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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Lincoln was a tyrant (Read 927 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 40030
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #40 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:11am
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 9th, 2019 at 7:54am:
They left the union to avoid becoming second class states at the mercy of the northern industrial states.
Ha ha.

What would have made them "second class states" other than their own feudal system?

They left to avoid losing the "right" to keep people as slaves and to extend slavery across North America.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5477
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #41 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:27am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:08am:
Thanks. So, before they attacked, they demanded that a federal fort on federal land be turned over to them...


That is only logical if you accept the premise that the states had no right to voluntarily leave the union having voluntarily joined it.  If the states did have the right to form a new nation, then that nation had a right to enforce the sovereignty of their borders and not have a foreign occupier encamped in their state.

You said that the the states had no right to start a war to leave the union.  Are you now saying that they had no right to leave the union, period?

Quote:
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.


No, I don't think they would  have.  They were clearly spoiling for a fight that would bring the south under their heels.  If the U.S. believed that had a right to compensation for the money they spent building Fort Sumpter, that is reasonable and could have been negotiated as part of the recognition of the new nation.

Quote:
Are you relieving Lincoln of the burden of being the proximate cause of the Civil War and laying it on Buchanan or Congress?


Actually, I place most of the blame on the northern industrialists who pushed for the war in anticipation of huge wartime manufacturing profits and an influx of cheap labor once the freed slaves migrated north.  They got both for only the price if a few million lives!
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9036
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #42 - Jan 9th, 2019 at 10:16pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:11am:
They left to avoid losing the "right" to keep people as slaves and to extend slavery across North America.


If they had the right to leave, then it doesn't matter.

There are other countries today where people still have the right to keep other people as slaves.

They are other countries, so it's not our business.
  

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
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 6915
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #43 - Jan 10th, 2019 at 6:43am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 9th, 2019 at 10:16pm:
If they had the right to leave, then it doesn't matter.

There are other countries today where people still have the right to keep other people as slaves.

They are other countries, so it's not our business.


The north also could have as part of the separation agreement forced the south to allow any slave that wanted to leave to go to the north.  The north didn't want them
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 40030
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #44 - Jan 10th, 2019 at 6:49am
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:27am:
That is only logical if you accept the premise that the states had no right to voluntarily leave the union having voluntarily joined it.  If the states did have the right to form a new nation, then that nation had a right to enforce the sovereignty of their borders and not have a foreign occupier encamped in their state.


From wikipedia-

"Seventy thousand tons of granite were transported from New England to build up a sand bar in the entrance to Charleston Harbor, which the site dominates."

The artificial island on which the fort was built wasn't within the state of South Carolina. It was created by the federal government to help protect the United States.

It was no unknown mystery that the slave states were planning secession, they explicitly threatened to do so if Lincoln won the election.

It would have been a dereliction of the federal governments responsibility to protect the United States to give or sell the fort to a foreign nation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 40030
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #45 - Jan 10th, 2019 at 7:03am
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 9th, 2019 at 9:27am:
You said that the the states had no right to start a war to leave the union.  Are you now saying that they had no right to leave the union, period?
When states ratified the Constitution, they agreed to abide by it's stricture that federal laws would be supreme in the U.S.
There is no provision in the Constitution for withdrawal from the union.
As a matter of law, I don't think states have a legal right to leave the union.
As a matter of the right of people to choose their own governments or alter or abolish those governments, I think states do have a right to leave the union.
As a moral issue, I think leaving the union in order to preserve the institution of chattel slavery is abhorrent.

If a state were to want to leave the union today, it would be a political issue and a matter that Congress would have to decide. That's what I think...

Perhaps a simple declaration by a state government that they were leaving the union and forming their own independent nation would suffice... IDK.

What if California declared it's independence in order to create a Democratic Socialist Republic of California with a government modeled on that of China? Would the Constitutional requirement that all states have a republican form of government permit the federal government to prevent California's secession in order to protect the rights and liberty of the American Citizens living in California?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 40030
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #46 - Jan 10th, 2019 at 7:05am
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jan 10th, 2019 at 6:43am:
The north also could have as part of the separation agreement forced the south to allow any slave that wanted to leave to go to the north.  The north didn't want them
You think the slavers would have allowed their slaves to go free in order to leave the union?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5477
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #47 - Jan 10th, 2019 at 9:16am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 10th, 2019 at 7:03am:
When states ratified the Constitution, they agreed to abide by it's stricture that federal laws would be supreme in the U.S.
There is no provision in the Constitution for withdrawal from the union.


Sure, there is.  It's right here:

Quote:

Amendment X


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


That either means what it says or it means whatever the current congress and president want it to mean.  Which position would you support?

You are falling into the statist mindset of, "where does it say in the law that you can do that?"

Quote:
As a matter of law, I don't think states have a legal right to leave the union.
As a matter of the right of people to choose their own governments or alter or abolish those governments, I think states do have a right to leave the union.
As a moral issue, I think leaving the union in order to preserve the institution of chattel slavery is abhorrent.

If a state were to want to leave the union today, it would be a political issue and a matter that Congress would have to decide. That's what I think...

Perhaps a simple declaration by a state government that they were leaving the union and forming their own independent nation would suffice... IDK.


It certainly should suffice, if there is any such thing as freedom.

Quote:
What if California declared it's independence in order to create a Democratic Socialist Republic of California with a government modeled on that of China? Would the Constitutional requirement that all states have a republican form of government permit the federal government to prevent California's secession in order to protect the rights and liberty of the American Citizens living in California?


If California seceded, they would no longer be part of the Union, so its people would no longer have that guarantee.  So the U.S. government would not be permitted by the constitution to invade The DSRC any more than they would to invade Mexico.
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 40030
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #48 - Jan 10th, 2019 at 2:14pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 10th, 2019 at 9:16am:
Sure, there is.  It's right here:


That either means what it says or it means whatever the current congress and president want it to mean.  Which position would you support?


It means what it says, but it doesn't mean what you say it does. States have no power to enter the union. They are required to apply for admission to Congress.

The retained powers mentioned in the Constitution are ordinary governmental powers, most generally police powers.

The Constitution is silent regarding states leaving the union.

In any case, I know you will agree that changes made to representative governments require the approval of the people, and unless you agree with the slavers that blacks aren't people, the people of South Carolina certainly did not agree to leave the union in order to preserve the institution that kept the majority of the population of S. Carolina enslaved.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 40030
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Lincoln was a tyrant
Reply #49 - Jan 10th, 2019 at 2:16pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 10th, 2019 at 9:16am:
If California seceded, they would no longer be part of the Union, so its people would no longer have that guarantee.  So the U.S. government would not be permitted by the constitution to invade The DSRC any more than they would to invade Mexico.
California is full of American Citizens. Many of them will ask for the help of the federal government if democratic socialists take over California and intend to take it out of the union.

I will be advocating that they be helped.

Do you think California currently has a republican form of government as it's required to have? Can the current government be seen as fairly representing the will of Californians? Why won't the current government of California allow the counties that want to secede from California do so?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Lincoln was a tyrant
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy