Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Duke of Earl

The Passing of General Robert E. Lee

68 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, Smokey 1 said:

What if they had no plans to engage in a war with the US but their new country was invaded by the US so they fought against that invasion?

You mean after they fired on a federal fort?  That's what you call "no plans to engage in a war?"

Hmmm, don't think they were doing it right....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Duke of Earl said:
Three hundred thousand Yankees is stiff in Southern dust!
We got three hundred thousand before they conquered us.
They died of Southern fever and Southern steel and shot,
I wish they was three million instead of what we got
 
 
 
 
 
 
It figures traitor worshippers would revel in the death of true Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Evil Yoda said:

No. However, if you renounce your citizenship and then try to take land that belongs to your former country, you're a traitor. Lee did that. In addition to the fact that he was a terrible human being. You can celebrate his life and mourn his death. Just don't expect a lot of sympathy from the folks who don't support slavery, the core ethos of the Confederacy.

Answer this, who owned the land, the labor and products produced in the states that seceded? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ms maggie said:

You mean after they fired on a federal fort?  That's what you call "no plans to engage in a war?"

Hmmm, don't think they were doing it right....

The fort was in the State of Carolina that had left the union. The garrison was given food by the people  of Charleston and was given every opportunity  to march out . their flags flying  , drums beating  with their heads  held high and with honor. Their  government chose not to negotiate   a peaceful transition  which they were offered over and over .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Smokey 1 said:

Answer this, who owned the land, the labor and products produced in the states that seceded? 

The labor and products were irrelevant. The land was part of the United States until the United States says otherwise. The Confederate States do not get to declare themselves a country without committing treason. When they did so, they became traitors.

What do you think would happen if you declared your home the Smokey States of America? And refused to honor the laws of the United States, pay your taxes, etc. Hint: I suggest you not try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Evil Yoda said:

The labor and products were irrelevant. The land was part of the United States until the United States says otherwise. The Confederate States do not get to declare themselves a country without committing treason. When they did so, they became traitors.

What do you think would happen if you declared your home the Smokey States of America? And refused to honor the laws of the United States, pay your taxes, etc. Hint: I suggest you not try it.

No the labor and products are not irrelevant they belong to the people who make the products and the land belongs to those who have possession or own it,  Otherwise we are all slaves to the federal government.  What do you think Lincoln would have done if the states went on a general strike instead of seceding knowing that the federal government received 75% to 80% of its revenue from the southern states?

Here is an abolitionist from Boston at the time of the CW who explains it better than I can.

Quote

 

The question of treason is distinct from that of slavery, and it is the same that it would have been if free states, instead of slave states, had seceded.

On the part of the North, the war was carried on not to liberate the slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution to keep the slaves in bondage, and was still willing to do so if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union.

The principle on which the war was waged by the North was simply this: that men may rightfully be compelled to submit to and support a government that they do not want, and that resistance on their part makes them traitors and criminals.

No principle that is possible to be named can be more self-evidently false than this nor more self-evidently fatal to all political freedom. Yet it triumphed in the field, and is now assumed to be established. If it be really established, the number of slaves, instead of having been diminished by the war, has been greatly increased; for a man thus subjected to a government that he does not want is a slave.

And there is no difference, in principle — but only in degree — between political and chattel slavery. The former, no less than the latter, denies a man's ownership of himself and the products of his labor, and asserts that other men may own him and dispose of him and his property for their uses and at their pleasure.

 

https://mises.org/library/no-treason-no-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ms maggie said:

You mean after they fired on a federal fort?  That's what you call "no plans to engage in a war?"

Hmmm, don't think they were doing it right....

Those idiots seceded and started a war because they thought Lincoln was coming for their slaves. It turns out he wasn't. At least not until they stupidly started a war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of honor is there in celebrating a man, and a cause, that fought to keep the right to OWN other people?  Good grief :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, banner1124 said:

What kind of honor is there in celebrating a man, and a cause, that fought to keep the right to OWN other people?  Good grief :rolleyes:

Look who is doing it. To push an alternative view of the Confederacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, banner1124 said:

What kind of honor is there in celebrating a man, and a cause, that fought to keep the right to OWN other people?  Good grief :rolleyes:

This is the point I can't understand. These folks celebrate people who committed treason so they could continue to own other people. That's what the Confederacy was *about*. It wasn't honorable, or just, it was corrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, banner1124 said:

What kind of honor is there in celebrating a man, and a cause, that fought to keep the right to OWN other people?  Good grief :rolleyes:

None, the people who revere him are simply evil and wretched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, banner1124 said:

What kind of honor is there in celebrating a man, and a cause, that fought to keep the right to OWN other people?  Good grief :rolleyes:

 

9 hours ago, Evil Yoda said:

This is the point I can't understand. These folks celebrate people who committed treason so they could continue to own other people. That's what the Confederacy was *about*. It wasn't honorable, or just, it was corrupt.

 

9 hours ago, Calamari said:

None, the people who revere him are simply evil and wretched.

People are who they are. Those celebrating the slave society here aren't new. They always have and always will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ivanbalt said:

But that's in the present.  I can't imagine legions of Trumpists 150 years from now.

If he is taken out of office forcibly at any point, I can definitely see Trump having a cult following 150 years from now - not unlike the neo-Nazis worship of Hitler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Evil Yoda said:

This is the point I can't understand. These folks celebrate people who committed treason so they could continue to own other people. That's what the Confederacy was *about*. It wasn't honorable, or just, it was corrupt.

This is what "Making America Great Again" is all about. Life was a whole lot easier for some people when they had other people (with no power to challenge) do their dirty work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a good sentence for convicted Charlottesville neo-Nazis would be work gangs assigned to remove Confederate-honoring statues! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ivanbalt said:

I'd expect a more terrific monument.

I don't care who you are,, that was funny. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grant was the MAN!

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Calamari said:

None, the people who revere him are simply evil and wretched.

I can only wonder at the pain and suffering of those honored military dead, and their families interred on the property that was once his home and worked by his slaves.

This horror needs to be immediately rectified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dr Johnny Fever said:

I can only wonder at the pain and suffering of those honored military dead, and their families interred on the property that was once his home and worked by his slaves.

This horror needs to be immediately rectified.

It was projecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Smokey 1 said:

No the labor and products are not irrelevant they belong to the people who make the products and the land belongs to those who have possession or own it,  Otherwise we are all slaves to the federal government.  What do you think Lincoln would have done if the states went on a general strike instead of seceding knowing that the federal government received 75% to 80% of its revenue from the southern states?

Here is an abolitionist from Boston at the time of the CW who explains it better than I can.

Pure adulterated hogwash by a neo-Confederate website.

"The Mises Institute recently came under fire from one of these watchdog groups that claims to oppose intolerance and hate. What was our offense? We have published revisionist accounts of the origins of the Civil War that demonstrate that the tariff bred more conflict between the South and the feds than slavery.

Revisionism indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0