The Civil War

[cpeeks]

Prove its fake. And Lincoln wasnt an abolitionist.

     If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of view, justify revolution. – Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), First Inaugural Address, 4 March 1861

Surrender means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the War; will be impressed by all the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as fit subjects for derision. -General Pat Cleburne, CSA

[cpeeks]

ok I guess I stand corrected on that.

[cpeeks]

I am not really sure what that means.

[cpeeks]

My point with the Marx and Dickens quote is that even ppl over seas monitoring Mr. Lincolns war knew this wasnt about slavery.

[cpeeks]

The idea of states' rights dates back to Thomas Jefferson, who himself drew on the "social contract" theories of the British philosophers Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) and John Locke (1632–1704). Jefferson maintained that the United States was formed through a social contract between the individual states rather than the people as a whole. In other words, because these states had united voluntarily to form a union—in Jefferson's language, a "compact"—the U.S. government derived its power only from them. This understanding of American government soon found expression in the U.S. Constitution. In 1791, the Ninth and Tenth amendments were ratified, reserving all powers not expressly granted to the federal government to the states and/or the people.

The nature of these rights and powers was hotly disputed just a few years later. In 1798, the Federalist-controlled U.S. Congress passed and the Federalist U.S. president John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Federalist Party favored a strong national government, and, according to the Alien and Sedition Acts, that government was now authorized to place restrictions on immigration and penalize certain kinds of speech, in particular the kind of speech coming from newspapers supporting the opposition Democratic-Republican Party. Some editors were even jailed.

In response, Jefferson, then Adams's vice president, secretly participated in drafting the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, passed by Virginia in 1798 and Kentucky in 1799. The separate resolutions provided an early articulation of a state's right to nullify—or declare null and void—a federal law it deemed to be contrary to its own rights and interests. While the New England states officially rejected the resolutions, they were nevertheless seduced by the principles.

The Nullification Crisis was the last outbreak of states' rights fever before the sectional crises of the 1850s. The Tariff of 1828 placed a tax on European imports in order to protect New England industry, a policy that hurt some southern businessmen. When, after taking office, U.S. president Andrew Jackson did nothing to mollify tariff opponents, the South Carolina legislature took matters into its own hands and declared the tax null and void within the state

States rights vs Federal goverment were embedded even before the revolution, the war was gonna take place. The seeds were sown early on and nothing to do with slavery.

[cpeeks]

I have always mantained that states rights was the justification, on the issue of tarrifs, not a bunch of slaves.

[cpeeks]

The idea of states' rights dates back to Thomas Jefferson, who himself drew on the "social contract" theories of the British philosophers Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) and John Locke (1632–1704). Jefferson maintained that the United States was formed through a social contract between the individual states rather than the people as a whole. In other words, because these states had united voluntarily to form a union—in Jefferson's language, a "compact"—the U.S. government derived its power only from them. This understanding of American government soon found expression in the U.S. Constitution. In 1791, the Ninth and Tenth amendments were ratified, reserving all powers not expressly granted to the federal government to the states and/or the people.

The Constitution does not express the understanding you describe.  The Constitution starts "We the People", not "we the States".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

According to those who led the secession movement it had everything to do with slavery.  Several of the rebel states published Declarations of Causes:
http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html

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.

I am sorry I guess you have never read the tenth amendment the states and the people are the same thing, and it sure doesnt start off saying "We the Federal Goverment"

[cpeeks]

The powers not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited by it the states, ARE RESERVED TO THE STATES RESPECTFULLY, OR TO  THE PEOPLE.

Then I would suggest you read it again you obviously missed the last part, its the same thing.

[cpeeks]

Its refering to the same thing because its the states rights amendment not the peoples rights amendment, the people or the states is the same thing.

[cpeeks]

Your not from Alabama, states rights is alive and well here.

[cpeeks]

The goverment gets that right to govern by the consent of the people, and when in the course of human events that goverment encroaches on the rights of the people, then they have the right to throw off a tyrannical goverment and start over. And  if your saying the people never have a right to scrap a document and start over, then we never had the right to break away from England in the first place, and the Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the others had no right to break away from the Soviet Union.

[cpeeks]

Leaving aside the issue of whether restricting slavery in the territories really was tyranny, what you saying is that the South was using the right of revolution, not a right of secession when it attempted to form a separate government.

Ya I believe that sums it up pretty well.