Posted on 03/21/2009 6:26:13 AM PDT by cowboyway
ATLANTA — In a cultural war that has pitted Old South against new, defenders of the Confederate legacy have opened a fresh front in their campaign to polish an image tarnished, they said, by people who do not respect Southern values.
With the 150th anniversary of the War Between the States in 2011, efforts are under way in statehouses, small towns and counties across the South to push for proclamations or legislation promoting Confederate history.
(Excerpt) Read more at courant.com ...
non=none
And that could be the downfall of any new republic because the NS's of the world don't really believe in a 'free' republic.
The Dixie bashers would poison any new republic that they joined much in the way that they've poisoned our existing republic.
Perfect! Thank you, Madame!
You've put on display for all to see the arrogant, supremacist mindset of the typical damnyankee.
Soooo, when are you and your jackbooted thugs gonna invade the South (again) to make sure that we stay 'marginalized'....................
You want neo-confederates to work with damn 'foreigners' from other states? Man, that would be like herding cats... or Libertarians. ;~))
We would probably not be having this very interesting conversation, what with you being in one country and me in another.
If that was the case, the America in which you live would be a totally socialist nation by now. The small population heartland and mountain states like Kansas and Wyoming would be crushed politically by the Northeast and the West Coast. It'd be interesting to see if you'd like it, or if you'd be begging to immigrate to Dixie once your tax bill came due.
Since everything is the fault of Lincoln, then it would be only fair to project a confederacy based on the policies of Jefferson Davis, wouldn't you agree?
The confederacy would no doubt be a one-party state (Davis ran unopposed in his only election). The constitution would be irrelevant since it meant what the president said it meant (Davis quote to that effect) and since there would be no checks and balances in place to enforce it or to check Congress or the executive(the confederacy never established the Supreme Court required by their own constitution). The economy would be socialist in nature (the Davis government seized farm produce, slave labor, and shipping space without compensation "for the war effort" and nationalized industries like liquor, textiles, and salt production). States rights would be a hollow joke (Davis ignored state control over their own militia by extending enlistments for the duration of the war and by declaring martial law in areas hundreds of miles from the fighting). Income taxes would be high (in addition to implementing the first income tax by the end of the war Davis was trying to implement tax levels that were almost confiscatory in nature). The confederacy would be larger, with their expansion into Cuba, Central America and the Caribbean to provide room for their spread of slavery (1860 Democratic platform and the expressed intent of many of the confederate founding fathers). Slavery would have continued for some time, maybe as late as the 20th century, and probably ended badly (quotes from many of the confederate leaders on slavery and blacks in general) possibly leading to something similar to the apartheid of South Africa (Blacks were not and could not be citizens per the Dred Scott decision. No supreme court to change that and no 14th Amendment to override it.) So in short, your confederacy could very well have become a police state keeping a restive minority in check with socialistic policies and high taxes. And you would be welcome to it.
Jeff Davis would have been promptly assassinated if he had said that.
Then judge your own leaders by the same standards. If you did then you would find them to be much worse than Lincoln by comparison. Deal?
You Reb bashers are constantly judging the antebellum South by current standards.
Can you point out where I've done that?
The South freed her slaves before the North. Go figure.
409.
And for the record are you stating that you believe the Constitution is meaningless? That it is something to be followed when convenient and ignored when you like? Is that what you are saying?
When you look at legislation from that era such as the Fugitive Slave Act or the Dred Scott decision, you will see that states rights, or even individual rights for that matter, were not all that important to them.
It was a handy phrase, but that's about it.
I believe that the necessity of slavery as an economic institution would have passed away as machinery took a larger role.
The first practical cotton harvesters did not come into use until the 1950s.
I'd also remind you that mechanization and slavery are not necessarly incompatible. See China.
No, it has been asked if I would support any actions which violated the Constitution. And I have answered that.
Kansas is part of this...Are you going to turn against your own State? SCR1609 “[T]he State of Kansas hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment.
To the best of my knowledge my state hasn't done anything that violated the Constitution. Unless and until it does then I have no problem with that resolution.
If & When this Federal Government suspends more of your rights are you...Going to defend your rights? Call honest Abe? Or just be a good Reb like us?
Well I don't know. Am I bound by your eccentric definition of what's lawful and what isn't? That'd make it hard.
You may get that live History lesson on States rights after all!
Oh I doubt it. Not like you imagine.
Sure.
Simply go to the very first post that you ever made on FR on a WBTS thread and then every post from there.
They are all laced with your typical yankee double standard.
Why waste the effort? As long as you keep talking, the thing will take care of itself.
But, no, instead of discussing that, you “theorize” on what the South would be like today if it were a separate nation, based on war time actions Davis took a century and a half ago. You “theorize” expansion into Cuba and other places. You fret about South African style apartheid, as if the current South Africa is an improvement.
But thanks anyway for the discussion!
You actually skipped the official name as designated by Congress ...
The military rebellion lasted four years and ended with defeat and a large percentage of the Confederate army and public quitting the fight when the going got tough. The Confederate rebellion of the mouth and pen has lasted 150 years and has yet to admit defeat. If General Lee and the CSA had been as persistent and inventive as their latter day supporters, the Union would not have had a chance.
When Obonga takes your freedom away with his right hand while waving the constitution with his left hand, are you just going to grin and say "Otay, Spanky...whatever you say...."?
We have your predicitions of what it would be like. Would you enjoy living in my scenario any more than I would enjoy living in your's?
But, no, instead of discussing that, you “theorize” on what the South would be like today if it were a separate nation, based on war time actions Davis took a century and a half ago.
But you have no problems blaming all our ills on wartime actions Lincoln took. Well, if he is responsible for what our country has become, as you all seem to believe, then why wouldn't actions taken by the confederacy impact the nation it would become? No, you all ignore what the confederacy did and instead imagine it to be some sort of small government nirvana. With nothing to back that up except the usual run of Southron myth and fantasy.
You “theorize” expansion into Cuba and other places.
No theory to it. The 1860 platforms that Breckenridge and Douglas ran on are clear on that - acquisition of Cuba was something to be pursued. And when the provisional confederate constitution was presented to the conference in Montgomery in February 1861, the first objection made was to the name of the proposed country - the confederate states of North America. The delegates thought that was too limiting and dropped the 'North'. Confederate expansion plans, and the motiviation behind it, was no secret.
You fret about South African style apartheid, as if the current South Africa is an improvement.
And the police state that preceeded it is a much better situation? If you're white, that is? Well, that may well have been the confederacy of 2009. And no doubt you would be happy being a part of it.
Ping
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.