How Libertarians Win Friends And Influence People With Their Positions on the Civil War - Page 9 - Politics and Economics

ErikTheDread · 11-30-2009, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrModern

There are a lot of reasons to dislike Lincoln, but he did issue the emancipation proclamation, and work for the passage of the 13th - 15th Amendments. He even went so far as to personally sign them (not a legally necessary act).

He was involved in passing the 13th, but the 14th and 15th were both several years after his death.

pvn · 11-30-2009, 09:37 AM

Let's just say for a minute that the civil war WAS about slavery.

OK, now what?

Let's say Maine wants to secede today. There are no slaves in Maine. Should Maine be prevented from seceding? If so, why?

mosdef · 11-30-2009, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pvn

Let's just say for a minute that the civil war WAS about slavery.

OK, now what?

Let's say Maine wants to secede today. There are no slaves in Maine. Should Maine be prevented from seceding? If so, why?

So they can't reinstitute slavery, LDO.

mcsqr · 11-30-2009, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pvn

Let's say Maine wants to secede today. There are no slaves in Maine. Should Maine be prevented from seceding? If so, why?

They should be allowed if both parties (Maine and the country) can come to an agreement accepted by both. But not unilaterally. So yes we can prevent it even if we just feel like it, it is up to Maine to give us incentives to encourage us to allow them to secede if they really want to.

Montius · 11-30-2009, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcsqr

They should be allowed if both parties (Maine and the country) can come to an agreement accepted by both. But not unilaterally. So yes we can prevent it even if we just feel like it, it is up to Maine to give us incentives to encourage us to allow them to secede if they really want to.

Wat? Why?

ErikTheDread · 11-30-2009, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Montius

Wat? Why?

Because we've already fought one civil war already. Do you really want a second?

ianlippert · 11-30-2009, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcsqr

They should be allowed if both parties (Maine and the country) can come to an agreement accepted by both. But not unilaterally. So yes we can prevent it even if we just feel like it, it is up to Maine to give us incentives to encourage us to allow them to secede if they really want to.

And what terms would you find acceptable?

pvn · 11-30-2009, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikTheDread

Because we've already fought one civil war already. Do you really want a second?

So, let me get this straight. A war was fought because of one group of people keeping another group of people in a situation against their will. And because of that, one group of people can now legitimately keep another group of people in a situation against their will.

DrModern · 11-30-2009, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pvn

Let's just say for a minute that the civil war WAS about slavery.

OK, now what?

Let's say Maine wants to secede today. There are no slaves in Maine. Should Maine be prevented from seceding? If so, why?

Come on. What's "Maine?" The state of Maine, qua entity that has agreed to be bound by the Constitution of the United States, lacks the authority to unilaterally secede from the Union, see Texas v. White (1869), and any act by the state attempting to do so is void. If "Maine" refers to a group of people, the question, as always, is about consent. If these Mainers did not consent to be ruled by any government, what is the point of talking about them seceding from some government?

pvn · 11-30-2009, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikTheDread

Because we've already fought one civil war already. Do you really want a second?

You sound like a bully. Just give me your lunch money. Do you really want a fight?

pvn · 11-30-2009, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrModern

Come on. What's "Maine?" The state of Maine, qua entity that has agreed to be bound by the Constitution of the United States, lacks the authority to unilaterally secede from the Union, see Texas v. White (1869), and any act by the state attempting to do so is void. If "Maine" refers to a group of people, the question, as always, is about consent. If these Mainers did not consent to be ruled by any government, what is the point of talking about them seceding from some government?

No, let's say they like the idea of state government, they just don't want to be tied to the federal US government.

DrModern · 11-30-2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pvn

No, let's say they like the idea of state government, they just don't want to be tied to the federal US government.

This doesn't resolve the ambiguity I noted.

**ElliotR** · 11-30-2009, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Montius

And the North's willingness to burn whole towns and kill countless so they could continue to levy taxes and tarrifs against their Southern brethren.

If the North really just didn't want slavery to exist, there were other far more effective ways to get rid of it. The most obvious being economic ostracization. You don't like the way they produce stuff, don't trade with them. Pretty soon, the system of slavery becomes economically unsustainable and falls out of practice.

This is one of the more absurd statements made on this issue. And that's saying something.

**ElliotR** · 11-30-2009, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Montius

Instead, what happened was the North tried to exercise its political will on the South via an aggressive war, which only hardened Dixie's belief on the issue and caused them to meet violence with even more violence (and helped cement the cultural attitude in the South that still very much exists today).

Are you contending that racial attitudes in the South are at least in part the result of the Civil War?

**ElliotR** · 11-30-2009, 11:29 AM

What is so magic about "Maine"? Should you, pvn, be permitted to declare unilaterally that on some plot of land that you call "yours" you are not subject to the laws of Tennessee or the United States?

I say no, you should not.