Granted, SCOTUS’s led by demorat judges have been using those amendments to mean just about anything, but they have done that with just about every amendment. Also, it was not until after the 1940’s were they so misused by judges appointed by demorat Roosevelt.
You picked one waypoint along the road to industrialization...but not the end state. Cotton is now picked by machines and my original point is valid.
Never the less, the population of slaves was growing, and the demorats wanted to expand slavery. All you have to do is look at the legislation demorats passed during the antebellum period.
First of all, they fired on Fort Sumter in 1861...not 1860.
Yeppers, you got me on this one; it was 1861. I misstated that fact. Correction noted. Hope you can amit your mistakes.
And it wasn’t in January, it was in April. And it wasn’t before Lincoln took office - it occurred a month after he took office. So please revise your history lesson.
It is you who has suffered revisionists’ history here. South Carolina seceded from the Union on December 20, 1860. The initial shots by these secession demorats were fired on January 9, 1861. On that day, democrat slavers fired these first shots on Fort Sumter, months before Lincoln even took office and could do anything to avoid war.
Now as to why. By April, South Carolina had been separated from the Union for 4 months. It would be like having a Mexican army base in Dallas, today. The south and north negotiated the abandonment of many federal forts in that 4 month period. But there was no successful negotiation with Sumter.
So you agree the demorat slavers of the South fired first?
Even so, the fort was still under demorat control under Demorat President James Buchanan until Lincoln took office in March. Frankly, it was demorats own doing that led to the war. They had the majority – Executive, House and Judiciary - but their own schisms split “white free labor” demorats of the North from slaver demorats in the South.
Northern demorats saw slavery as depressing the income of free whites in the North. The demorat controlled SCOTUS made slavery a national institution and the demorat slavers loved it (so much for states’ rights). The demorat Fugitive Slave Act was also a federal law and the demorat slaver sates cleaved to it (again, so much for states’ rights).
Demorat Stephen A. Douglas was instrumental in splitting the Demorat Party and bringing about the war by introducing the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which led to “Bleeding Kansas”. These are just the highlights of some demorat slaver legislation that led to the war; I can write pages of other demorat stupidity making them responsible for the war. Name the federal laws enacted that were authored by abolitionists and I can give you ten laws created to help demorats.
And the last straw...Lincoln made known his intention to re-supply the fort. Just imagine Mexico announcing a supply train was headed through Texas to supply their Dallas fort. South Carolina had decided to bow out of the compact of states, and was no longer part of the Union. The characterization of firing on Sumter as the aggressive catalyst of the war ignores the true situation. The aggressive act was maintaining an outpost on what was now foreign soil.
Even if you think secession is legal without the agreement of the rest of the states, and those that seceded had the right to the land that Fort Sumter was on; they should have made sure if they were going to fire on that fort that they’d be able to win a war. Even if they were shooting for a negotiated peace, they had no chance of winning a war and should have kept negotiating more than the 20 days they had from secession to first shot (or as you believe, between March and April) .
IOW, the civil war is much more complicated than the sound byte history books you have read.
“sound byte history books you have read?” What you have learned is demorat history indoctrination. They don’t want you to know the truth . They own the responsibility of the war, but they don’t want you to know their little secret. Just think where they would be if they had to own up to it and had to apologize for it!
Now I understand your point...you don’t like the historical switcheroo that has occurred with both slavery and the civil rights movement, when it comes to the democrats. But why on earth join the anti-flag chorus at this time. To me its practically obscene...politicians are standing on a soap box propped up with dead bodies when they preach on this issue. The flag has gradually been pulled from statehouse domes over the years, and that trend, born from legislative and referendum action is likely to continue...IOW the people are deciding to leave the flag in the history books.
But now the rabble want to erase history, and act like the flag never existed. That type of stuff seems to go hand in hand with totalitarian dictators, and I want no part of it.
I have always been against that flag because it represents those who flew it during the Civil War - demorat slavers. But I will grant you, and I'll admit (as in post 35) that the removal of the flag is symbolism over substance. I’m not for the flags entire removal from everything. You are correct, it is part of US history, much like how the US fought in other wars. It should be in museums and history books - but the history has to be correct – DEMORAT SLAVERS FLEW THE FLAG.
I will always fight against the false notion that Christian conservatives should be stuck with the history of this flag and I will do what I can to keep the history of it where it belongs. Abolitionists were the conservatives of their time, they stuck to what the Bible stated and kept it in context; the slaver Christians took the Bible out of context like liberal Christians of today.
No republican flew this flag when it was held in battle. I’m not saying you have stated this, but it does come out of college students. I’ve heard it, I sat with them.
I repeat, if we are going to do something with substance, we should ban the political Party that upheld slavery without apology.
It is the Demorat Party that has this heritage of hate. No Republican EVER held slaves - ONLY DEMORATS. The Demorat Party has NEVER apologized for slavery! If we are going to ban anything meaningful because of slavery - BAN THE DEMORAT PARTY !!!
Unfortunately, there are many here that will defend demorat history.
The first shots on Sumter weren in April, not January. You are confusing this with confederate shots fired on a supply ship attempting to reach Sumter.
And why wouldn’t it be legitimate to fire on a ship violating the confederacy’s sovereign territory? And of course this illustrates the problem with maintaining federal forts in confederate territory...how could Lincoln or anyone else expected anything other than armed conflict to be the ultimate outcome?
I’ll tell you a secret. Most of his cabinet and even the commander at Sumter understood this - and they begged Lincoln not to press for war. He ignored them.
We’re obviously never going to agree. But I refuse to believe the black and white history of the civil war that has become conventional wisdom. And party labels aside, the south acted in more of an originalist fashion than the north, hands down. I’m actually glad the union stayed together...and ours became a nation powerful enough to save the world from tyranny in the 20th century. But we never needed to have a war or even secession. The late 1850s marked the beginning of our robbing Peter to pay Paul, a watershed fork in the road in which our ancestors had to choose between the constitution or an ever bloating government. The urban centers chose the latter, and implememted tariffs that damaged the south’s export economy. Creeping big government reared its ugly head as it always does - taxes/tariffs and fees. The south wanted no part of it...and the government wrapped itself in a social issue, per usual, and the killing began. Imagine what type of nation we would now have, if originalists had won out and rescinded the new tariffs.