Right here where you remarked "The Georgia secession document even mentions "the free trade environment now prevailing" or words to that effect" in order to argue that the protectionist movement was not a cause.
We is eddjicated.
You sure "is," though where I know not. Based on their respective products I do believe a strong case could be made for dissolution of each institution on the grounds of failure though.
Now, where did I even -suggest- that protectionists were a non-issue?
Right here: "The Georgia secession document even mentions "the free trade environment now prevailing" or words to that effect."
Hey, wouldn't it be better to say "protectionism"?
No, because referencing a protectionist indicates the individual and tangible nature of the person promoting protectionism. The Lincoln was a protectionist and calling him that denies you the opportunity to argue his escape from it by generalizing the protectionist movement into the economic theory of protectionism.
It -would- suck to have some little skulldugger of a protectionist pulling at ye pant leg.
From what you've suggested to be your case, he's hanging on your wall in a position of your personal adoration.
Where did I say that?
Right here where you remarked "The Georgia secession document even mentions "the free trade environment now prevailing" or words to that effect" in order to argue that the protectionist movement was not a cause.
THAT statement of mine neither indicates, suggests, or says that the protectionist movement was not a cause.
I might -hold- that position, but not based on that comment, fuzzy head.
As "Yankhater" indicated, tariffs are not in the set of issues that drive people to the barricades.
Tariffs are the issue the "Lost Cause" apologists fastened on after the war. The disinformation campaign continues, as your involvement suggests.
Walt