Why do so many people on this board wish to return to the 18th century?

[mudwhistle]

The point should be that we took steps to end the practice. Dwelling on something that ended 150 years ago is pointless.

The point is we took steps to ensure slavery's continued existance, before we took steps to end it. Call it the John Kerry paying to rebuild Iraq option.

You're fucking crazy.
I have better things to do than argue with an idiot.

 

[miketx]

Why do so many regressives make up so much garbage? No one wants to return to the 18th century. This is just more made up crap.

Where do you think Antonin Scalia, and now Neil Gorsuch have their judicial philosophy rooted in?

The constitution. Now, wait for it, the attack will come!

 

[meaner gene]

I have better things to do than argue with an idiot.

Really, I checked your ONLINE status. So apparently, YOU DON'T

 

[miketx]

I have better things to do than argue with an idiot.

Really, I checked your ONLINE status. So apparently, YOU DON'T

Your admission of idiocy is noted. This must be the first time you have ever told the truth.

 

[meaner gene]

The constitution. Now, wait for it, the attack will come!

And in what century was the Constitution written?

 

[meaner gene]

Your admission of idiocy is noted. This must be the first time you have ever told the truth.

It is often said, only an idiot would argue on the internet. we are all bozo's on this bus.

 

[miketx]

Your admission of idiocy is noted. This must be the first time you have ever told the truth.

It is often said, only an idiot would argue on the internet. we are all bozo's on this bus.

Speak for your regressive lying self, idiot.

 

[rightwinger]

18th century America was broke. We had little industry and our people were spread out over large areas with little interaction
Our founding fathers were incredibly wealthy and most Americans scratched out a subsistence living

This is the "norm" that conservatives strive for

Our founders had 'small government" because that was all they could afford
We are the richest and most powerful nation on earth and conservatives want us run like Somalia

 

[gipper]

Why do so many people on this board wish to return to the 18th century? That was a time when we as a nation committed very little towards investment within our borders, very little laws or rules to protect the workers, life was far harder then today and I honestly believe the world of the time was so alien to the concepts of modern 20th and 21st century that America would be transformed into a very poor, backwards and violent society if we attempted it. It would be a outright suicide of the most advance nation on earth in many measures and a true lost to all of humanity.

Government expanded because it had too, just like every other modern state due to civilized people wanting infrastructure, wanting education for their children, clean air, water and food and a ever better standard of living. For one to argue that the 18th century was superior is the height of insanity within my mind, but that is exactly what extreme conservatism is bitching for. So you'd rather put your trust in the same corporations that pollute the environment in india then to have the government fine the bastards and give them a good reason to stop??? So you'd rather businesses have the power to refuse payment to work or set up sweat shops while you smile and say get a job. WTF is wrong with you? I say this because it could be you or your children that has little choice for employment! Why make life worse for yourself?


I could keep going on down the list on why the concepts of the 18th century would be a nightmare to the American people but I'll stop here. Lets just say that it isn't preferable and I really wish some people would see the benefits in living within a society that gives a shit about things.

I wish for a return to the 18th century. I would then challenge you to a duel and put you out of your misery. Thus ending the misery you inflect on others.

 

[meaner gene]

Speak for your regressive lying self, idiot.

You're yelling at pixels.

 

[blackhawk]

I have not seen one poster say they would like to do that.

 

[Boss]

Some will inevitably chime in here... oh yeah, what about the SLAVES? Okay... it was our system and our fundamental principles which ultimately prevailed in ending slavery. It took a while, we had to fight a bloody war, but eventually the principles of liberty prevailed.

The principles of liberty were thwarted by the constitution. It enshrined slavery, 3/5ths compromise, prohibition of legislating against slavery for 12 years, even the electoral college that gave small states, collectively more power than big states, so the big states couldn't legislate freedom.

You are wrong on virtually every inane point you are trying to make here. The Constitution did NOT enshrine slavery. It specifically ended the slave trade. The 3/5 compromise was to prevent Southern slave populations from being counted in apportioning congressional representation which would have given Southern states far more political power than Northern states. The electoral college was to prevent states with larger populations from ruling over everyone. The largest population states of the time were the slave states.

Again, you have to understand that slavery was more of an economic issue than a social issue in the mid 1800s. Modern progressives like to imagine a scenario where the righteous north was standing up for freedom of black people and the deplorable south was rebelling against that. This is just a flat out fallacy. The primary issue was economical. Slaves weren't even considered "people" by the United States Supreme Court and they certainly weren't considered people with constitutional rights of citizens. Even after they were freed, it took another century to gain their civil rights.

BUT... It was the foundation and principles on which this country was established that ultimately prevailed.

 

[meaner gene]

I wish for a return to the 18th century. I would then challenge you to a duel and put you out of your misery. Thus ending the misery you inflect on others.

And how would you do that? You don't have his name or his address. And the internet wouldn't be invented for another 200 years. Your challenge becomes moot as soon as you filll your desire to escape to the 18th century.

 

[meaner gene]

You are wrong on virtually every inane point you are trying to make here. The Constitution did NOT enshrine slavery. It specifically ended the slave trade. The 3/5 compromise was to prevent Southern slave populations from being counted in apportioning congressional representation which would have given Southern states far more political power than Northern states. The electoral college was to prevent states with larger populations from ruling over everyone. The largest population states of the time were the slave states.

Why the 3/5's compromise, why count people who have no representation? To use the Dredd Scott decision, [Slaves weren't even considered "people" by the United States Supreme Court and they certainly weren't considered people with constitutional rights of citizens.] why didn't the south count 3/5ths of their pigs and horses?

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Why do so many people on this board wish to return to the 18th century? That was a time when we as a nation committed very little towards investment within our borders, very little laws or rules to protect the workers, life was far harder then today and I honestly believe the world of the time was so alien to the concepts of modern 20th and 21st century that America would be transformed into a very poor, backwards and violent society if we attempted it. It would be a outright suicide of the most advance nation on earth in many measures and a true lost to all of humanity.

Government expanded because it had too, just like every other modern state due to civilized people wanting infrastructure, wanting education for their children, clean air, water and food and a ever better standard of living. For one to argue that the 18th century was superior is the height of insanity within my mind, but that is exactly what extreme conservatism is bitching for. So you'd rather put your trust in the same corporations that pollute the environment in india then to have the government fine the bastards and give them a good reason to stop??? So you'd rather businesses have the power to refuse payment to work or set up sweat shops while you smile and say get a job. WTF is wrong with you? I say this because it could be you or your children that has little choice for employment! Why make life worse for yourself?


I could keep going on down the list on why the concepts of the 18th century would be a nightmare to the American people but I'll stop here. Lets just say that it isn't preferable and I really wish some people would see the benefits in living within a society that gives a shit about things.

Who the fuck says I wanted to go back to the 18th century?

I prefer we all go back to Adam and Eve time period where we grunt and worshipped a magical divine being and walked around in the damn nude!

In the 1800's there were already too many assholes in the damn world that smelled, wore too many clothes and wrote their opinion and believed they had all the damn answers to society ills...

 

[rightwinger]

You are wrong on virtually every inane point you are trying to make here. The Constitution did NOT enshrine slavery. It specifically ended the slave trade. The 3/5 compromise was to prevent Southern slave populations from being counted in apportioning congressional representation which would have given Southern states far more political power than Northern states. The electoral college was to prevent states with larger populations from ruling over everyone. The largest population states of the time were the slave states.

Why the 3/5's compromise, why count people who have no representation? To use the Dredd Scott decision, [Slaves weren't even considered "people" by the United States Supreme Court and they certainly weren't considered people with constitutional rights of citizens.] why didn't the south count 3/5ths of their pigs and horses?

Elected representatives did not "represent" the slaves. So why should slaves count on how many representatives you are allocated?

 

[Boss]

Why the 3/5's compromise, why count people who have no representation? To use the Dredd Scott decision, [Slaves weren't even considered "people" by the United States Supreme Court and they certainly weren't considered people with constitutional rights of citizens.] why didn't the south count 3/5ths of their pigs and horses?

Indeed, some congressmen made that very argument. That's why they call it a "compromise". It was a very contentious argument and there were hypocrites on both sides.

 

[meaner gene]

I prefer we all go back to Adam and Eve time period where we grunt and worshipped a magical divine being and walked around in the damn nude!

Your'e an Iraqi sympathizer. Wanting to go back to the cradle of civilization.

 

[rightwinger]

Some will inevitably chime in here... oh yeah, what about the SLAVES? Okay... it was our system and our fundamental principles which ultimately prevailed in ending slavery. It took a while, we had to fight a bloody war, but eventually the principles of liberty prevailed.

The principles of liberty were thwarted by the constitution. It enshrined slavery, 3/5ths compromise, prohibition of legislating against slavery for 12 years, even the electoral college that gave small states, collectively more power than big states, so the big states couldn't legislate freedom.

You are wrong on virtually every inane point you are trying to make here. The Constitution did NOT enshrine slavery. It specifically ended the slave trade. The 3/5 compromise was to prevent Southern slave populations from being counted in apportioning congressional representation which would have given Southern states far more political power than Northern states. The electoral college was to prevent states with larger populations from ruling over everyone. The largest population states of the time were the slave states.

Again, you have to understand that slavery was more of an economic issue than a social issue in the mid 1800s. Modern progressives like to imagine a scenario where the righteous north was standing up for freedom of black people and the deplorable south was rebelling against that. This is just a flat out fallacy. The primary issue was economical. Slaves weren't even considered "people" by the United States Supreme Court and they certainly weren't considered people with constitutional rights of citizens. Even after they were freed, it took another century to gain their civil rights.

BUT... It was the foundation and principles on which this country was established that ultimately prevailed.

Slavery was an economic issue
Without the rise of the cotton industry in the early 1800s, slavery would have disappeared

But there was money to be made and cotton was king. Plantation owners were the equivalent of billionaires. God forbid they actually share their wealth with those who created it

 

[meaner gene]

Elected representatives did not "represent" the slaves. So why should slaves count on how many representatives you are allocated?

Hence my argument the south should have pushed for a 3/5ths compromise of horses and pigs. Property is property, why should a slave have more electoral college influence than a horse.