Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/23/2001 3:14:52 AM EDT
A review of what I hear is an excellent book. I want to get it when I get the money. Of course I have 8 other books to read, and about a thousand other things to do! Anyway check it out: [url]http://www.lewrockwell.com/stromberg/stromberg28.html[/url]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 3:28:48 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 5:43:31 AM EDT
Well.....if the South should ever seceed....make sure they eliminate all gun control laws on the books.....if so, I'll be moving South [:D]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 6:42:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raf: ..... the issue of slavery precluded any decisive foreign support for the South, and doomed the attempt.
View Quote
raf, not to be a picker of nits but in the North, slavery only became an issue well after the war was underway. Even then the issue was used as a "recruiting tool" not one of the corps beliefs of the North. Rights-of-the-states vs. a strong central government was the prime issue. (In other words "Power" and who was gonna have it.) Guess we all know who won - Schumer, Hitlary, etc.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 7:18:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/23/2001 7:21:39 AM EDT by raf]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 7:21:18 AM EDT
raf is right...Lincoln MADE slavery the issue with the Emancipation Proclamation, which prevented England and France from coming on the side of the Confederacy.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 8:56:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By RikWriter: raf is right, France did aid the Confederacy !
View Quote
[:D] [:D]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 9:40:43 AM EDT
Sorry, I don't see the humor in the misquote.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 9:52:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By RikWriter: Sorry, I don't see the humor in the misquote.
View Quote
I think hes saying that had france helped they would be why the south aint still the south anymore.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 9:55:47 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 9:59:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By RikWriter: Sorry, I don't see the humor in the misquote.
View Quote
The Writer is correct. I've misquoted his quote ! I've been changing "Ericthe..........Hun's by lines for a couple of days now and "he" never caught it. My very finest-day-before-Christmas-eve-apology.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 10:36:30 AM EDT
Texas is the only State that was a country before entering the Union. Texas, in the Republic of Texas Constitution I beleave, has the ability to secede. It is not clear that Texas entered the Union correctly. But it is to late to undo any ‘bad paperwork’ now. Texas has the best chance, legally, to secede. Texas dose have a diverse economy, agriculture to hi-tech. We could support ourselves. It [b]would[/b] be a bumpy ride! [}:)] Ya’ll come on down![:D] SSD
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 10:40:50 AM EDT
they'll never let Texas leave, not while our cars still run on gasoline.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 10:46:31 AM EDT
Come on, guys. You don't want states to secede and start their own countries. Imagine the nightmare of dealing with 50 federal bureaucracies instead of 1. Passports, customs, extradition treaties... What a friggin' mess that would be.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 10:57:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By marvl: Come on, guys. You don't want states to secede and start their own countries. Imagine the nightmare of dealing with 50 federal bureaucracies instead of 1. Passports, customs, extradition treaties... What a friggin' mess that would be.
View Quote
If 1 State did manage to leave the uSA, would not it be reasonable to believe that the fed and remaining States would maybe rethink some of there polices? I can dream can't I? SSD[;)]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 11:09:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By marvl: Come on, guys. You don't want states to secede and start their own countries. Imagine the nightmare of dealing with 50 federal bureaucracies instead of 1. Passports, customs, extradition treaties... What a friggin' mess that would be.
View Quote
The "European Union" has found ways to get around most of those problems. What I wonder about is how much of the national debt would be assigned to the departing state.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 11:26:57 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SSD: Texas is the only State that was a country before entering the Union.
View Quote
Republic of Vermont: 1777 - 1791. It joined the US 3/4/1791. Had to pay $30K in reparations to New York for some land they had taken.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 11:32:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 5subslr5: What I wonder about is how much of the national debt would be assigned to the departing state.
View Quote
How about that be the personal responsibility of the s***heads in congress that made it? SSD
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 11:57:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By marvl: Come on, guys. You don't want states to secede and start their own countries. Imagine the nightmare of dealing with 50 federal bureaucracies instead of 1. Passports, customs, extradition treaties... What a friggin' mess that would be.
View Quote
Whats wrong with any of that? Just admit it, you would be mad because you couldn't get into Texas as easy. If Texas became its own state, I wouldn't even think about leaving. The only reason I rarely leave now it to remind myself how bad off other people in the world have it! [img]www.fotw.stm.it/images/us-csanj.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 12:02:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By marvl: Come on, guys. You don't want states to secede and start their own countries. Imagine the nightmare of dealing with 50 federal bureaucracies instead of 1. Passports, customs, extradition treaties... What a friggin' mess that would be.
View Quote
Why not tell that to Kalifornia with their Communist gun laws. I think I'd be very happy if Kalifornia did secede and take their liberal, faggot ways with them!
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 12:36:33 PM EDT
Texas, Vermont... Mormons established the nation of Deseret and almost fought a war before backing down accepting occupation by Federal troops. The Florida Keys supposedly were never ceded to USA by Spain, because of omission, deliberate or not. I read articles of the Northeast and urban USA in general, by urban based authors, and I realize our USA cultures have little in common but language, with slang and eubonics eroding that tenuous tie. Many regions would leave Federal hegemony if it were possible. Draconian Federal laws dictating substance use as criminal abuse cause millions of internments while enforcement costs and population substance use\abuse parallel each other increasing at an increasing rate. The idea of diversity and open borders, with wide-spread illegal immigration, is forced upon us by a ruthless and relentless Federal Government under the influence of short-sighted and equally ruthless and relentless special interests. The diversity forced upon us is an unnatural and unstable condition. Heterogeneous culture is an oxymoron. But it is not possible to secede now anymore than it was possible to secede one hundred and fourty years ago. Opposing viewpoints are welcome.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 2:10:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SSD: Texas is the only State that was a country before entering the Union.
View Quote
As opposed to, say, Hawaii, which was merely a sovereign kingdom?? Oh, right, I forgot, they were a bunch of ignorant savages without TV or flush toilets. So it's ok that the U.S. invaded and civilized them. Oh, and wasn't there a Cherokee Nation that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled was a valid nation, but which Andy Jackson invaded and took over anyway?? Seems to me that that was used as a lesson in my American history classes to show that the Supreme Court may have the ultimate power in government, but only to the extent that anyone else wants to let them use it. Sorta like the "gun free school zones" law that the Supremes threw out a few years ago, only to see Congress pass the identical law the next year (with one sentence added: "yes, this really is a matter of federal interest due to the Interstate Commerce Clause, dammit, so the Supremes can go back to wearing slinky dresses and singing in bars.").
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 5:27:28 PM EDT
Secession? I don't thing so. For all of you who still harbor serious thoughts about the rightness and positives of seccession, I have just one thought for you: Take a few minutes to sit down and write down some of the REALLY important positive things that the United States has done in this world since the end of the Civil War and the re-unification of the states. Then, try to imagine this world without a strong United States. Had the Confederacy won, it too would have split up into individual fiefdoms, principalities and states. The North American continent would have most likely consisted of a confederacy of individual southern [agrarian] states, the heavily industrialized United States in the northeast and in the northern midwest, and the emerging western states/territories. Since the different regions are so different in so many ways, they would not have had the collective strength of the present USA. They could and probably would make their own treaties and economic agreements with their regional world powers. Continental regional suspicions and goals would have prevented them from uniting against most outside threats. Had that all happened...history itself would have been altered greatly: Imagine the Spanish American war never happening. No overseas bases for the US Navy. No big Fleet. Imagine the western states not providing the great agricultural breadbasket to the rest of the continent without tariffs or heavy fees and concessions. Imagine the same for northeastern manufactured goods going west. Imagine WW I and more importantly, WW II when the United States as the Arsenal of Democracy utterly demolished the Axis powers. A fragmented North America could not have beaten the Axis. Think for a second about what kind of world we would be living in now...if the Axis had won? History has shown that Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant (Along with hundreds of thousands of other brave Union troops.) saved the Union. We are all the better for it. Imagine the world without the UNITED States of America? I can't. Secession is simplistically foolish. We could never survive and the world would sink into an abyss if the USA ceased to exist. From a Southerner who believes in a strong union. [soapbox]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 6:11:10 PM EDT
Hey LWilde, Perhaps you didn't consider the negatives of the Federal subjugation of the South. Your synopsis is correct only in presupposing that the separate small nations would act individually. Given the record of history, your statement more or less concludes "the end justifies the means." Bill Clinton is an adherent to that philosophy... Had the Confederacy won the right to exist, what would have more likely occurred is that slavery would have been rendered obsolete by the Industrial Revolution and the southern states would have either rejoined the Union or maintained relations much like the US and Canada. The US and Canada have jointly supported each other in war. The one exception you mentioned was the Spanish American war, which was a war of American Imperialism. The other consequence is that the Federal government was established as the supreme authority of the United States by the sword and there is no redress for greivances when a "state of emergency" is declared. All civil rights are subjugated under Executive authority when such circumstances occur. How to you think Clinton got to "stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool.."? Because the Federal government is only nominally accountable to the people, it is only a matter of time before the Republic devolves into a democracy. When that happens and 51% realize they can steal from 49%, the abyss you mention us sinking into will be deeper than you could ever imagine..
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 7:25:17 AM EDT
I think California should have the right and mandated duty to seceed whether they want to or not.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 8:01:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/24/2001 7:54:34 AM EDT by LWilde]
RichinCM, Your points are well taken...but you missed my essential argument that the world would not be here as we know it if the South had won. As to your issues: Yes, slavery was a doomed economic system. Immigrant Irish sharecroppers were far less expensive to the middle and small southern landowners...but I suspect slavery would have remained for some time on the larger plantations. Wealthy southerners fancied themselves as aristocracy and that system requires servants...either slaves or indentured help. Yes, the Spanish American War was clearly an imperialistic war trumped up against Spain simply to gain territory...which it did beautifully! We needed those overseas coaling bases for our Navy to be able to operate far from home (You might read, "The Influence of Seapower Upon History" by Alfred Thayer Mahan.) Actually, I did consider the awful battering the United States gave the south after the war, but I didn't think it germain to my central thesis: A strong United States is critical to the freedom of the entire world. I think that was a terrible way to re-unite the country and we are still paying for it today. (BTW, Bringing Clinton into the fray doesn't help your argument since I suspect I hate that scumbag as much or MORE than you do...so let's leave him out and focus on [what-if] history and its consequences.) I agree that the United States and the Confederacy 'might' have reunited...but only as a weakened confederacy. The Southern states would never have permitted any federal government to govern them...and THAT is the central point to my argument that the world would have been much the poorer for the lack of a strong centrally governed United States. Only through a strong federal government was the Roosevelt administration able to enact laws and create organizations needed to successfully prosecute WW II. Only by "controlling" our society more than usual, were we able to make the sacrifices and attain the goals of defeating the Axis. Those wartime offices and organizations quickly faded away after the war...but unfortunately, the peoples' psycological "need" for an overly strong federal government remained with us for far too long. THAT we must overcome...but it doesn't mean I'm for a fractured federal system! Agreements and treaties are simply not the same as fighting the war as a single socio-political entity. If this country as we now know it does not exist in 1941, the war is not won by democracy. The axis powers prevail and the world sinks into the abyss. If the, "...ends justify the means", then so be it. I can't imagine living under the boot of Facism. I am sorry you [apparently] fear your country so. This remains the single greatest successful experiment in the governing of a society ever in the long history of mankind. We ain't hardly perfect...but we're the best there is. Merry Christmas! [<|:D>] [soapbox]
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 8:04:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By wrcx: Republic of Vermont: 1777 - 1791.
View Quote
I did not know that.
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed As opposed to, say, Hawaii, which was merely a sovereign kingdom??
View Quote
I forgot this. Seccession, today, or the threat of a seccession would best be used to futher change to return to the Constitution. We have to evaluate all tools available to stop the erosion of our freedoms. SSD
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 8:18:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LWilde: This remains the single greatest successful experiment in the governing of a society ever in the long history of mankind. We ain't hardly perfect...but we're the best there is. Merry Christmas! [<|:D>] [soapbox]
View Quote
agreed SSD
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 10:25:42 AM EDT
LWilde, I want you to know I really enjoy these debates. Let me revise one statement. The South was not interested in winning. They sought a truce where they could exist as an independent nation, which was their right. Remember the essence of the Constitution is that the Federal government is strictly limited to performing the duties explicitly written in its text. The Bill of Rights enumerated other specific rights that the government shall not interfere with. All other rights are reserved for the states and the people. So if the Constitution did not state that states could secede, then they have that right by default. The notion of plantation owners considering themselves to be aristocracy is likely true. However, slaves are inefficient workers, as they will do the minimum to avoid punishment and there is no real reward for excess productivity. I still believe that the economic bottom line of industrialization vs. slavery would have ended slavery within a generation.. Any conquest by the sword has ramifications. Many Union generals, especially Sherman, felt they were punishing the South for daring to secede. That led to the March to the Sea and other destructive marches that Sherman made through Georgia and South Carolina. The Reconstruction was also particularly harsh for that same reason. As another example, consider the angst between Germany and France. The Franco-Prussian war begets WW1, which begets WW2. At least we were able to break the cycle of hate. That is because there are so many ties between North and South, which alludes to my argument that the states would have eventually reunited. The real curse of having a strong United States being the world’s peacekeeper is that if, God forbid, we fall upon anarchy, the world will see bloodshed unparalleled in the history of mankind. Clinton is a byproduct of governments that are progressively less accountable to the people and the Constitution. Look at the social engineering projects that have evolved through exploitation of the General Welfare and Interstate Commerce clauses of the Constitution. The New Deal (Roosevelt). The Great Society (Johnson). I believe that Ben Franklin said something to the effect of "governments grow in power at the expense of freedom." I am sure somebody here has the exact quote. I guess the real issue we need to discuss is how much (or little) government is enough? Roosevelt didn’t have to do much in terms of enacting domestic policy during WWII. If the cause is just, there is hardly a need for compelling obedience. The notion of rationing and devoting resources to a war effort was pioneered by the South in the Civil War due to their limited resources. Church bells were melted into cannon, for example. The real problem with "controlling society" is that governments love to accumulate such powers and are very reluctant to release them. Because of the compelling interest, I will maintain my position that even if the Confederacy and the Union still existed in 1941 that they still would have succeeded in destroying the Axis powers.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 10:27:00 AM EDT
I have no fear of my government, but I know my government fears me. This is why my handgun purchases in California are registered at the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Information. This is not BS - I’ll email you a scanned copy of the letter if you like. The state has a nice registry of all legal handgun owners. Why do they need that information? I like my high paying, high technology job and have no interest in a life of crime. I take a slightly different spin on your assessment of this country. We have the lousiest government in the world, except for all the others. The Greeks surmised that democracies last roughly 200 years before falling. Our Republic has stood for over 200 years, and will continue to stand as long as it remains a true republic. The problem lies in the fact that many people don’t want to live in a republic; they want the benefits without responsibility (socialism). If you want an example of "rebels" in the United States acting against their government in recent history, do a search for the "Battle of Athens." I am referring to Athens, TN in 1947, when a corrupt county government decided they didn’t need elections any more. A few WWII veterans decided differently….. You have a Merry Christmas, too!
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 11:38:29 AM EDT
Ooowwww! I failed to notice the CA address! My deepest condolences. As a former prisoner of that state, I can comiserate completely with your plight. I lived there most of my entire life...with breaks here and there to fulfill my official duties in the service of my country. We moved out for good five happy years ago. NOW I can buy a firearm without the threat of the government intruding upon me at all. I would agree that far too many of our citizens wish for the guvmint to take care of their needs, else why would socialists like Shumer, DiFi, Babs Boxer, Barney Fag...no FRANK, dammit, and her Nibs, the always polite Maxine (SHUT UP!!!) Waters herself, plus a host of other, "We can do it better for you!" liberals, get elected? Remember this too...in your state, you ARE a potential criminal and mass murderer. (Pssst...own any ARs?) My sister in law still lives there in Los Osos next to Morro Bay, a haven for the brie and chardonnay set in the central coast region. She is about as liberal as they come. When she comes to our lovely FREE state, I always make a point of innocently but overtly walking through the room, with one of my really UGLY firearms...usually my nasty AR with the bipod, the Trijicon ACOG, the muzzle compensator and of course a loaded[becausewhatgoodwoulditbeunloaded?] 30 rounder in the weapon! As she recoils in liberal horror...(No doubt imagining I'm about to roar out the door and head for the nearest grammer school.) her constant plaint to me is, "Why does any person NEED such a horrible gun?" I then simply state, "It isn't a NEED." I own it because I CHOOSE to. I CAN do so here and it (shooting) is my hobby. About that time...she usually makes some really silly statement like, "Well, just think what our society could do with all the money you have put into your guns?" Yup...but think of the fun I wouldn't have...I tell her. Oh...and the next time you guys have a riot like in 4/92...don't come to me or any CA gunners for help. You're on your own! So you see...just living where you are is the problem. Now I understand why you hate government so. On the other hand...its still a good thing that the North won. From a Southerner who believes in a strong federal system...(with LIMITs of course!) [beer]...time to go get one! Cheerz to ya!
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 12:33:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/25/2001 12:30:12 AM EDT by libertyof76]
Originally Posted By LWilde: Try to imagine this world without a strong United States.
View Quote
It would be no different than today. Wars and death everywhere. But a lot of American boys would still be alive, and we would be truly free.
other goals would have prevented them from uniting against most outside threats.
View Quote
Without any centralized government, we would be much freer and better off. And I think they would unite, as we did during the Revolution.
Imagine the Spanish American war never happening. No overseas bases for the US Navy. No big Fleet.
View Quote
Excellent. We don't need oversea bases, and we don't need a massive Navy, only one big enough to patrol our seas, beaches, and borders
Imagine the western states not providing the great agricultural breadbasket to the rest of the continent without tariffs or heavy fees and concessions.
View Quote
So you support wealth transfer and harmful economic regulations? Sounds like a socialist.
Imagine WW I and more importantly, WW II when the United States as the Arsenal of Democracy utterly demolished the Axis powers. A fragmented North America could not have beaten the Axis. Think for a second about what kind of world we would be living in now...if the Axis had won?
View Quote
The same as we have now. Death, destruction, tyranny, and war. It would be no different. And WWII wouldn't have happened if we didn't intervene in WWI. [qoute]History has shown that Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant (Along with hundreds of thousands of other brave Union troops.) saved the Union. We are all the better for it.
View Quote
Was it worth 600,000 lives lost, not to mention our liberties? I think we are worse off
Imagine the world without the UNITED States of America? I can't. Secession is simplistically foolish. We could never survive and the world would sink into an abyss if the USA ceased to exist.
View Quote
Well the Founders didn't thing is was "simplistically foolish". Here is a quote from the Declaration of Independence(which very few believe in any more):
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to [red]dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another[/red], and to assume among the powers of the earth, the [red]separate[/red] and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them... ... We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and [red]independent[/red] states; ... and that as free and [red]independent[/red] states, they have full power to levey war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.
View Quote
Sounds like secession to me. The South would have survived, just like US did. And maybe they wouldn't have fallen into the trap we got ourselves into.
From a Southerner who believes in a strong union.
View Quote
From a Northerner who is ashamed of what is Northern ancestors did, and who believes in a very weak and limited, or even a non existent, central government and union.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 12:36:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LWilde: We needed those overseas coaling bases for our Navy to be able to operate far from home
View Quote
We should have never fought that war, regardless of what we gained.
A strong United States is critical to the freedom of the entire world.
View Quote
I strong US is not critical to the freedom of the world. If anything it is detrimental.
Only through a strong federal government was the Roosevelt administration able to enact laws and create organizations needed to successfully prosecute WW II.
View Quote
1st thing, we should have even been in WWII. If it wasn't for our interventions, esp., in WWI, WWI wouldn't have happened. Next, Roosevelt destroyed our Constitution, rendering it a near dead document. He curtailed liberties, and even helped, through negligence at the least, Japan attack us.
Only by "controlling" our society more than usual, were we able to make the sacrifices and attain the goals of defeating the Axis. Those wartime offices and organizations quickly faded away after the war.
View Quote
Some did, but not all and it also set the precedent for the shredding of the Constitution. WWII was terrible for our country, and Roosevelt was one of our worst Presidents, ranking with Wilson, Lincoln, Johnson, and Clinton
..but unfortunately, the peoples' psycological "need" for an overly strong federal government remained with us for far too long. THAT we must overcome...but it doesn't mean I'm for a fractured federal system!
View Quote
And that need is coming back with the "war on terrorism." But we do need a TRUE federal republican system, where the states and the federals operate concurrently.
Agreements and treaties are simply not the same as fighting the war as a single socio-political entity. If this country as we now know it does not exist in 1941, the war is not won by democracy. The axis powers prevail and the world sinks into the abyss.
View Quote
It would be GREAT if the country we know today didn't exist. I would love to go back to the Founding Days instead. As I said before, WWII wouldn't have happened if we weren't so intent on interfering with the world. And now we have 9/11 to thank for that.
If the, "...ends justify the means", then so be it. I can't imagine living under the boot of Facism.
View Quote
Part of facism is the ends justify the means. What we have now is no better than facism or socilism. In fact, we wouldn't be living under the boot of facism and we would be much more free if the South had won, and we weren't so pro-interventionist. Switzerland didn't fall to the Nazi's, and neither would we.
I am sorry you [apparently] fear your country so. This remains the single greatest successful experiment in the governing of a society ever in the long history of mankind.
View Quote
You are damn right I fear my country. I see images of Waco, Ruby Ridge, Pearl Harbor, WTC, and read many stories of government, OUR government's, terror. And I wouldn't call our experiment successful. We have become no better than the old would. The experiment started failing as soon as it began, the War for Southern Independence accelerated it, and so did WWI, WWII, and every other "war" since then. We have failed.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 8:28:52 AM EDT
Liberty, Interesting outlook you have there. I need not respond with an argument; the clarity of your words speak volumes. On the other hand, I think a careful scrutiny of history will give your thesis some problems. I have just one question: What is the "trap" you say we have fallen into? It sounds as if you think our society is fast crumbling around me and our freedoms are about to be terminated with great prejudice. Merry Christmas! [<|:D>]
Top Top