[DiogenesLamp]

It’s not a question of whether states have the right to be independent.

Well it was when the United States was formed. I thought their victory over the British established that the right of states to be independent was valid.

If it was valid in 1776, why wouldn't it be valid "four score and seven years" later?

It’s a question of whether of a government has ceased to represent its people.

It is exactly that. As the Declaration of Independence says:

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.

In 1860, many states believed the government of the United States no longer served their interests, and so they chose to exercise the right to independence which the founders established.

Had the slaves revolted and killed every God-damned slave-holder (I mean that 100% literally, not as a cuss) and blinded sheeple who fought on the side of the slave-holders, THAT would have been just.

Well let's not leave out all the Northern ship builders and shipping companies that rounded them up and brought them here. Obviously they were the lynchpin of the entire slave trade, and they were certainly more responsible for kidnapping them away from their homes than were the slaveholders who put them to work.

Much of the wealth of Boston and other parts of the Northeast are built on the slave trade. The US only accounted for 3% of the total slave trade across the Atlantic, so the northern slave ship companies were responsible for a lot more slavery than that which existed just in this country. I'd say they have a lot more to atone for than those who put that 3% to work. They also carried the other 97% into slavery.

While we are talking about punishing evil and revenge, we need to make sure all the appropriate parties get their fair share of the murder, er, I mean "Justice."

[piasa]

No, the crux of the problem is demand, not supply.

If there were no demand for slaves, there would be no suppliers.

If there was no demand for cocaine, coca would still be nothing more than an obscure plant used by indigenous chewers to mild effect.

Didn’t the Portuguese, French, and Spaniards use their own ships, like the São José, rather than contract all their slave shipping out to Yankees?

[dangus]

>> Well let’s not leave out all the Northern ... [blah, blah, blah, bah]

The Union prohibited transatlantic slave trade in 1807. And had prohibited slavery within Northern states even earlier. I’m talking about libertaing oneself from sadistic, terroristic, absurdly repressive governments, and you’re blathering about vengence of generations gone by.

>> I thought their victory over the British established that the right of states to be independent was valid. <<

Nope. In fact, the notion that they were states was even a later invention.

You seem to confuse vengence with liberation. The transatlantic slave trade was prohibited in 1807. There would be no point in attacking the

>> In 1860, many states believed the government of the United States no longer served their interests, and so they chose to exercise the right to independence which the founders established. <<

It is an undeniable fact that the Southern states were represented in the Senate and House (and military, and Supreme Court and its circuit courts). The DofI complained about lack of representation, lack of recourse, lack of permitted governors, lack of ability to draft needed local laws, and so on and so on.

[Bull Snipe]

“The US only accounted for 3% of the total slave trade across the Atlantic, so the northern slave ship companies were responsible for a lot more slavery than that which existed just in this country. I’d say they have a lot more to atone for than those who put that 3% to work. They also carried the other 97% into slavery.”

The following information is from the “Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database”. This database can be found at www.slavevoyages.org
The country listed below is the flag of the ship transporting slaves and the number of documented voyages under that flag.
Country total voyages
Portugal 35,994,
Britain 12,010
France 4,199
USA 2,268
Spain 1,893
Holland 1,704
Denmark 411
Total 58,449
The website estimates that the database represents about 80 % of the total slave trade voyages from 1514 to 1866.
Looking at the country’s ships transporting slaves and the destination of the voyage shows the most of the slave voyages were ships of a specific country bound for the colonies of that country in the Western Hemisphere. As an example, most, but no all, Portugal’s slave voyages ended in Portuguese Brazil. Most, but not all, Britain’s slave voyages went to British colonies in the Caribbean. American slave ships transported mostly to the United States, and after 1808, to Cuba.

It really does not look like that the Northern business interests transported the other 97% into slavery.