StalinsNotDead's Journal: More thoughts

Here's a poem that I got out of a book that I am reading, and was the topic of my last journal entry.

The book I'm rereading is A Case For Southern Secession. An interesting look into the causes of the War Between the States, and includes contemporary (for that time) foreign viewpoints. And much of what I am going to speak of here is probably a rehash of what many of you have already heard, read, or discussed.

An unfortunate consequence of being pro-Confederacy/secession is that in many instances that immediately brands you a racist. Because, like global climate change or not eating panda bears, it's not an argument you're going to win. Suffice to say, I am probably less of a racist than Lincoln was. (Why weren't Marylander slaves freed by the emancipation proclamation) I just wish the Confederate states would have emancipated the slaves and gained recognition from European powers.

An interesting parallel that I've noted is the discrepancy between states which pay federal taxes and states which receive federal funding/assistance. And all the belly-achers (sorry, MarxistHacker42 and others I've read here, you're excluded from that pejorative) crying let those hillbillies fend for themselves. Why should we subsidize them? Similar sentiments existed as a prelude to secession. The agricultural exports (and taxes placed upon them) essentially funded the North. And the figures (albeit from a biased source. I must do further research into this) presented showed a much wider gulf between revenue generators and government hand-out takers.

The federal government could not have been paid for without Southern taxation.

Any thoughts? Am I a jackass for my opinions in these matters?

I agree

[JesseL]

Ever read this tidbit?:
The American Lenin [lneilsmith.net]

Re:

[StalinsNotDead]

You agree? That I'm a jackass?

Thanks for the link. I'll read it as soon as time permits.

Re:

[JesseL]

Almost everyone I like is a jackass, so I'm afraid your odds aren't good; but what I was really agreeing with is the pro-secessionist viewpoint.

Re:

[StalinsNotDead]

This here is an interesting read. [amazon.com]
When in the Course of Human Events: Arguing the Case for Southern Secession

It's what I'm currently reading.

Seccesion

[Shadow Wrought]

I've never been a pro-seccesionist. I think as a country we are stronger by having us all together, than having states, counties, and cities winking out because they don't like whatever else does. In the long run seccesion would likely lead to even more armed conflict. If not as a Civil War, than as a war over land or resources. I don't think the Balkanization of the US would be favorable to anyone over time. Doesn't mean we won't end up there- just that I think it would be an undesirable state of affa

Re:

[Captain Splendid]

just that I think it would be an undesirable state of affairs

Hey, don't get all misty just yet. If a good chunk of the fundie states break off into their own cracker-spawnin', dirt-eating enclaves, that's a very good thing.

The expression is 'Yankee go home'

[weierstrass]

..not 'confederate go home' for a reason.

I assumed for most of my life that the standard explanation of why the states went to war was accurate. But without having learnt much more about the history, other than the fact that the Southern states were within their rights to leave the union, I have come to question it. Every apparently imperialistic war that the US has been involved in has been justified by a higher moral principle, supposedly more important than the right of nations to govern themselves or th

Re:

[StalinsNotDead]

Every apparently imperialistic war that the US has been involved in has been justified by a higher moral principle

Usually concocted mid-way through the war at hand.

(Completely unrelated) From what I've read the US spent more time fighting the native Filipinos than they did fighting the Spanish to get the Philipines.

Think of your own overused historical example

Sorry. I do tend to prattle on about that subject.

Even if the North did go to war to free the slaves, that's not to say it didn't needlessly trample S

Re:

[weierstrass]

Think of your own overused historical example
Sorry. I do tend to prattle on about that subject.

I didn't mean you yourself have overused any particular historical example (that I'm aware of), just that everyone uses certain historical wars again and again and tries to construct analogies to the present (WWII if you're pro-war, Vietnam if you're anti). So these kind of arguments have become so common as to kind of become trite and ineffective, that's why I didn't want to actually spell them out in full.

Re:

[StalinsNotDead]

No I pretty much do tend to go off on the Civil War, Mexican-American War, and Spanish-American War. (All for various reasons)

I've also been known to bring up 1812, too. (But that's to help out my Canadian friends when they're made fun of too much by my American friends)

My vaguely libertarian take

[smittyoneeach]

Is that concentrating excessive power at the federal level is anti-democratic.
Why does the federal government even know about average individuals? Sounds like a poorly layered system, to me.
Ah, but there are a) those who love power, and b) those that don't mind giving up their personal freedom.
The perfect storm of socialism.