
Civil War News



Remember the Senator from South Carolina..."....we could bring the whole world to our feet."
Rings like “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal ..."
Two dopes.




9. Harper's was pro-union, and didn't let England's refusal to endorse the Confederacy go unnoticed; they really rubbed it in.
" The whole rebellion has rested upon two points : first, that the North was cowardly and divided, and then that England, which must have cotton, would open the Southern ports.

But the traitors forgot how much the one depended upon the other. If England had seen the Slave States united in the movement, and the Free States hesitating and divided, she would doubtless have taken some more decided action. But she has seen just in time, in the Free States, an enthusiastic unanimity unparalleled in history—all the vast resources of a great, intelligent, skillful, industrious, and wealthy people, she has seen heaped and lavished in the measures of defense against this conspiracy. "
Harper's Weekly, June 8, 1861



Get that: "... rebellion has rested upon two points..."

Slavery was not one of 'em!

Just one more proof of my premise!


So, it was not slavery, but a misjudgment about their power to intimidate Britain, pushed the South down a path that it would, eventually, regret.

Kinda like the last presidential election......

Seek help.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As soon as you know you're lying, your language becomes vulgar.

That sound....me laughing at you.

Tsk, tsk....

actually, it's easy to get vulgar with you. Your neanderthal beauty brings out the beast in men.

Vulgarity aside, your several posts can be boiled down to "is not, is not."

I've provided links and sources to prove everything I've claimed.
You've provided proof that you are a fool.


We've both, it seems, worked up to our individual ability.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Apparently today it's PoliticalChic's turn to make Econchick look smart by comparison. I hope EC's turn is equally entertaining.

They are both hangin' with Albert Einstein's ghost letting him know where he went wrong on the "Theory" of relativity.

Like anyone should take a theory, seriously..duh.

Only educated folks.

Kinda leaves you out, huh.

You do know when you cut and paste other people's lies that's lying too?

What???

You haven't received enough of a beating?

OOOOOOOK....


So...resolved: slavery was not the precipitation for secession.

Rather, it was the widespread belief in the South that Britain would have to recognize, and support them, because of how heavily British industry was invested in cotton.



And this is one of those mistakes that often propel human events....somewhat like the election of Barack Obama.



8. So....it turned out Britain was not as concerned about the impact on the cotton trade as the South thought!

a. Lord Palmerston: Britain would refuse to recognize Southern sovereignty.

b. London Times: "....Southern rights are now more clearly understood, and in any case since war, though greatly to be regretted, was now at hand, it was England's business to keep strictly out of it and to maintain neutrality."
May 9, 1861



c. On May 14th, Queen Victoria issued Britain's "Proclamation of Neutrality." The proclamation was avidly reported in the American press, with Harper's Weekly summarizing it in its edition of June 8.

"THE proclamation of the Queen has been issued by the Privy Council at Whitehall, warning all British subjects from interfering, at their peril, with either party in the American conflict, or giving aid and comfort in any way, by personal service and supplying munitions of war, to either party. The proclamation announces it as the intention of the British Government to preserve the strictest neutrality in the contest between the Government of the United States and the Government of those States calling themselves the Confederate States of America."
Civil War News



Remember the Senator from South Carolina..."....we could bring the whole world to our feet."
Rings like “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal ..."
Two dopes.




9. Harper's was pro-union, and didn't let England's refusal to endorse the Confederacy go unnoticed; they really rubbed it in.
" The whole rebellion has rested upon two points : first, that the North was cowardly and divided, and then that England, which must have cotton, would open the Southern ports.

But the traitors forgot how much the one depended upon the other. If England had seen the Slave States united in the movement, and the Free States hesitating and divided, she would doubtless have taken some more decided action. But she has seen just in time, in the Free States, an enthusiastic unanimity unparalleled in history—all the vast resources of a great, intelligent, skillful, industrious, and wealthy people, she has seen heaped and lavished in the measures of defense against this conspiracy. "
Harper's Weekly, June 8, 1861



Get that: "... rebellion has rested upon two points..."

Slavery was not one of 'em!

Just one more proof of my premise!


So, it was not slavery, but a misjudgment about their power to intimidate Britain, pushed the South down a path that it would, eventually, regret.

Kinda like the last presidential election......

Seek help.

Every time I enter the voting booth.

Unfortunately, some morons elect failures like Obama.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC's blathering reveals she has little clue to anything outside of her extremely limited view of reality.

they would have loved little miss Saigon in the south during the civil war

Sheeet! They wouldna let her in or live in the area..back then they was either hung or run outta town...

Exactly the response one would expect from a low-life when I prove to be correct.

A low life, I worked myself up from nothing to a state of extreme poverty...Do you suppose I could buy back my introduction to you?

Nah.....free.

I have a mind to join a club and beat you over the head with it.
Read more at Groucho Marx Quotes QuoteAuthors.com

Now be honest.....

Even with the merciless beatings that I am forces to administer to you...

My post are the flame to your moth.


It's just that you never remember what happens to the moth that gets too close to the flame.


This thread pulled you right in.....and knocked you right out!



Too many metaphors?

Will you marry me? Do you have any money? Answer the second question first.

In his failing last years, Groucho had a relationship with a mentally unstable, but controlling, younger woman.

Though neither you, nor PC should infer anything from that.

I followed Groucho and we shared the same wife...

 

[Toro]

The slavery apologists are statists in drag, or ignorant, one of the two. Their pathological hatred of the Federal government leads them to embrace the ideology that is as anathema to individual liberty as communism. They revise history, or take it out of context, to suit their narrative.

"States rights" is "state," the power of the collective to crush individual liberty. That's the essence of the Confederacy, and their modern-day apologists.

Thank God the Confederates were crushed in the Civil War. Had they succeeded, they would have become a pariah state, a North American South Africa, only more backwards. Shut out of the global economy, they would have clung to an agrarian economy, and would never have industrialized, until - like South Africa - they would have eventually been shamed into abandoning their anachronistic, statist, anti-libertarian ideology. Poor, and backwards, Southerners would be like poor Mexicans today, illegally entering the United States for a better life.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I think a running tally of PolitialChic's insanity is in order.

Yesterday, or whenever, it was Roosevelt prolonged WWII by 2 years. Today it's Slavery had nothing to do with the secession of the Confederate states.

Stay tuned for even more delightful dementia...

 

[bodecea]

I think a running tally of PolitialChic's insanity is in order.

Yesterday, or whenever, it was Roosevelt prolonged WWII by 2 years. Today it's Slavery had nothing to do with the secession of the Confederate states.

Stay tuned for even more delightful dementia...

It's part and parcel of "The Lost Cause". After the war was over, the South had to come up with a new theme as to what the war was about.....since fighting FOR slavery was not really a pleasant thing to be remembered for.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I think a running tally of PolitialChic's insanity is in order.

Yesterday, or whenever, it was Roosevelt prolonged WWII by 2 years. Today it's Slavery had nothing to do with the secession of the Confederate states.

Stay tuned for even more delightful dementia...

It's part and parcel of "The Lost Cause". After the war was over, the South had to come up with a new theme as to what the war was about.....since fighting FOR slavery was not really a pleasant thing to be remembered for.

The weird thing about this lunacy of PC is that her premise isn't even an argument against slavery as the cause of the war,

and she doesn't even realize it. Her cockeyed argument is that the South felt confident that they could secede, and thus preserve the institution of slavery,

because they expected help from Great Britain.

 

[edthecynic]

I see you can't even discuss history without infusing your contempt for the current president, which is most disingenuous to your premise...

"...you can't even discuss history without....blah blah blah..."

What an excellent time for a teachable moment.

As you Liberals are limited in education, you may not know of the American philosopher George Santayana, who wrote (in The Life of Reason, 1905): “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”


So we have you, and (most merciful) Barack Obama who failed to understand the provenance of the Civil War.....and cause woe as a result.




To put it another way.....why do you suppose those of us with an education study the past at all???

Well obviously to lie about the past, since your "education" is obviously very limited.

Another quote from Santayana that the better educated are aware of:
"History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there."

And a better quote from the author you love most to lie about.

If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must Man be of learning from experience.
George Bernard Shaw

Y'know what I love about the dunces who are so infuriated about my incontestable OPs.....

....they pour out all sorts of vituperation about me....

....not realizing that I am my favorite subject!





Hey...still sporting a quote from the socialist who supported genocide....great!

Do I have your lies down pat before you even spew them?
Why yes, yes I do.

As you well know, the SHAVIAN eugenics you call genocide, an honest person calls women choosing who they mate with. But that is just your lack of education showing.

Same lie you always post with the same lying YouTube video where he satirizes eugenicists and the dishonest liars who made the video ignore the satire.
Can't you come up with any new lies????

Again, only the grossly uneducated fall for the lie in your video. The educated know that Shaw is satirizing eugenicists, and this has been pointed out to you every time you posted the same lie, proving that you are too stupid to learn.

Shaw supported SHAVIAN eugenics in which women create the "Superman" by who they choose to mate with. In your edited video Shaw is mocking all NON-SHAVIAN eugenics, which is the edited part all premeditated liars use, exposing their ignorance and lack of higher education having never read Shaw's play "Man And Superman." Only those ignorant of what is in that play are stupid enough to be deceived by your dishonestly edited video.

Here is a taste of your own medicine:

"America sucks" - Rush Limbaugh

"We are racists, sexists, bigots, homophobes. We discriminate against people who worship differently than we do, have skin color different from ours, and we have not always behaved properly in the world. And we torture." - Rush Limbaugh

 

[rdean]

Why Did The South Secede?

Because they were as delusional as right wingernuts are today.

 

[edthecynic]

Hell even MessiahRushie says Pompous Cheek is full of shit!

October 12, 2009
RUSH: So to set the record... No, not to set it straight. To confirm the record, I don't know how many times on this program I have gotten into arguments over the last 21 years with people when I have asserted that the Civil War primarily was about slavery. People have called me, "No, it wasn't! It was about states' rights. It was about this," and I said, "Don't be silly. Abraham Lincoln knew what the union could not survive if one man was allowed to own another.

 

[longly]

PC's blathering reveals she has little clue to anything outside of her extremely limited view of reality.

Fortunately ISIS does not know our history or they could use it against us. We are far from a united country; you guys are a good example of that. If they worked at it they could divide us even more, but they would have to place operators over here in order to do it.


One of the biggest causes of the civil war was the Kansas Missouri border war. For almost ten years Southerners either read or heard about the murders of Southerners in Missouri. By the time the war started, most Southerners rich and poor felt they had no other choice than fight; an idea that most wealthy slave owner were not eager discourage.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I think a running tally of PolitialChic's insanity is in order.

Yesterday, or whenever, it was Roosevelt prolonged WWII by 2 years. Today it's Slavery had nothing to do with the secession of the Confederate states.

Stay tuned for even more delightful dementia...

It's part and parcel of "The Lost Cause". After the war was over, the South had to come up with a new theme as to what the war was about.....since fighting FOR slavery was not really a pleasant thing to be remembered for.

The weird thing about this lunacy of PC is that her premise isn't even an argument against slavery as the cause of the war,

and she doesn't even realize it. Her cockeyed argument is that the South felt confident that they could secede, and thus preserve the institution of slavery,

because they expected help from Great Britain.

Well, when people jump off their meds, this kind of stuff happens. Poor PoliticalSchtick.

Not to mention the huge missing link in her OP, namely that the cotton industry in the South was doomed to fail were the slaves to be freed, BECAUSE the White plantation owners would then have to pay workers to do work that the slaves were doing for free, of course, because they were being held against their will. And since cotton picking required oodles of workers, with paid-workers, it was just not doable with the technology of that day. This is also the reason why vast swaths of the South remained dirt poor for generations after the end of our Civil War.

So, sure, it was a financial issue, but the lynchpin to all of this was indeed slavery.

Were this not the case, then there would have been no need for the Missouri Compromise of 1980, one of the more important moments in our history, because it slowed the onset of the war and also vastly delayed the admission of new years quite severely. It was a "balance of power" act that at the end, caused each side of the Mason-Dixon line to be even more bitter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The slavery apologists are statists in drag, or ignorant, one of the two. Their pathological hatred of the Federal government leads them to embrace the ideology that is as anathema to individual liberty as communism. They revise history, or take it out of context, to suit their narrative.

"States rights" is "state," the power of the collective to crush individual liberty. That's the essence of the Confederacy, and their modern-day apologists.

Thank God the Confederates were crushed in the Civil War. Had they succeeded, they would have become a pariah state, a North American South Africa, only more backwards. Shut out of the global economy, they would have clung to an agrarian economy, and would never have industrialized, until - like South Africa - they would have eventually been shamed into abandoning their anachronistic, statist, anti-libertarian ideology. Poor, and backwards, Southerners would be like poor Mexicans today, illegally entering the United States for a better life.

The thread showed that the mistaken belief that they could force Britain to support them due to cotton was the factor that drove secession.

Not a fear of slavery being outlawed.

I asked you if you had the name of anyone who was about to outlaw slavery.

You don't.

Your post is simply obfuscation.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I see you can't even discuss history without infusing your contempt for the current president, which is most disingenuous to your premise...

"...you can't even discuss history without....blah blah blah..."

What an excellent time for a teachable moment.

As you Liberals are limited in education, you may not know of the American philosopher George Santayana, who wrote (in The Life of Reason, 1905): “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”


So we have you, and (most merciful) Barack Obama who failed to understand the provenance of the Civil War.....and cause woe as a result.




To put it another way.....why do you suppose those of us with an education study the past at all???

Well obviously to lie about the past, since your "education" is obviously very limited.

Another quote from Santayana that the better educated are aware of:
"History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there."

And a better quote from the author you love most to lie about.

If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must Man be of learning from experience.
George Bernard Shaw

Y'know what I love about the dunces who are so infuriated about my incontestable OPs.....

....they pour out all sorts of vituperation about me....

....not realizing that I am my favorite subject!





Hey...still sporting a quote from the socialist who supported genocide....great!

Do I have your lies down pat before you even spew them?
Why yes, yes I do.

As you well know, the SHAVIAN eugenics you call genocide, an honest person calls women choosing who they mate with. But that is just your lack of education showing.

Same lie you always post with the same lying YouTube video where he satirizes eugenicists and the dishonest liars who made the video ignore the satire.
Can't you come up with any new lies????

Again, only the grossly uneducated fall for the lie in your video. The educated know that Shaw is satirizing eugenicists, and this has been pointed out to you every time you posted the same lie, proving that you are too stupid to learn.

Shaw supported SHAVIAN eugenics in which women create the "Superman" by who they choose to mate with. In your edited video Shaw is mocking all NON-SHAVIAN eugenics, which is the edited part all premeditated liars use, exposing their ignorance and lack of higher education having never read Shaw's play "Man And Superman." Only those ignorant of what is in that play are stupid enough to be deceived by your dishonestly edited video.

Here is a taste of your own medicine:

"America sucks" - Rush Limbaugh

"We are racists, sexists, bigots, homophobes. We discriminate against people who worship differently than we do, have skin color different from ours, and we have not always behaved properly in the world. And we torture." - Rush Limbaugh

You imbecile....he spoke without a teleprompters.

 

[Moonglow]

Maybe someone lip-synced with him...

 

[G.T.]

No one needs a name of anyone who was about to outlaw slavery, they just need the secessionists' own words of their motives - like Carb posted and you ignored (cough) because it destroys your retarded premise in the South's own words.

But you're probably right, they didn't understand their own motivation as well as YOU DO.

 

[Rotagilla]

I think a running tally of PolitialChic's insanity is in order.

Yesterday, or whenever, it was Roosevelt prolonged WWII by 2 years. Today it's Slavery had nothing to do with the secession of the Confederate states.

Stay tuned for even more delightful dementia...

It's part and parcel of "The Lost Cause". After the war was over, the South had to come up with a new theme as to what the war was about.....since fighting FOR slavery was not really a pleasant thing to be remembered for.

The weird thing about this lunacy of PC is that her premise isn't even an argument against slavery as the cause of the war,

and she doesn't even realize it. Her cockeyed argument is that the South felt confident that they could secede, and thus preserve the institution of slavery,

because they expected help from Great Britain.

The the war of northern aggression wasn't fought to preserve... nor abolish ....slavery.

Lincoln couldn't have cared less about the negroes either way. He said so himself.

 

[G.T.]

PC's blathering reveals she has little clue to anything outside of her extremely limited view of reality.

Hey....be fair!

It's my job to make you look like a fool......stop doing my job!!

This is the opening line of the Mississippi secession declaration:

In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.


"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."

...and to the specifics:

"That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.

The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.

The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.

The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.

It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.

It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.

It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.

It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.

It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.

It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause.

It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood.


Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it."

Now go ahead and make your argument that secession was not about the fear of the abolishment of the institution of slavery.

link Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Mississippi Secession

This is where the thread ended.

 

[Rotagilla]

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --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, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Declaration of Independence
1776
____________________________________________________________________________

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can may revolutionize and make their own of so many of the territory as they inhabit."


Abraham Lincoln
Jan 12, 1848