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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 12 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Lincoln was a tyrant (Read 1585 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 42650
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #30 - Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:44pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:15pm:
EDIT:

When the Union invaded the Confederacy, how much better off would Texas have been if it had freed the slaves and invited them to defend their new freedom by bearing arms against the enemy. 


You mean instead of joining the Confederacy?

I think you're confused if you think freeing slaves would have motivated them to fight to preserve slavery. Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5742
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #31 - Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:47pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:41pm:
How does having the mentality of a slave state make you believe Texas would have left the union to avoid the New Deal?


Slave states left the Union primarily because a president was elected that wasn’t even on most of their ballots.  They say that they would have no voice in future government except the representatives they sent to congress which would always be in a minority.

So being a slave stated doesn’t make a state less likely to leave the union.  That idea runs counter to historical evidence.

Quote:
Don't you think FDR would have punished them if they left? Simply banning U.S. trade with Texas would have caused serious harm in an already greatly depressed economy... You know it was a world wide depression don't you?


Not having to support the rest of the United States would benefit Texas greatly.  Our economy could have easily self-sustained with no international trade, but the US would not turn down our surplus production at the low prices we could have offered due to our superior efficiency.


  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 42650
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #32 - Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:57pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:47pm:
Slave states left the Union primarily because...
...they knew that a Congress controlled by the Republicans with Lincoln as President would be unlikely to admit new states to the union as slave states, which would mean there would soon be enough free states to outlaw slavery in America.

Rather than wait for that result, which they saw as inevitable, they left the union in order to preserve slavery.

Stupidly, they attacked Ft. Sumter.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 42650
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #33 - Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:59pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:47pm:
Not having to support the rest of the United States would benefit Texas greatly.
We were talking about Texas in the Great Depression and the new Deal Era.

I understand that you want to change the subject again, but it is annoying.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9693
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #34 - Jan 8th, 2019 at 10:07pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 9:19am:
Isolating an action (such as the compromise on slavery made by the people who ratified the Constitution) from the background of facts and beliefs that surrounded the action can lead you to make incorrect judgements about the action.

It's an Ethics 101 thought problem from J.S. Mill.

If doing something you know is wrong will prevent a much greater wrong, is it moral to do it?


No.

This is a very simple question. You assume the wrong in the question (bolded), so yes, it's still wrong, meaning you still shouldn't do it.

If you ave the chance, do you murder Hitler on the crapper when he's 19? No. No you do not. That's murder, not justice.

The universalised alternative is that everyone disregards every moral duty and just does what they think will have the best results. In this case, there is no morality so it is pointless to discuss morality.

Little Big Man wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 8:48am:
The use of force to prevent states who had entered the Union voluntarily from leaving the Union voluntarily set the precedent that the federal government can do whatever it wants and the states have only the options of accepting it or being invaded, killed, burned out of homes and put under martial law.

Absent that, many states would have left the Union to avoid the disaster of the New Deal.  Or more likely, FDR, fearing such an exodus, would not have implemented it in the first place.


I cannot find a flaw with this logic.

Good luck imposing horrible laws on everyone for the benefit of a tiny elite few (mostly politicians) if the greater number can just secede and get away from them.

I mean, the right of secession is a nearly slam-dunk defence against parasitism... which I'm educated guessing is exactly what Lincoln was afraid of.

Imagine if we had non-welfare states. All the workers would flood to them, not only leaving the parasites holding their own bag, but imagine how great it would be not to have to live among them. I'm calling that special snowflake on Skychief's video as a probable welfare recipient.

http://www.libertariansforum.com/cgi-bin/freedom/YaBB.pl?num=1543551177

They generally seem to be entitled, nasty, and always looking to get others in trouble. Not all are like that I'm sure, but it's still plus to me if I don't have to live near them.

I almost made a joke about structuring a society with the credo, The needs of the few, or the one, outweigh the needs of the many, but then I didn't, but then I sort of did.

  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5742
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #35 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 7:46am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 2:01pm:
You have some evidence of this request? I've always thought that the CSA just attacked Ft. Sumter.


Not at all.  The Confederates tried hard to make it a peaceful withdrawal:


Quote:
In a letter delivered January 31, 1861, South Carolina Governor Pickens demanded of President Buchanan that he surrender Fort Sumter because "I regard that possession is not consistent with the dignity or safety of the State of South Carolina."[10] Over the next few months repeated calls for evacuation of Fort Sumter[11][12] from the government of South Carolina and then from Confederate Brigadier General P. G. T. Beauregard were ignored.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter#First_Battle_of_Fort_Sumter

  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5742
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #36 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 7:54am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 5:57pm:
...they knew that a Congress controlled by the Republicans with Lincoln as President would be unlikely to admit new states to the union as slave states, which would mean there would soon be enough free states to outlaw slavery in America.

Rather than wait for that result, which they saw as inevitable, they left the union in order to preserve slavery.


They left the union to avoid becoming second class states at the mercy of the northern industrial states.  Under the constitution, a coalition of northern states could pass any laws they pleased, elected any president they pleased and appoint/confirm any justice they pleased.  That would give the northern coalition complete power over all three branches of government leaving the southern states and Texas completely at their mercy.

Yes, slavery was one issue on which the south knew that they would be forced to comply with the wishes of the northern coalition.  Just as the founders knew that they would be forced to comply with the wishes of England on the issue of slavery.  You remain worshipful of the slavers in the American revolution, but you pretend moral outrage at the slavers of the confederacy.

But still no outrage at the U.S.' continued use of slavery during the civil war.  I remember you defending that once, but I can't remember your justification.   


  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 42650
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #37 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:00am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 10:07pm:
No.

This is a very simple question. You assume the wrong in the question (bolded), so yes, it's still wrong, meaning you still shouldn't do it.

Moral and ethical decisions aren't easy because they are not often as simple and straightforward as this pretends.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 42650
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #38 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:02am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 8th, 2019 at 10:07pm:
The universalised alternative is that everyone disregards every moral duty and just does what they think will have the best results. In this case, there is no morality so it is pointless to discuss morality.
People often think about moral issues when trying to decide what actions they should take to get (hopefully) the best result.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 42650
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #39 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:08am
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 9th, 2019 at 7:46am:
Not at all.  The Confederates tried hard to make it a peaceful withdrawal:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter#First_Battle_of_Fort_Sumter

Thanks. So, before they attacked, they demanded that a federal fort on federal land be turned over to them...

Probably President Buchanan consulted his Attorney General, who probably told him he had no authority to give away federal military installations to either a state or a foreign government. Congress would have had to pass legislation for that to happen. I don't think they would have.

Are you relieving Lincoln of the burden of being the proximate cause of the Civil War and laying it on Buchanan or Congress?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 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