Oh look, you're lying about me again. Shocker! You should really put this personal vendetta of yours aside.

In the right context, it certainly can be. In the context given, I'd say probably. If it had been in Texas, that would be a different question.

I quoted the post.

Thank you. I understand that somewhat. But why should it be? It just sounds like a shifting blame game. Nobody cares to read actual philosophers from that time but they just humpty dumpty about a broken egg.

Alex

I think most of us are A-OK with the slave owner being punished for owning other human beings and don't find it unfair at all and certainly don't find it unfair compared to, you know, the people who were treated as property because of their skin color.

(a) Not really, abolitionist friendly would be more accurate.
(b) True.
(c) Not his call. The CSA started the war.

This is categorically false.

This is either absurd (claiming some kinda universal right to be a hermit) or gibberish (if not living as a hermit, WTF does a seceded individual even possibly mean ~ answer: nothing).

True, they just had a big-deal election about this in the UK. However in the context of what AlexM is carrying on about (Lincoln, etc) it is explicitly tied to US History and slavery.

However, in this US Historical context, most people forget that the rallying slogan and goal of the Abolitionist Movement was 'Disunion'. Abolitionists considered the US Constitution as fatally flawed because it was specifically written to legally protect slave owners 'rights' from democratic political action. Therefore dissolving the union was the only peaceful way to abolish slavery.

I thought you might have been thinking this. I can't even tell which post you mean though, because none of the ones you quoted are anything like that. Your ability to distort the things I say into some other thing is certainly amazing. You have a talent.

Alex, since we're apparently doing this **** all over again, can you also remind me real quick how the black vote broke down in the Southern Independence referendums in the various states of the CSA?

After you answer the question about the billoard, of course.

Who was making a comparison? Obviously that other thing is way worse.

So, do you think we should have also executed everyone in Germany after WWII? After all, the populace was, by and large, an accomplice in what happened. I'm sorry if I don't necessarily agree with ruining the lives of all the dumbs who go along with things.

But hey, let's go with that philosophy. I now support imprisoning everyone who has ever voted against gay marriage. Yeah, sounds like a great idea!

Umad bro? Cause I figure you wouldn't have missed my response to that if you weren't mad.

I have no idea what a Southern Independence referendum is and have no idea why I should care.

It may help to imagine the civil war never ended, from some folks perspective.

How these people behave in the modern political climate is more complicated than it may seem. A person with willfully racist political intent is the most dangerous and is represented figuratively in that civil war discussion entanglement.

Uh, dude, I'm so in your head I made you have a ****ing anxiety attack/mental breakdown. I'm doing it to you right now.

But, uh, the billboard just says "secede" how is that racist?

You know, the votes that Southern states held before seceding from the Union? So that they could morally assert the "consent of the governed" argument?

Just a real quick overview of the black vote in those referendums, you don't need to go state by state.

Arguing over the right to secede is a tangent that is interesting as its own discussion.

Ahh, okay. So, you think you're scoring some point or something because they didn't get to vote. Having them revote after the war and including everyone's vote sounds like a great idea.

It is not necessary to read the Constitution to assert a natural and inalienable right to secede.

I agree with all of them. I am not blaming Lincoln for the war.



Yeah, it somewhat is, therefore my "" around rights.



That we could argue about. I think it means I right to solitude.



I tried to account for that.

That was somewhat what I was talking about.

OK then maybe just the white vote, how'd that break down?


LOL you worthless ****ing racist, by the way. What odds you think there are on your "great idea" actually happening? Why do we have to wait until AFTER the war, I thought under your plan there would be no war.

Dip**** this is why you shouldn't learn history from white supremacists. Maybe try a history book next time?

lol Fly

How about you say what you're trying to say and stop playing dumbass games?

If you do that, I might even pretend that you're engaging with me honestly, even though we both know you're not.

I think my point is pretty clear. You may not understand, but you're an uneducated mentally ill racist piece of ****. Enjoy living half a life, ****wit.

I DO NOT WANT TO ENGAGE YOU HONESTLY. Alex, you bring nothing to the table besides whining and ****ing dishonesty. What's in it for me? I not only already know what your halfwit racist opinions are(bog standard Mises-style neoconfederacy apologism), I know the historical context for how stupid white Southerners built that Lost Cause mythology.

What do you bring to the table, besides bleating demands that everyone hold your hand, explain everything to you, and be real nice about it while we do it?

I don't know what's in it for you. Most people who discuss Politics are interested in learning and helping others learn. What's your purpose?

I get that somewhat. But this my point. So we want to hinder this discussion or not just because it is dangerous? Edit: Why is the modern political discussion even relevant?

Man, it was dangerous to discuss the earth not evolving around the sun in some countries some years ago. Everybody would agree that that was stupid. Just because we do not know what will be an "accepted theory" some years from now, why would we stop discussing it? Just because everybody knows it is an "accepted theory" now why would we stop discussing it? Discussion is dangerous, that is why it is so precious. Doesn't mean there are not differences between different modes of discussion.

I guess the real question is, if you don't want to engage with me, why are you asking me questions?