Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Presidents list

By: xcslewis in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Thu, 11 Oct 12 7:27 AM | 103 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix 		Msg. 10753 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 10749 by Cactus Flower)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

The American revolution was a war to separate the colonies from England so the war between the states would be the second American war of sucession.

I believe emancipation occured in Brazil and Puerto Rico in the 1870' and Cuba in the 1880's.

I believe the U S constitution reached a compromise only on the representation issue relating to the slave population. The issue of slavery itself was left to the states rather that the federal government.

I believe the sucession was about tariffs. The agricultural South either paid a tariff for imported manufactured goods or higher prices to Northern manufacturers. Effectively the Southern states were paying the cost of federal projects. Lincoln was a Whig, similar to today's crony capitalists, and wanted to greatly expand government financed projects.

Rather than humanitarian intent often ascribed to them many northerners simply wanted new states to be "white" only.

I believe had suceeding states been allowed to suceed slavery would have died a natural death for moral and economic reasons. In addition slaves escaping to the North would have no longer enforced the fugitive slave laws. Once slavery had ended the suceeding states very likely would have rejoined knowing the were free to leave as was tje original intent when the union began.


 - - - - -
View Replies (4) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Presidents list
By: Cactus Flower in ALEA
Thu, 11 Oct 12 1:33 AM 		Msg. 10749 of 54959

forgive my ignorance.

wasn't the civil war the only american war of secession? therefore the first.

or are you talking about the war of independence as the first?

re slavery - wasn't the us about the last western country to abolish slavery? for myself, the failure to resolve this issue is a cornerstone of my argument that the us constitution is flawed. why? because it makes it difficult to make anything but the most gradual change, so the us often ends up making changes in the shadow of the catastrophe that inflexibility causes. every 70 years or so.

why did the south wish to secede? was it over tariffs? or did tariffs just end up entangled with slavery and states' rights in a chain of circumstances that became irreversible.

personally, i agree with the folks in the south who think they should have been permitted to secede. on the other hand, i think they would have kept slavery going to the present day, so on balance i am content that they lost.

« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next