Posted on 04/10/2015 5:03:22 PM PDT by lqcincinnatus
One hundred-fifty years after Appomattox, many Southerners still won’t give up.
One hundred fifty years ago, on April 9th, 1865, Gen. Robert E. Lee surrendered at Appomattox Court House and the Union triumphed in the Civil War. Yet the passage of a century and a half has not dimmed the passion for the Confederacy among many Americans. Just three weeks ago, the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) appeared before the Supreme Court arguing for the right to put a Confederate flag on vanity license plates in Texas. Just why would someone in 2015 want a Confederate flag on their license plate? The answer is likely not a desire to overtly display one’s genealogical research skills; nor can it be simplistically understood solely as an exhibition of racism, although the power of the Confederate flag to convey white supremacist beliefs cannot be discounted.
Rather, displaying the Confederate flag in 2015 is an indicator of a complex and reactionary politics that is very much alive in America today. It is a politics that harks back to the South’s proud stand in the Civil War as a way of rallying opinion against the federal government—and against the country’s changing demographic, economic, and moral character, of which Washington is often seen as the malign author. Today’s understanding of the Confederacy by its supporters is thus neither nostalgia, nor mere heritage; rather Confederate sympathy in 2015 is a well-funded and active political movement (which, in turn, supports a lucrative Confederate memorabilia industry).
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
You’re projecting....again.
If you say so. I would have thought you could follow the message thread back far enough to get the context in which you made your statements, but it really isn't worth arguing about. I consider it an unserious point unworthy to pursue.
Perhaps it's just me, but you seem to alternate between serious and silly. I can't tell which you are going to be from one moment to the next.
I think i'm going to ignore this thread for awhile.
Then you have to answer the question of what it is that gives a state the right to declare itself to be a different country and seize property that is denied to a county, a township, a city block, the Elks Club or you and your neighbor.
Your metaphor would be ridiculous if applied to the 13 Colonies and it is just as ridiculous when you attempt to apply it to the Independence movement of the Southern States.
The 13 Colonies never for a moment pretended that their actions were legal or claimed that the British had no right to oppose their rebellion. They new they were fighting a war of rebellion
You are an unserious debater. I could draw cartoon stick figures showing bombs and explosions to support my position too, but the fact remains that nobody was killed.
It's an absurd argument. If you spend 34 hours shooting 4000 guns at someone's house, setting it on fire with incendiary rounds, and they survive because they were hiding in the basement until they surrender, it's pretty disingenuous to claim that you really weren't trying to hurt anyone and just wanted them to leave.
Nor will you find, in all of the confederate correspondence, orders and reports, even the remotest indication that they were making an effort not to hurt anyone.
Then why did you bring it up?
Of course Davis was. If you don't start the war the there is no war to stop.
If you are comparing Ft. Sumter to Pearl Harbor, you are really grasping at straws. How many men died during the attack on Ft. Sumter? Wasn't it NONE?
OK, so if the Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbor and sunk all those ships and destroyed all those airplanes but by some miracle had not killed anyone then would you still be saying there was no cause for war?
If you are suggesting that the South was going to Invade the North, you are insane. Why wouldn't it have ended with Ft. Sumter? Do you have info on Confederate troop movements massing along the border or something? My recollection is that the first battle caught them off guard. They really didn't expect it.
There was still Fort Pickens and Fort Jefferson in Florida in U.S. hands. Why should we think that Davis wouldn't have then transferred his attention to those?
The attack on the Lusitania is what you refer to in regards to World War I.
The Lusitania was sunk in May 1915. The U.S. declared war in April 1917. Do you still contend that the Lusitania was the sole reason?
As far as the war of 1812 was concerned, it was not just about the Chesapeake–Leopard Affair (1807, five years earlier than 1812) it was about the continued impressment of American sailors onto British ships. Apparently they felt as you do, that people don't have a right to independence.
You know, this is going nowhere because your arguments grow more idiotic by the moment. You seem to think that independence should be handed to people. That they should not be opposed. And that is asinine. The South wanted independence to protect their slaves? Fine, they chose war as their way to go about achieving it. And they lost that war. That was their own fault. Yet you blame Lincoln because he won. Because he didn't roll over in the face of rebel aggression and say, "Don't hurt me! Just go away!" You say that the South was stupid to start the war and the North was even more stupid not to surrender. Well I honestly don't know how to contest a crazy stance like that. I'll leave you to the other people on this forum who are far more learned on the subject than I and have far more patience.
“There was still Fort Pickens and Fort Jefferson in Florida in U.S. hands. Why should we think that Davis wouldn’t have then transferred his attention to those?”
Excellent point. The fact was that the insurrectionists overwhelmed many many federal facilities in anything-but peaceable maneuvers. Any one of these could and should have been defined as acts of war. It’s just Fort Sumter that got the notoriety.
Confederate Confiscations
Alabama seizures:
United States Arsenal at Mount Vernon
Fort Morgan
Fort Gaines
Arkansas seizures:
United States Arsenal at Little Rock
United States ordnance stores at Napoleon
United States subsistence stores at Pine Bluff
Fort Smith
Florida seizures:
United States Arsenal at Apalachicola
Fort Marion
Barrancas Barracks
Fort Barrancas
Fort McRee
Pensacola Navy Yard (Warrington Ship Yard)
Georgia seizures:
Fort Pulaski
United States Arsenal at Augusta
Oglethorpe Barracks
Fort Jackson
Dahlonega Mint
Louisiana seizures:
United States Arsenal at Baton Rouge
Baton Rouge Barrack
Fort Jackson
Fort Saint Philip
Fort Pike
Fort Macomb
United States paymaster’s office at New Orleans
New Orleans Mint
Mississippi seizure:
Fort Massachusetts on Ship Island
Missouri seizures:
United States Arsenal at Liberty
United States ordnance stores at Kansas City
North Carolina seizures:
Fort Johnston
Fort Caswell
Fort Macon
United States Arsenal at Fayetteville
Charlotte Mint
Texas seizures:
United States Arsenal at San Antonio
San Antonio Barracks
Camp Verde
Fort Clark
OH FER CRYIN” OUT LOUD WHY DON”T WE ALL STOP FIGHTIN” THE F***KING CIVIL WAR AND REALIZE THIS M”FER IN THE WHITE HOUSE IS ABOUT TO SIGN A NUKE DEAL WITH IRAN THAT”LL GET US ALL KILLED!!(sorry for shouting at you friend but I just heard this coming home from work.)
Wind keeps blowing out that lamp don’t it bud?
Tis hot air, and the lamp is only meant to illuminate honest men. It is no surprise if it shines on none here.
Diogenes was also known for masturbating in public, saying “If only it were as easy to banish hunger by rubbing my belly.”
Boy, irony isn’t lost on you, is it bud? BTW, everyone back in the day thought ol’ Diogenes was a fool. And they were right.
LOL!! Didn’t know that Bubba. Hey, “Lamp’’ ol’ buddy, ain’t spankin’ yer monkey in public are you? BWHAHAHA!!
We can always count on you to have the dumb**ck post of the thread, you always come through, no matter what the subject. Where did I say the south was the liberal part of the country? I said they like their socialism as much as any other region. They gave us FDR in his first elections, when he did most of his damage.
What crapola. The Conservatives is the Democrat then are like the Conservatives in the Republican Party of today, they've got "now where else to go".
They've always had other places to go. They choose wrong in a lot of cases. First with slavery, then with FDR-type socialism.
Um, no. Did you not see where FDR never lost a southern state? They like their socialism as much as any other region.
Just because liberal northerners have moved into southern states and changed the voting patterns is no reason to denigrate what the south has done in keeping conservatism alive.
Actually the south has been more conservative relative to the rest of the country only lately. I'm not saying the northerners moving down there is doing it. I would say it's more the raging leftism of the major cities is causing to south to look more conservative due to their cities being smaller.
The Midwest has always been more liberal in its history (that book “What Happened to Kansas?” - I think that’s the title) explains it all very well.
Not during FDR's time. We voted against him at first. The south was his stronghold, then the war cemented his wins after that.
I must say we Union types are the biggest sore winners on the planet.
Sore winner? What is that? It looks to me that we have to straighten out the falsehoods of the sore losers. lol
Then you have to answer the question of what it is that gives a state the right to declare itself to be a different country and seize property that is denied to a county, a township, a city block, the Elks Club or you and your neighbor.
On this I refer you to the Declaration of Independence. Perhaps you've heard of it?
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.
The 13 Colonies never for a moment pretended that their actions were legal or claimed that the British had no right to oppose their rebellion. They new they were fighting a war of rebellion
Ah but they did. They absolutely thought that what they were doing was legal and in accordance with the Highest authority. Again, I give you the Declaration of Independence.
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.
It's an absurd argument. If you spend 34 hours shooting 4000 guns at someone's house, setting it on fire with incendiary rounds, and they survive because they were hiding in the basement until they surrender, it's pretty disingenuous to claim that you really weren't trying to hurt anyone and just wanted them to leave.
It's a more unserious argument to believe you could do that and not kill anyone unless that is precisely what you were attempting to do. Walls can take a lot of bombardment. People can't.
Nor will you find, in all of the confederate correspondence, orders and reports, even the remotest indication that they were making an effort not to hurt anyone.
You may not have read the correspondence between Major Anderson and General Beauregard. It seemed quite civil to me. None of that childish "sturm and drang" like you bring to a discussion.
Because I didn't expect a childish reaction when I pointed it out. I know better now.
You think the broken rocks and burned wood of Ft. Sumter is roughly equivalent to billions of dollars worth of ships and aircraft, and other material?
Not only that, but you may not have noticed that Pearl Harbor wasn't commanding the entrance of a major Japanese city.
There was still Fort Pickens and Fort Jefferson in Florida in U.S. hands. Why should we think that Davis wouldn't have then transferred his attention to those?
There's a very good chance that they would have done so if anyone was so foolish as to try to keep those places garrisoned after Ft. Sumter, but again, removing foreign troops from your own territory can hardly be considered the same thing as an invasion or an existential threat.
If they weren't massing along the border, or preying on Northern shipping, it doesn't seem to me as if they were threatening any real Northern interests.
The Lusitania was sunk in May 1915. The U.S. declared war in April 1917. Do you still contend that the Lusitania was the sole reason?
Were you referring to some other ship that served to trigger US entry into World War I? The Lusitania is the famous case most cited, but I recall the Germans had sunk others. I think US entry into the war had more to do with the Zimmermann Telegram than anything else. The British certainly knew how to do their spy and propaganda stuff very well.
You know, this is going nowhere because your arguments grow more idiotic by the moment. You seem to think that independence should be handed to people.
Well I agree it's going nowhere, and I certainly think idiocy is involved, And Yes, I do think Independence should be handed to people if they want it. What are you, a believer in Slavery or something?
Because the issue then, is the same issue now. We have an out of control Federal government forcing an agenda on us with which we disagree, and it's asserted right to do so was established by the actions of that civil war.
One of the few ways we MIGHT have escaped this disaster in the making is by breaking away into rationally governed districts separate from the printing presses of Washington and the media propaganda centers of New York, but you people keep insisting that such a solution is treasonous and intolerable, and so you consign us to a suicide pact.
*THAT* is why we are still discussing this. Till you grasp that people have a right to leave, the decent will be forced to die shackled alongside the wicked in this coming societal collapse.
I think arguing with unreasonable men is a form of the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.