Who Would You Have Supported In the American Civil War

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Soy Mexicano. Me encanta como Benito Juárez y quien lo apoya, especialmente el hombre alto que lleva grandes sombreros.

Thankfully, I have no relatives who lived in America during the Civil War. I'm sure that my dirty papist German and Irish ancestors would have voted against Lincoln.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

This thread makes me want to quit posting on this forum. Only in a forum populated by immature nincompoops and reactionary nutbags would this generate more discussion than interesting debates on immigration, globalization and low fertility rates. Atlas may have pollinated my sensibilities but I'm not inclined to come back here if this trash proliferates the forum.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

This thread makes me want to quit posting on this forum. Only in a forum populated by immature nincompoops and reactionary nutbags would this generate more discussion than interesting debates on immigration, globalization and low fertility rates. Atlas may have pollinated my sensibilities but I'm not inclined to come back here if this trash proliferates the forum.

What's your beef with historical debate?

I am a modern man. I like industrialization, flexible labor markets and abhor chattel slavery. This question bores me.

I love history but arguing about who was in the "right" is moronic imo. This is especially holds true for cases in which there is clear villainy and clear virtuosity - like the Civil War. I suppose that who won is largely responsible for this clarity but I'm not going to question the very foundations of the civic society I live in: the Confederacy is embodied by evil reactionary racists who sought to defend an unsustainable society doomed by the resource curse.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Me encanta como Benito Juárez y quien lo apoya,

Ya lo creo que debe ser y quien lo apoyaba

(Juárez está muerto, ¿no?)

I don't actually speak Spanish. Lo siento, mama.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I am a modern man. I like [...]flexible labor markets

Nowt screams modernity like recreating poverty wages and making workers utterly at the mercy of business.

Shut up and eat your big mac, prole.

(I'm clearly being somewhat facetious, this is an internet forum and I am an avid leftist raised by a blue collar father. I am willing to throw stones at management even though I attend a liberal arts college overpopulated with the cosmopolitan, upper class/upper middle class elite)

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Me encanta como Benito Juárez y quien lo apoya,

Ya lo creo que debe ser y quien lo apoyaba

(Juárez está muerto, ¿no?)

I don't actually speak Spanish. Lo siento, mama.

vale.  arurú mi amor 

Stop mom, we're in public!!! *yells english expletive loudly to prove identification with america*

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Truth is, I don't really care about whether States have a right to secede (they clearly don't have it, anyway, since any nation is founded on the basic premise that its parts can't split whenever they want to). A State that attempts to secede in order to perpetuate the existence of slavery shouldn't be let to secede, EVEN if it juridically had the right to. If the constitution had said otherwise, then f**k the constitution.

Even though our country was founded on the idea that it could split itself from Britain because we wanted to?........

Read Rousseau and get back to me:

"AS long as several men assembled together consider themselves as a single body, they have only one will which is directed towards their common preservation and general well-being. Then, all the animating forces of the state are vigorous and simple, and its principles are clear and luminous; it has no incompatible or conflicting interests; the common good makes itself so manifestly evident that only common sense is needed to discern it...
However, when the social tie begins to slacken and the state to weaken, when particular interests begin to make themselves felt and sectional societies begin to exert an influence over the greater society, the common interest then becomes corrupted and meets opposition, voting is no longer unanimous; the general will is no longer the will of all; contradictions and disputes arises, and even the best opinion is not allowed to prevail unchallenged"

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

random old man on the internet has a much deeper understanding of my value system than people i know in real life, weird.

keep in mind they don't teach kids about europe in public school, the more coherent parts of my political philosophy are products of the canon promoted by the liberal arts tradition.

I think our constitution is a deeply flawed product that reflects the classical liberal tradition of disregarding republican ideals in favor of accumulating power under the visage of upholding "god-given liberties" or whatever. That doesn't mean you can just stop existing within its framework and throw a reactionary temper tantrum when the deliberate impediments to popular change cease to be sufficient.

Part of the reason I like the Union has to do with my fetish for a particular period of American history from 1850 to 1920: the time when America was a rapidly developing, multifaceted nation of many tongues and with no coherent culture. The Union's obvious trajectory and the program of Lincoln's Party presaged this nation so I'm inclined to identify with it. I think my love of this era is more of an aesthetic appreciation than anything else but I suppose embedded within that is a love of developing radical labor movements and the like.