Posted on 03/31/2010 3:04:35 PM PDT by TitansAFC
Ron Paul: Why didn’t the north just buy the south’s slaves and free them that way?
Getting down to the last two questions here…. Most people consider Abe Lincoln to be one of our greatest presidents, if not the greatest president we’ve ever had. Would you agree with that sentiment and why or why not?
No, I don’t think he was one of our greatest presidents. I mean, he was determined to fight a bloody civil war, which many have argued could have been avoided. For 1/100 the cost of the war, plus 600 thousand lives, enough money would have been available to buy up all the slaves and free them. So, I don’t see that is a good part of our history.....
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
No big surprise Walter Williams has never been a fan of Lincoln.
If nothing else it is worth a discussion.
I simply dont get the hatred for RP by many on this site. His knowledge on economics is so far above and beyond that of your typical rino or run of the mill republican that I can cut him slack on other issues.
Do people really believe that there is this magical mystical perfect person out there?
“Maybe all the slaveholders weren’t willing to sell.”
***
Not only were they not for sale, but there was a conflict as to whether the western states would allow slavery or not-containment was apparently not an option.
Paul is crazy, and I have as little respect for his supporters as I do for libtards. They are just too out there. (He does have some good ideas relating to the economy and the fed, but NO WAY is he stable or competent enough to be POTUS.)
I’m confused how something Ron Paul told Tim Russert back in December 2007 is now considered “breaking news”.
And another thing, the American Civil War (aka the war of northern aggression-LOL!) began when Confederate batteries opened fire on the Union garrison of Fort Sumter and dared President Lincoln to confront their succession plans.
Lincoln was a sadistic jack ass who was manufactured into a “hero”. He didn’t get a bullet in the head because everyone loved him.
Riddle me this. If John Wilkes Booth were alive today, would he be a full fledged member of the Ron Paul Libertarian cult and fan club?
Oh good God. Here we go. 400 posts already, and I’m sure it won’t stop there.
Ron Paul was basically right. Albeit not quite as simple as buying them out in 1 chunk.
All men created equal means no Counts, no Barons, no Dukes and no Kings. It was the idea behind the revolution, that a man calling himself king has no divine right to rule us. And they do not.
Do you support the concept of our representative constitutional republic and the equality and natural rights of man?
People are horrified because DOCTOR Paul speaks truth and cuts through the statist BS to the heart of Conservatism. This is why he was the winner on the CPAC straw poll for President, as Reagan was before him. He is a loyal Republican and speaks for millions. Weak minded are intimidated and it is what ails us in this dieing party.
You are so right. Lincoln didn’t give a tinkers damn about the Negro. He absolutely wanted to ship them and DID SHIP THEM to Liberia by the thousands. The War was not over slavery. It was over power and politics .Lincoln was a consummate hypocrite.
Thank you!!!!
FINALLY someone posted that fact about 1808 trade sunset - but not before at least 10 showed their ignorance!
Geesh!
Lincoln “got just what he deserved”, AMEN
The fact that it was illegal to import new slaves wouldn’t have stopped people from bringing in more slaves unless slavery was abolished in the southern states. The southern states didn’t want to abolish slavery. They wanted to expand it into the new territories.
If, as paul suggested, they just bought the slaves freedom and they hadn’t abolished slavery, there would be nothing to stop people from smuggling in more slaves just like they smuggle Mexicans in today.
It’s illegal for Mexicans to cross the border and come here. It’s illegal for people to smuggle Mexicans in. We have laws. But there are millions of them here. And until our gov gets serious about our laws we’re going to see more illegals smuggled in too. So do you really think there wouldn’t have been more slaves smuggled in when the south wouldn’t abolish slavery? When they wanted to expand it?
I saw a TV show, I don’t remember, 48hrs or something like that. It was about five or six years ago, maybe more I can’t remember. But I was shocked to find out that slavery was still being practiced in Africa.
Anyway they took some money and bought the freedom for a few of the slaves. All young girls if I remember right. Can’t remember what African state. But buying some of the slaves didn’t stop slavery there. And that was one of the sad points of the show. That slavery existed in today’s world. Or should I say in the world of five or six years ago, maybe more when I saw the show.
And now , WE ARE THE SLAVES and I’m sick of it.
However, there is a caveat here: The proposal was aimed at slaveholders in areas already under Union control, including the Union States where slavery was legal, notably Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri. The Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 had already freed slaves in areas under Confederate control, though the immediate effect was negligible because there was no way to enforce it.
Remember, early in 1864, Lincoln's reelection was far from a sure thing. Missouri was still being harried by the Confederacy, particularly in the key western city of Independence. The Wilderness Campaign in Virginia was dragging on as a stalemate until Grant's army finally begin to turn the tide late that fall. The South was still able to mount limited invasions of the north, as the Monocacy Battlefield in Maryland attests.
There was not even a huge outcry from the Northern States to abolish slavery outside of New England and frontier states such as Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Kansas and Minnesota where the farming economic base was at a distinct disadvantage competing with slave labor agriculture from the south.
Outside of these areas, most northern states were not keen on the idea of massive immigration of freed slaves to the north. New York City, in particular, was a den of copperheads and southern sympathizers who hated Lincoln for his interference with their once profitable commerce with the south. It was also the site of the largest race riot in U.S. history just the year before.
Even Lincoln himself entertained the idea of resettling as many freed slaves as possible in Africa or in newly opened lands in the west to minimize the postwar friction which he considered inevitable.
So the point I'm making is that those 1864 proposals were made in the heat of an election campaign against a very popular former Union General who had a real chance of defeating Lincoln at the time.
In my years at FR, I've seen a few delusional rants here.
I have to admit that is by far the most delusional one I've ever seen. I sincerely hope you get a life. Soon.
ROTFLMAO. Ron Paul is a cranky Bircher/Liebertarian, NOT a conservative or a loyal Republican as you claim. In fact, Ron Paul is a RINO in the true meaning of the word: Republican In Name Only.
His win at CPAC cannot be compared to Reagan's win, when the vote was authentic and meant something, but you go ahead and think so if it makes you feel better.
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.