I see that you have been victimized by pro-Confederate propaganda & lies. So sad.
Right-wing Librarian: "nor do you believe the Constitution recognizes the right for states to secede. Prior to Lincoln, it was common knowledge that states had the right to secede. "
A right recognized by all Founders & others, including Lincoln, under two (and only two) circumstances:
Also from Madison: "It will hardly be contended that there is anything in the terms or nature of the compact, authorizing a party to dissolve it at pleasure."
That term, "at pleasure" accurately describes Deep South Fire Eaters' declarations of secession in late 1860 and early 1861.
And yet, those declarations did not start war, neither did their forming a new Confederacy.
Civil War only came after months of Confederates provoking it, starting war, formally declaring war on the United States and waging war against it in Union States.
Right-wing Librarian: "Lincoln usurped that right from the states, which is tyranny.
Like I said, he was a tyrant.
Good riddance."
Sorry, but that's complete rubbish & garbage talk. Not a word of truth in it.
Right-wing Librarian: "Anyone who wishes to get embroiled in this discussion: I am not here to educate you.
Get your own primary sources and read the truth for yourself."
You obviously learned nothing of the truth of history, only your pro-Confederate propaganda lies.
So Sad.
"Let us not allow ourselves to be used by progressive trolls wishing to divide us with this topic. "
Let us not allow ourselves to be used by lunatics who lie professionally in support of a Lost Cause which deserves nothing more than a decent burial.
"If you want to play the Jesse Jackson, Black Lives Matter game, you’re in the wrong forum."
If you come here to defend slavery or slavers, or heap lie upon lie about history, then you need to move along, bub.
You are so removed from reality it is pathetic and so sad. There is no point further discussion with people like you. Perhaps one day your veil might be lifted, BroJoeK. I’ll focus elsewhere.
BroJoeK, I almost missed this. You wrote,
“It will hardly be contended that there is anything in the terms or nature of the compact, authorizing a party to dissolve it at pleasure.”
Are you not taking that completely out of context? I don’t recall any of the Southern states seceding “at pleasure”, but rather after a long train of abuses and usurpations. This is Madison:
“Applying a like view of the subject to the case of the U. S. it results, that the compact being among individuals as imbodied into States, no State can at pleasure release itself therefrom, and set up for itself. The compact can only be dissolved by the consent of the other parties, or by usurpations or abuses of power justly having that effect.” — James Madison to Nicholas P. Trist, Feb 15, 1830
Was not a purpose of the constitution to guarantee the states a republican form of government, and to protect them against invasion? Madison, again:
“A protection against invasion is due from every society to the parts composing it. The latitude of the expression here used seems to secure each State, not only against foreign hostility, but against ambitious or vindictive enterprises of its more powerful neighbors. The history, both of ancient and modern confederacies, proves that the weaker members of the union ought not to be insensible to the policy of this article.”
And is this not the object of a society? Madison, again:
“The first question is answered at once by recurring to the absolute necessity of the case; to the great principle of self-preservation; to the transcendent law of nature and of nature’s God, which declares that the safety and happiness of society are the objects at which all political institutions aim, and to which all such institutions must be sacrificed.” — FP #43
Now, suppose that vindictive and powerful neighbor is the superior or controlling political institution, and roughly half the states decide the safety and happiness of their societies are no longer the objects of the controlling political institution, is it not the controlling institution that needs to be sacrificed, rather than the societies themselves?