Posted on 06/29/2023 4:16:36 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp
The late Great Walter Williams makes it quite clear that he believed the South had a right to secede.
Lincoln had Union troops attack and take Pensacola a month before Sumter.
This is false.
Orders lost and found?
The whiskey rebellion proved who was in charge.
Thank you for the enlightened post.
What is the Constitutional process for secession? There is none given in the Constitution.
Both the arguments of the Confederate states and the arguments of Lincoln relied of two different sets of moral sentiments and assumptions (not law) they believed the Constitution relied on, but the clear legal language for neither was placed in the Constitution.
Yes, I think the Confederate states had the better philosophical argument, even though I reject their cause (to preserve slavery) but no I don’t think they were on any better Constitutional grounds than Lincoln; unfortunately due to the founders unwillingness to place legal language for secession in the Constitution.
It was always possibly to dissolve the union through mutual consent of federal and state governments. It still is. It could be done by an act of Congress or a Constitutional Amendment. It can't be done by a state acting on its own. There is no right in the Constitution for a state or locality to break with the Constitution and declare itself independent and free from federal laws.
The Declaration of Independence was written and signed when war had been going on between the colonies and Britain for over a year. It asserts a right to revolt and a right to independence, but says that "Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes." In other words, it doesn't say that you can throw over membership in a nation whenever you feel like it.
Prime example: the second amendment in New Jersey, New York and numerous other states. Permission from the almighty state required to exercise it. A right which can be denied is no right; it is a privilege.
Yes he is. We have been fed lies by the government since at least 1861.
Yes he was, and it is a shame we lose good men such as he was yet we keep human garbage like Biden and the Clintons.
I've read a lot of the founding era stuff, and I know exactly what you mean.
I now believe the reason they wanted it changed was because the way it was originally designed, there was too little opportunity for graft.
I now believe graft is the primary purpose of government. We feed this massive army of do-nothings and parasites because they have rigged the system to give them wealth off of the backs of people who actually do useful things in society.
Aren't you going to answer my point first? Do you believe that people have a right to hold others in subjugation simply because they have the power and might to do so? Or do you believe in natural rights?
And the slaves were eventually freed because the US government gathered together a massive army to destroy the South, not because of slavery, but because it refused to keep allowing DC to control it's money and finances, and as an afterthought, they abolished slavery so as to hide the real reason why they invaded and killed people.
Slavery is a dodge to prevent discussion of the real issue of the civil war.
If you ever talk about the civil war, and someone wants to divert into slavery, this is just a tactic to prevent a discussion on the issue of self determination.
People are now like trained seals and cannot help themselves anytime the subject of the civil war is brought up. They cannot think beyond the propaganda we have all been taught growing up.
Beyond that, I await eagerly to read the documentary support for the right to secede at will. So far no one has made that case, just lots of bloviating.
You must be reading different areas of the internet than me. So far i've seen a lot of evidence to support the idea that people have a right to independence, beginning with the Declaration of Independence, and I see very little in support of the contrary idea.
I didn't read anything in there that contradicts the Declaration of Independence.
Wouldn't that be a thing? Arguing that the US constitution could directly contradict the Declaration of Independence?
I have actually ran across quoted bits of this discussion, and if memory serves me right, I believe what Justice Chase said was "You will lose everything in the courtroom that you gained on the battlefield."
What made him "hot headed"? What should he have done differently?
Well then I suppose you can quote it for us?
I doubt you are the sort who would be spreading false rumors so I look forward to you pointing out what part of their constitution forbids secession.
Me too. He was the best among us.
I am not that familiar with that aspect of him. All I know is he wrote great columns for the newspapers for years, and he substituted for Rush and did a wonderful job.
He was also a professor at George Mason University. All around a very admirable man.
This is fairly correct but leaves out an important point. The warships he sent were ordered to attack if they were resisted in placing supplies in Fort Sumter.
Also left out is that fort Sumter was seized by force in the middle of the night by Major Anderson. The seizing of fort Sumter was probably the first belligerent act of the war.
It also was not legitimately passed. When they took over the state governments, they made them sock puppets of Washington DC. Those "governments" created by guns and bayonets *DID NOT* represent the will of the people of those states.
Those fake puppet governments ratified Amendments that were completely against the will of the people of those states. It was all ceremonious pretense. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were ratified by DC, not by the conquered states, and we just make a pretense today that this was a valid ratification.
I argue that the constitution was never meant to encompass such a corrupt ratification process. It turns consent of the governed on it's head.
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.