Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Lincoln was a tyrant
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Lincoln was a tyrant (Read 1910 times)
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #100 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 9:42am
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 8:02am:
Only a true moron would still insist the war was over slavery since the North offered and the South declined to keep slavery if the South agreed to stay in the Union.  How more clearly could the point possibly be made that the war was over secession, not slavery?


The South seceding clearly showed they no longer consented.  Lincoln conquering them clearly showed he didn't care the South no longer consented.  Anyone advocating Lincoln conquering States that no longer consented doesn't believe in consent of the governed.

If the North were fighting over slavery, they simply would have freed the slaves and let the South leave.  They did not let the South leave even after the slaves were freed.

The North didn't invade to free the slaves
The North offered to permanently codify slavery in the Constitution if the South agreed not to leave
The North didn't let the South leave after the  slaves were freed
The North accurately titled the war, the war to "Save the Union"

It takes a moron of a special kind to still believe the war was about the North deciding to end slavery
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43082
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #101 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 10:18am
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 9:42am:
The South seceding clearly showed they no longer consented.  Lincoln conquering them clearly showed he didn't care the South no longer consented.  Anyone advocating Lincoln conquering States that no longer consented doesn't believe in consent of the governed.

If the North were fighting over slavery, they simply would have freed the slaves and let the South leave.  They did not let the South leave even after the slaves were freed.

The North didn't invade to free the slaves
The North offered to permanently codify slavery in the Constitution if the South agreed not to leave
The North didn't let the South leave after the  slaves were freed
The North accurately titled the war, the war to "Save the Union"

It takes a moron of a special kind to still believe the war was about the North deciding to end slavery
Yes, saving the Union was important, and not just for the purpose of ending slavery in America.

Despite however much argument in detail you marshal to your defense, you are arguing in support of Jeff Davis and the CSA. Read the constitution of the CSA and see for yourself what they were all about. It was preserving and extending the institution of chattel slavery into U.S. Territories. War was inevitable. Had South Carolina not started it, it would have occurred anyway. One of the first acts of the CSA was to send troops into U.S. Territory in order to win the territory for slavers.

Since consent of the governed is so important to you, let's talk about how consent of the governed was obtained in the CSA... Who exactly consented to leaving the Union and preserving slavery?

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #102 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 10:40am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 10:18am:
Yes, saving the Union was important, and not just for the purpose of ending slavery in America.

Despite however much argument in detail you marshal to your defense, you are arguing in support of Jeff Davis and the CSA. Read the constitution of the CSA and see for yourself what they were all about. It was preserving and extending the institution of chattel slavery into U.S. Territories. War was inevitable. Had South Carolina not started it, it would have occurred anyway. One of the first acts of the CSA was to send troops into U.S. Territory in order to win the territory for slavers.

Since consent of the governed is so important to you, let's talk about how consent of the governed was obtained in the CSA... Who exactly consented to leaving the Union and preserving slavery?



QED.  You just agreed with my saying you believe government can conquer it's citizens who withdraw their consent.  So stop whining when I say that.

And the South put up a hell of a fight against larger, superior forces and sustained it through the war.  If you really don't see consent of the southern States to the CSA, you really are just stupid.

And that consent of the governed is connected to your assessment of the values of the people who didn't consent is just moronic.  It wasn't the South's job to prove to you that they were virtuous to withdraw their consent, that makes no sense. 

Jeff:  Sorry, you didn't convince me that I approve of the reason you're withdrawing consent, that means you didn't really withdraw your consent

Yeah ...
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43082
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #103 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 10:47am
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 10:40am:
QED.  You just agreed with my saying you believe government can conquer it's citizens who withdraw their consent.
According to you, "the people" of the slave states transferred their consent to the CSA...

Let's talk about that.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43082
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #104 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 12:29pm
Print Post  
kaz, for the sake of discussion, I'm willing to stipulate your point that neither the USA nor the CSA had "consent" of "the people".

That leaves us debating the relative merits of two rather different tyrannical governments...

And you prefer the CSA and think they should have been left alone to preserve and spread slavery... Why?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #105 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 12:37pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 12:29pm:
kaz, for the sake of discussion, I'm willing to stipulate your point that neither the USA nor the CSA had "consent" of "the people".

That leaves us debating the relative merits of two rather different tyrannical governments...


I have no idea what you're talking about.  The North always consented to the Union.  The South had previously consented to the Union.  When they broke away, the people consented to the CSA.  I never said the people didn't consent to anyone

Jeff wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 12:29pm:
And you prefer the CSA and think they should have been left alone to preserve and spread slavery... Why?


I said the North did not fight the war to end slavery and I said the South no longer consented to the Union.  That does not imply what you said.  The North didn't fight the war to end slavery.  You're just finding another way to phrase your strawman that they did.

Also, I already answered that.  The North could have demanded that the South end slavery as a condition to letting them go instead of offering them to codify slavery in the Constitution if they stayed.

But the North did offer the South codifying slavery in the Constitution if they stayed, so it was your side who was willing to leave the South alone to pursue slavery


  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43082
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #106 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 1:01pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 12:37pm:
I have no idea what you're talking about.  The North always consented to the Union.  The South had previously consented to the Union.
OK, we al least agree that consent of the governed is possible...

How did the slave states determine that they should withdraw their previously given consent to be a part of the Union and form a new country? Did the various slave states create ratifying conventions of people in their states in order to ratify their new Constitution as was done to ratify the U.S. Constitution?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43082
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #107 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 1:03pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 12:37pm:
I said the North did not fight the war to end slavery and I said the South no longer consented to the Union.  That does not imply what you said.  The North didn't fight the war to end slavery.
So, if slavery was not an issue in the slave states decision to secede from the Union, what was the reason?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43082
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #108 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 1:05pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 12:37pm:
But the North did offer the South codifying slavery in the Constitution if they stayed, so it was your side who was willing to leave the South alone to pursue slavery
Much to the shame of liberal minded lovers of liberty everywhere, slavery was already protected by the Constitution.

Your reconstruction of reality is absurd.

Edit: By identifying me with the anti-slavery side, with the abolitionists, you place yourself with the people who wanted to continue the institution of government sanctioned slavery.

You side with the CSA. TSk tsk.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #109 - Jun 2nd, 2019 at 2:04pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 1:01pm:
OK, we al least agree that consent of the governed is possible...


You own opposition.  Everything he says to everyone is based on what you say to him.

Burnsred owns you, you are his sock.  It's burnsred who demands 100% consent, not me.  Of course he just wants to be the one to tell the rest of the citizens they need to die because he'll never consent to anything no matter how much he agrees with it.  I consider the support of the people sufficient that the government is not seriously threatened by the people without using force.  That answers your other questions.  You'd know that if you were a classic liberal
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Lincoln was a tyrant
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy