Posted on 02/27/2006 6:14:47 AM PST by SuzyQ2
I love history. I’m proud of my Southern heritage. But for me to be angry to the point of protesting a moment in Southern history that happened nearly a century-and-a-half ago would be just, well, nonsensical. And would in some ways tarnish that heritage.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Georgia added the "southern cross" flag to their state flag in 1956. South Carolina put up the battleflag in 1962. Yes, it was around 100 years after the Civil war, but the Confederate flag was "the bonny blue flag that bore a single star" if you recall the confederate anthem. That flag does not have the hateful associations, so of course the all white Democrat legislature chose, of all the Southern flags that had been used, the one most used by the KKK.
I am glad it is down, and its position at a cemetary should be a warning to racists in the future.
Taking Mr. Norris' account of his inhuman flogging at General Lee's order as accurate (and, disallowing the possibility of exaggeration, I have no reason to believe it is inaccurate), it is established that Lee thus (on at least this occasion) behaved in a cold-blooded and barbarous manner towards those slaves of "his" who elected, as properly sovereign Human Beings, to Secede from his Plantation.
Which compels me only to two questions:
Lincoln stated in his own First Inaugural that his object was NOT to free the slaves, but rather to continue collecting Federal Tariffs upon the Southern Trade (through all those "fortifications", i.e., Tax Forts, by which the Federals collected monies from the free-trading South): "The power confided in me," he said, "will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property, and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion -- no using force against, or among the people anywhere".
I'll reserve in advance that I genuinely believe that the Southern "peculiar institution" of life-long and multi-generational Slavery was a supreme, Anti-Biblical Evil, utterly abhorrent to the norms of Biblical Law (despite the abusive attempts of some Southern preachers to justify the practice). I just happen to believe that an Invasion of Conquest, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans and originally commenced for the purpose of Collecting Taxes (even if it was, and that only later, tepidly justified on Emancipationist grounds), is pretty Evil too.
I was born and bred an Iowa Yankee, so I don't have an Old Dixie, "Lost Cause" dog in this hunt. I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the matter.
Best, OP
1.) Was it Just for Lincoln to commence a War of Conquest against those Southern States who elected to Secede from a Northern Plantation of Protectionist Tariffs?
Comparing the torture of a man who was already captured, to the actions that were necessary to end rebellion is a bit of not fair, no? Now if the Federal govt had insisted that all southerners be tortured after the rebellion ended, you may have a point. You don't.
It was not a war of conquest, it was a war to end a rebellion. The US included the southern states. The states did not form the federal government as individuals, but rather the entire people formed it. If 9 states were necessary to put the constitution in effect, no single state could then withdraw. Compacts between states are specifically forbidden without the permission of Congress.
The constitution guarantees to each state, a republican form of government. No state can leave, or else it can leave, and then establish a dictatorship, which is darn close to what the South tried to do. Davis never did get around to appointing a Confederate Supreme Court. After the southern armies were attritted and occupied fighting the north, they were unable to enforce Confederate directives, but a dictatorship is what they wanted. The South conscripted its soldiers, while the US used volunteers for a long time.
The Articles of Confederation established a perpetual union. The south did not submit a court case, they gathered armies. Buchanan's secretary of war shipped Federal property south where it could be stolen. The south, rather than awaiting legal dispositions, fired on federal troops, occupying a federal fort (Ft Moulton) in the process.
Considering that there was no income tax at that time, and that free trade depended on federal navy patrols of the sea lanes, it is silly to think that the south should benefit from free trade, (selling cotton free of tarriffs) and not even pay for their imports.
Tax plantation is a mixed metaphor, and is unfair. The north paid many times what the south paid in tariffs.
I suppose one can imagine a situation where the south raised armies, and the North did nothing. As it was, the North had to raise militia companies even to get the duly elected President to his inauguration. Yes, the entire south is also my country, and anyone pretending to remove part of it will be resisted. Lincoln didn't launch an invasion, he responded to armed insurrection on US territory.
2.) Just supposing that Lincoln HAD desired to free the slaves -- and by his own words, he originally intended no such thing, but rather the Collection of Taxes -- is it Moral to commit Mass-Murder to secure another man's freedom?
I think that it is moral to kill terrorists. That is not murder, it is necessary. Would you suggest that when the terrorist comes to kill you, you should bend your neck to his blade, lest you commit murder? Darn foolish argument.
When an army resists, fighting in a bad cause (insurrection, slavery, racial injustice) fighting against that army in a good cause) ending insurrection, ending slavery, securing federal property purchased by the Government, and improved at the cost of all federal tax payers) that is not murder. It is ending insurrection and reestablishing justice and the rule of law.
The connection between tariff and trade protection is well known. The theft of government property by rebels during the waning months of the Buchanan administration is well known.
Give to Caesar what is Caesars. Give to G-d what is G-ds.
Seems to me the death of 600,000 Americans is somewhere on the same scale of Moral Evil as Torture. You could belabor the point, I suppose, but they both seem pretty Evil to me.
It was not a war of conquest, it was a war to end a rebellion.
That's a "Fugitive Slave Law" type of argument.
It's Immoral either way you slice it.
You're still attempting to justify 600,000 deaths for what was, originally, a War to Collect Taxes.
The US included the southern states. The states did not form the federal government as individuals, but rather the entire people formed it.
Actually, the United States were formed by the Conventions of the Sovereign States. It's not as if the People of the United States followed the Biblical Methodology of Unanimous Individual Consent, as was required for the Ratification of the Israelitish Covenant (Deuteronomy 27:14-26).
I've heard this Argument from Federalists before, and it doesn't fly. You're attempting to use a Deuteronomy 27 argument (Unanimous Individual Consent) to justify a Forcible Union between Sovereign States.... but that's not how the Constitution was Ratified.
The Constitution was Ratified by the State Coventions, not "the entire people".
And, therefore, the Contractors were the States, not "the entire people".
If 9 states were necessary to put the constitution in effect, no single state could then withdraw.
That theory (the impossibility of Secession) was never explicitly stated in the Constitution, wasn't what the States agreed to, and in fact was a theory which was rejected by the Founders.
Several States specifically reserved the Right to Secede, and no-one ever doubted the propriety of their Reservations at the point of Ratification.
Compacts between states are specifically forbidden without the permission of Congress. The constitution guarantees to each state, a republican form of government.
Irrelevant, if the States had already voluntarily chosen to exit a voluntary Contract.
Considering that there was no income tax at that time, and that free trade depended on federal navy patrols of the sea lanes, it is silly to think that the south should benefit from free trade, (selling cotton free of tarriffs) and not even pay for their imports. Tax plantation is a mixed metaphor, and is unfair. The north paid many times what the south paid in tariffs.
I could argue the point based on the South's disproportionate payment of Import Tariffs... but I won't.
If Secession was such a bad economic deal for the South, then that would be their own mistake to make. If that was the case (I'll allow it, just for the sake of argument), then it was murderously wasteful of Lincoln to spend $6 billions of dollars and 600,000 lives just to prove an economic point.
Yes, the entire south is also my country, and anyone pretending to remove part of it will be resisted. Lincoln didn't launch an invasion, he responded to armed insurrection on US territory.
Sorry -- my house belongs to me, not you. You don't own anything but what you personally own, yourself. Identifying your Own Self with your Federal Government doesn't change the basic Biblical Law against Trespassing.
I think that it is moral to kill terrorists. That is not murder, it is necessary. Would you suggest that when the terrorist comes to kill you, you should bend your neck to his blade, lest you commit murder? Darn foolish argument.
There were no Southern plans for any invasion of the North, until *after* the Federals invaded the Confederate States.
When an army resists, fighting in a bad cause (insurrection, slavery, racial injustice) fighting against that army in a good cause) ending insurrection, ending slavery, securing federal property purchased by the Government, and improved at the cost of all federal tax payers) that is not murder. It is ending insurrection and reestablishing justice and the rule of law. The connection between tariff and trade protection is well known. The theft of government property by rebels during the waning months of the Buchanan administration is well known.
You're still attempting to justify the waste of Billions of dollars and 600,000 American lives in order to justify... a War to Collect Federal Taxes.
I'm sorry. I can't buy into that sort of "morality". I just can't buy it.
Give to Caesar what is Caesars. Give to G-d what is G-ds.
That's precisely my point. See, I was there with Operation Rescue back at the Wichita "Summer of Mercy" in 1991, and I try (as best I am able) to define my Politics in terms of "What Would Jesus Do"? I'm by no means perfect, on any of a variety of fronts, but I try to look up to that standard even if I fail personally.
I can imagine that Jesus would have worked for the Underground Railroad, "Fugitive Slave Law" be damned. I can imagine that Jesus would have thrown Himself before the doors of an Abortion Clinic, to be beaten and dragged away by the Federals in defense of the Unborn. I don't claim that my imagination is necessarily correct, but I could see Him defending the defenseless in such manner.
That being said, I have a hard time seeing Jesus haul out a shotgun and blaze away at an abortion doctor, his nurses and his bodyguards, the way Paul Hill did; and I have a hard time seeing Him ordering the Deaths of 600,000 Americans... just to collect Lincoln's Tariffs.
Maybe I'm wrong.
I'm open to your point of view, but I'm not much sold as yet.
Best, OP
BTTT!
I think of the confederate flag as a memorial to treason. Others may differ.
I have never been to South Carolina. My brother taught there, and now is called out as "from South Carolina" now that he is working in Atlanta. However, if you engage him in technical matters, he drops the Charleston Clip, and slips into "Appleknocker twang".
He got his PHD from Mississippi state. I gave him a largish painting I had of Lee on the battlefield of Antietam, riding on a horse in front of a regiment from Alabama, with his arm in a sling.
He was glad to have it, I was glad to get rid of it. Mutual satisfaction.
I am not Jesus, and do not pretend to act as he did. Nor do I recommend that others act that way. As I recall, Jesus's sacrifice was accomplished once, for all. To commit sin and then emulate his sacrifice is an element of the Khlisty heresy, as did the Mad Monk, Rasputin.
When you think of the death of the 600,000 Americans, ask yourself, who killed them. Rather a lot were killed by rebel fire. I have a hard time blaming that on Lincoln.
if you ARE, your best ten years were third grade.
free dixie,sw
if you are, people here who haven an "IQ higher than average room temperature" are laughing AT you.
what you posted is just as clueLESS & "off the edge" as the NONSENSE usually posted by "m.eSPINola" the fool, bigot & FR's DUMBbunny-in-chief.
free dixie,sw
IF you checked the FACTS, rather than just "running off at the mouth" OR posting FALSE,EVASIVE & DECEPTIVE comments, you'd look SMARTER.
in point of fact, President John F. Kennedy ASKED the state government of SC, in March of 1961, to fly the CSA flag over the statehouse in memory of the CSA soldiers,sailors & marines, who died fighting for dixie LIBERTY.
the original letter, on WH stationary & signed by JFK, is on display in the "Relics Room", across from the statehouse.
free dixie,sw
are you trying to become the next "m.eSPINola" the class clown & DUMBbunny?
free dixie,sw
is that too much to ask???
free dixie,sw
What was false?
What was deceptive?
http://www.sos.state.ga.us/museum/html/georgia_state_flag_c_1920_1956.htm
For georgia flag before 1956
http://www.sos.state.ga.us/museum/html/georgia_state_flag_since_1956.htm
After 1956.
http://www.confederateflags.org/secesh/FOTCbbf.htm
Confederate flags.
http://www.confederateflags.org/national/FOTCs_b.htm
Stars and Bars
that assertion, in 2 words is: FALSE & DECEPTIVE.(i might also throw in,ARROGANTLY IGNORANT, as well.)
IF you believe that LEFTIST/REVISIONIST/naaLcp bilge, you must be in the same IQ range as "m.eSPINola", i.e., the bottom 10% OR you hope the rest of us are.
free dixie,sw
do you HAVE a point????
free dixie,sw
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.