[BurlyShirley]

...
And before you all even try to leap from the top ropes with an atomic elbow and call me a racist, lets all be mature adults and agree that the civil war, as kids are taught to understand it, is nothing more than a mutilated piece of revisionist history and that slavery, though an issue, was not really even the cause of it.
I want to talk about "preserving the union" and what that really means. And whose best interests was that in?
What is an American? What does someone from TN have in common with someone from CA or CT? What does someone from HI have in common with someone from AK? Why would they share a common interest and want to live under the same rules/govt./leaders/morals/media/ when their ideals may not jive at all?
Why is it better that the United States are, in fact, united?

 

[Westy]

The answer is the $.

and

Being able to move from state to state with no paperwork. Traveling state to state with no border. Think of the pain it is going to/from Canada and Mexico, imagine that on a statewide scale.

edit: Unified power. Imagine WWI II and so on to say if only 15 of the states decided to participate.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Is the $ more important than the freedom to abort a fetus or marry your own brother or practice human sacrifice?

I doubt it. People just have no choice IMO.

 

[BurlyShirley]

edit: Unified power. Imagine WWI II and so on to say if only 15 of the states decided to participate.

I think the US as a whole, would not have been involved with such a conflict if we were really about 5 different countries instead of one big one.

 

[-BB-]

So in your opinion, what WAS the civil war about?

 

[BurlyShirley]

So in your opinion, what WAS the civil war about?

preserving the union and states' rights. that is not opinion. it is fact.

 

[N8 v2.0]

preserving the union and states' rights. that is not opinion. it is fact.

You are correct sir!

 

[narlus]

i find it funny that the ratio of "northerners" who talk about the civil war to the "southerners" is about 1:20 at best.

who cares anymore?

 

[BurlyShirley]

i find it funny that the ratio of "northerners" who talk about the civil war to the "southerners" is about 1:20 at best.

who cares anymore?

Im from Chicago, and the point really isnt about who won or lost the war, but about why the country is what it is and why it is or isnt better to have it that way. Would we be better off without california? I say yes. Would regional laws better represent the folks living in those respective regions? Yes.
Is the country divided right now? Yes.
Why keep it together?

 

[N8 v2.0]

We could have the United States, the Confederate States and the Republic of Texas.

 

[Westy]

preserving the union and states' rights. that is not opinion. it is fact.

And in that case it was the States Rights to preserve slavery.

 

[caputo1989]

hell yes

 

[N8 v2.0]

And in that case it was the States Rights to preserve slavery.

Yep... and they got the smackdown they deserved, both during the war and after 1865-1877.

 

[BurlyShirley]

And in that case it was the States Rights to preserve slavery.

no.

the south did not send troops marching when the north said "NO SLAVES"

the north sent troops marching when the south said "**** you guys. We're gunna start our own Bio-Dome. With a dome within a dome"

The south figured out that states' rights really dont exist and wanted to leave. Yes, one of the infringements was slavery, but not the meat of the issue.

 

[BurlyShirley]

lets not get away from the point though.

forget about the slavery thing.

why is it better that the states are united?

 

[N8 v2.0]

The south figured out that states' rights really dont exist and wanted to leave. Yes, one of the infringements was slavery, but not the meat of the issue.

Careful... do not misunderestimate the issue of slavery in the mix... it was a hot-button issue that energized both sides.

Lincoln (the US) did not free the slaves until Jan 1863... nearly 2 years after the war started and was not going well for the North.

 

[narlus]

you can take any state where country music is the preferred listening choice.

 

[Toshi]

it's already been said. it's advantageous because of the $$ and military power. it would be interesting to see a breakdown of the finances, infrastructure, general education level etc. of the blue vs. red states... and whether the red states would truly be better off, especially after the abolition of the farm subsidies.

 

[llkoolkeg]

Why? Same reasons every war is fought- money and power. The Yanks were interested in protectionist tarriffs and a captive market for their young industries and didn't like that Southerners truly believed in free markets and were able to pay less for finer European goods. To make matters worse, they wanted to dictate the price of cotton and other agricultural products, didn't like it when Southerners sold to Europe for higher profits and then ultimately demanded that unit costs skyrocket by taking away the cheap labor pool...slaves. Slavery was a motive for some, but by and large, it was but the moral Trojan Horse the Union used to justify it's desire to subjugate the upstart Southern States.

 

[Westy]

The south figured out that states' rights really dont exist and wanted to leave. Yes, one of the infringements was slavery, but not the meat of the issue.

I agree that the war was faught due to states rights the whole freakin' topic came up because their was a movement by the northern states to abolish slavery. What the hell were the other major states right that were in contention?

 

[-BB-]

Im from Chicago, and the point really isnt about who won or lost the war, but about why the country is what it is and why it is or isnt better to have it that way. Would we be better off without california? I say yes. Would regional laws better represent the folks living in those respective regions? Yes.
Is the country divided right now? Yes.
Why keep it together?

LOL... and we'd be better off w/o you.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Some red-necks around here say the war ain't over yet anyhow...

 

[BurlyShirley]

it's already been said. it's advantageous because of the $$ and military power. it would be interesting to see a breakdown of the finances, infrastructure, general education level etc. of the blue vs. red states... and whether the red states would truly be better off, especially after the abolition of the farm subsidies.

I dont really think the farmers would need subsidizing if the states were to split for obvious reasons. And basically, the answer I get out of you and westy is almost a paradox. Basically that the govt. only exists to protect its own existence. Not to do its job and represent the views of its people...or somehting....

 

[N8 v2.0]

Why? Same reasons every war is fought- money and power. The Yanks were interested in protectionist tarriffs and a captive market for their young industries and didn't like that Southerners truly believed in free markets and were able to pay less for finer European goods. To make matters worse, they wanted to dictate the price of cotton and other agricultural products, didn't like it when Southerners sold to Europe for higher profits and then ultimately demanded that unit costs skyrocket by taking away the cheap labor pool...slaves. Slavery was a motive for some, but by and large, it was but the moral Trojan Horse the Union used to justify it's desire to subjugate the upstart Southern States.

Well articulated.

 

[Westy]

Some red-necks around here say the war ain't over yet anyhow...

As a Yankee who lives in Virginia I like to tell the folks who don't think the war is over that I was sent here by the government to burn down Richmond if the souf tries rizin' up 'gain.

 

[BurlyShirley]

I agree that the war was faught due to states rights the whole freakin' topic came up because their was a movement by the northern states to abolish slavery. What the hell were the other major states right that were in contention?

Im not saying slavery didnt set it off, but that slavery is the issue that exposed that there was an issue, and that it wasnt the issue itself. Just forget I said anything...

 

[N8 v2.0]

As a Yankee who lives in Virginia I like to tell the folks who don't think the war is over that I was sent here by the government to burn down Richmond if the souf tries rizin' up 'gain.

I'll bet you haven't dropped by the Rebel Yell biker bar and let them know that...

 

[mack]

i find it funny that the ratio of "northerners" who talk about the civil war to the "southerners" is about 1:20 at best.

who cares anymore?

Ive never heard about any one from the north bitch/talk about the civil war.

 

[Silver]

Careful... do not misunderestimate the issue of slavery in the mix... it was a hot-button issue that energized both sides.

Lincoln (the US) did not free the slaves until Jan 1863... nearly 2 years after the war started and was not going well for the North.

Dear Lord...that's gotta be one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse right there.

 

[Tenchiro]

You southerners better STFU before the better half of the country lays the pimp hand down again.

 

[N8 v2.0]

You southerners better STFU before the better half of the country lays the pimp hand down again.

No Florida for you!

 

[Toshi]

does the missouri compromise and the compromise of 1850 not ring bells?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2951.html

is this just part of the "revisionist [northerner] history" not part of southern schools' curriculum?

 

[-BB-]

No Florida for you!

Who the F needs FL?

What does it have that you can't get elsewhere?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Who the F needs FL?

What does it have that you can't get elsewhere?

bikeweek

 

[ohio]

why is it better that the states are united?

You answered that yourself when you stated that we wouldn't have gotten involved in WWII had we been seperated.

Had we not gotten involved, with the power that our unified nation possessed, Europe would have been a Nazi superpower with the ability to eventually crush our divided land.

Is that a good enough reason?

(Also, I disagree with your assessment of the civil war. Slavery was a necessary condition, and a major cause of the rift that eventually led to secession. Stop sucking down Southern revisionism. Just 'cause you live their doesn't mean you need to believe it. It's like people that fly the confederate flag and claim it's not racist... it's about southern pride. --> now that ought to start some frothing.)

 

[Silver]

(It's like people that fly the confederate flag and claim it's not racist... it's about southern pride. --> now that ought to start some frothing.)

I always thought that flying the confederate flag showed pride in the south's rich and storied history of racism, so people who claim that aren't completely incorrect.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Is that a good enough reason?

No

(Also, I disagree with your assessment of the civil war. Slavery was a necessary condition, and a major cause of the rift that eventually led to secession. Stop sucking down Southern revisionism. Just 'cause you live their doesn't mean you need to believe it.

Oh christ. You were once able to understand what I was trying to say, but now I see you've begun modeling your posts after Silver (who hates christians). Im not sucking down any revisionism, Im just posting a "what if". And the way the civil war is taught, in my experience goes something like this.

South: "We wanna own our blax"

North: "No. A good christian nation would never do such a thing. For slavery is wrong and cruel and we enlightened northerners have come to show you what the true spirit of America is. Freedom and equality for all"

South: "We we hate blax and we hate you, we're leaving"

North: "No you're not."

South: "Oh yes we are so."

North: SMACK!

South: "Man, thanks for smacking the hell out of me. Turns out you were right. What was I thinking. Thanks Abe Lincoln and the rest of the north!"


Which of course wasnt the case, but is what most people beleive. Anyway, forget the civil war for a 2nd. Are you saying that the reason the US is united is to protect the other countries from big powers? They dont even like us.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

lets not get away from the point though.

forget about the slavery thing.

why is it better that the states are united?

dude, why do you dig so much?? i mean... you and the south, are getting the sweet end of the deal...

without the north, the south would be an extension of third world south america.

 

[Changleen]

$$$$$$.

Dude. It's that simple. You're right that you are now fairly ideologically divided now. If the West Coast + Blue East told the rest of you where to get off, the Red zone would pretty quickly turn into Mexico standards of living. (No offence to Mexicans)

 

[ohio]

No

Oh christ. You were once able to understand what I was trying to say

I did understand what you were trying to say. I addressed that with the first part of my post.

I then posted an aside to address a corrollary remark you made about the nature of the civil war. That remark wasn't necessary to your point so you shouldn't have posted it if you didn't want it addressed. Capiche?

Now back to the beginning: No, I'm not saying that being a superpower is the sole reason. But it's one good reason... and I picked it because you pointed it out yourself, and it's fun to turn people words against them. Like the "quit hitting yourself" game I used to play with my little brother.

The other "good" reason is much the same reason we may or may not have used to invade Iraq (I say may or may not, because I've lost track of which justification we're currently using). There were severe human rights violations going on, and we had a strong financial reasons to want to invade. Now whether it was the former or the latter that are the true reasons are about as important as whether it was the former or latter that were the true reasons for invading Iraq.

(Now I've created the opening for you to argue my opposition of the war in Iraq, but it will require you to abandon your position on Southern secession... whatcha gonna do?)