PDA

View Full Version : Libertarianism in the South




Lisle16
03-26-2009, 09:32 PM
It seems that many of the most principled defenders of the Constitution in Congress are from the South.

Ron Paul
Larry McDonald
Bob Barr
John Duncan
Paul Broun

etc.

Is there a reason for this?

Young Paleocon
03-26-2009, 09:43 PM
Murray Rothbard has given some good lectures about this and religious/political history of our nation's demographics.

Matt Collins
03-26-2009, 09:46 PM
Don't forget Harry Browne

torchbearer
03-26-2009, 09:48 PM
It seems that many of the most principled defenders of the Constitution in Congress are from the South.

Ron Paul
Larry McDonald
Bob Barr
John Duncan
Paul Broun

etc.

Is there a reason for this?

I think the south still remembers what a strong central government will do to your people if you step out of line.
The spirit of independence never died in the south.

Freedom Forever
03-26-2009, 10:20 PM
During the civil war the south was fighting against the centralization of power in the Federal Government.

nate895
03-26-2009, 10:29 PM
Thomas Jefferson was a Virginian. Virginia is a Southern state, and the rest of the Southern states adopted the Jeffersonian view on government (i.e., the minarchist point-of-view). The tradition still lives on in some Southerners, but many of them are poor and live off the government and those who take the king's shilling are the king's men, therefore much of the South is enslaved to the Federal government. If the fire is going to be lit for freedom anywhere in this country, it is in the South and maybe the Mountain West. If only the Southerners can realize what the Federal government has done to them.

Kludge
03-26-2009, 10:29 PM
Mexicans are less authoritarian than Canadians/French???

Matt Collins
03-26-2009, 10:37 PM
During the civil warDid I miss a history lesson or something? :confused: The United States never had a civil war. We had a war against Southern Independence. :rolleyes:

heavenlyboy34
03-26-2009, 10:42 PM
Did I miss a history lesson or something? :confused: The United States never had a civil war. We had a war against Southern Independence. :rolleyes:

lolz...nah, you missed a brainwashing lesson. ;):cool:

Stary Hickory
03-26-2009, 10:53 PM
Thomas Jefferson was a Virginian. Virginia is a Southern state, and the rest of the Southern states adopted the Jeffersonian view on government (i.e., the minarchist point-of-view). The tradition still lives on in some Southerners, but many of them are poor and live off the government and those who take the king's shilling are the king's men, therefore much of the South is enslaved to the Federal government. If the fire is going to be lit for freedom anywhere in this country, it is in the South and maybe the Mountain West. If only the Southerners can realize what the Federal government has done to them.

Exactly, one must follow where the Inflationary money goes and who benefits from Fascist legislation in government. Taxes play a much smaller role in thins when seen from this angle.

ChaosControl
03-27-2009, 08:09 AM
Same reason I feel more of an attachment to the south even though I was born in the west. But then my father was born in Oklahoma, so I guess I do have southern blood in me. :P

Pennsylvania
03-27-2009, 08:10 AM
Let us not forget where Ron Paul is actually from :D

jdmyprez_deo_vindice
03-27-2009, 08:15 AM
We southerners know what tyranny is and we also know how the mainstream media and public education brainwashing machine works. Obama was able to brainwash people with three words "yes we can". The media and public education has been able to demonize the south and her people with one word, "slavery".

It is like Jefferson Davis said ""The principles for which we fought are bound to reassert themselves in a later time."

acptulsa
03-27-2009, 08:16 AM
The South has the rebel heritage. The West has the pioneer heritage, at least those areas between the Mississippi and the Sierra-Nevadas which had to be settled by hardy people in wagons and couldn't be settled by rich people who could afford passage around the Horn. What they have in common is decade after decade of one-size-fits-all laws that only ever fit the populous Northeast--and a bucketload of resentment. What better breeding ground for liberty?

malkusm
03-27-2009, 08:21 AM
Let us not forget where Ron Paul is actually from :D

True, but more to the point, he didn't get elected there. :D

constituent
03-27-2009, 08:46 AM
The South has the rebel heritage. The West has the pioneer heritage, at least those areas between the Mississippi and the Sierra-Nevadas which had to be settled by hardy people in wagons and couldn't be settled by rich people who could afford passage around the Horn. What they have in common is decade after decade of one-size-fits-all laws that only ever fit the populous Northeast--and a bucketload of resentment. What better breeding ground for liberty?

that about covers it.

also, growing up around some deeply philosophical, independent spirited folks. Seeing them day to day in your actual life, and then seeing how people from the south (particularly Texans) are portrayed in radio, tv, film, creates whole populations that think everything establishment, everything "outside" is all bullshit.

i consider myself to be one of these people.

sevin
03-27-2009, 08:47 AM
Also note that Obama didn't pick a single person from the south to be in his administration.

The South will rise again!

http://i14.ebayimg.com/03/i/04/d0/30/35_2.JPG

georgiaboy
03-27-2009, 08:53 AM
It seems that many of the most principled defenders of the Constitution in Congress are from the South.



Is there a reason for this?

Yes, just ask their (and my) mommas. :D

Virginia Libertarian
03-27-2009, 10:45 AM
It also seems to be more popular in the Appalachian areas

Crowish
03-27-2009, 11:13 AM
I think it is the Scotch-Irish/Appalachian influence.

George Washington: “If defeated everywhere else, I will make my stand for liberty, among the Scots-Irish in my native Virginia”.

Elwar
03-27-2009, 11:17 AM
Nah, nothing to do with anything from the past...

It's the sweet tea.

acptulsa
03-27-2009, 11:39 AM
Nah, nothing to do with anything from the past...

It's the sweet tea.

Blue kool-aid and red tea?

nate895
03-27-2009, 12:03 PM
Nah, nothing to do with anything from the past...

It's the sweet tea.

LOL, I love sweet tea.

I was at a Sonic about a month ago and ordered sweet tea, which was on the menu, but the moronic Yankees brought me out regular tea with sugar in it. I then had to go up to the window and a girl with a Southern accent said she'd actually get some and it was there quite a bit later.

Matt Collins
03-28-2009, 07:46 AM
The South has the rebel heritage. The West has the pioneer heritage, at least those areas between the Mississippi and the Sierra-Nevadas which had to be settled by hardy people in wagons and couldn't be settled by rich people who could afford passage around the Horn. What they have in common is decade after decade of one-size-fits-all laws that only ever fit the populous Northeast--and a bucketload of resentment. What better breeding ground for liberty?As I was driving across the country yesterday I really pondered on this. And what you have said is very insightful and there is lot of truth to it. In fact I felt very uncomfortable once I got out of the South because I realized I Was in yankee territory. Oh, and I especially hate Illinois because nothing good has ever come from there.... Obama, Lincoln, Daley, Kennedy's victory.... and including my speeding ticket (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=186124) :mad:

tnvoter
03-28-2009, 09:42 AM
Appalachia is indeed important. The remaining Cherokee and other tribes who didn't sign their names and weren't forced away on a trail of tears know about the central Gov. and I assure you haven't forgotten.

Working Poor
03-28-2009, 11:37 AM
Is there a reason for this?

Because us red necks don't like nobody telling us how to live our lives.

anaconda
03-28-2009, 01:19 PM
Did I miss a history lesson or something? :confused: The United States never had a civil war. We had a war against Southern Independence. :rolleyes:

That most definitely qualifies as a civil war.

anaconda
03-28-2009, 01:21 PM
Because us red necks don't like nobody telling us how to live our lives.

How come there's more red necks that are pro Republican instead of pro Constitution?

malkusm
03-28-2009, 01:24 PM
I think it is the Scotch-Irish/Appalachian influence.

George Washington: “If defeated everywhere else, I will make my stand for liberty, among the Scots-Irish in my native Virginia”.

The Scotch-Irish history most certainly lends itself to independence. If you were beat down by Britain for your whole life, as were your parents, and their parents, and their parents....and then they took your land and made you move to Ireland because they wanted to take control over Ireland as well...yeah I guess you'd probably be pretty anti-establishment. ;)

torchbearer
03-28-2009, 01:24 PM
How come there's more red necks that are pro Republican instead of pro Constitution?

WHy was the south solid democrat until reagan?

Matt Collins
03-28-2009, 01:37 PM
That most definitely qualifies as a civil war.No it does not. A civil war is when multiple factions are fighting to control each other. The South never wanted to control the Union, it simply wanted the right to self govern which was their inherent right.

Uriel999
03-28-2009, 01:38 PM
That most definitely qualifies as a civil war.

It was a war of Northern Aggression. :D

anaconda
03-28-2009, 02:41 PM
No it does not. A civil war is when multiple factions are fighting to control each other. The South never wanted to control the Union, it simply wanted the right to self govern which was their inherent right.

Dictionary: civil war
Sponsored Links
Civil War History
Learn History and Facts about the Civil War and More.
ListingLook.com
Love Civil War History?
Travel To Historic Williamsburg. Tour Real Virginia Civil War Sites!
VisitWilliamsburg.com
Home > Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary

n.

1. A war between factions or regions of the same country.

jdmyprez_deo_vindice
03-28-2009, 02:46 PM
Dictionary: civil war
Sponsored Links
Civil War History
Learn History and Facts about the Civil War and More.
ListingLook.com
Love Civil War History?
Travel To Historic Williamsburg. Tour Real Virginia Civil War Sites!
VisitWilliamsburg.com
Home > Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary

n.

1. A war between factions or regions of the same country.

And from the moment that South Carolina passed the ordinance of secession, they ceased being a part of that original country and became their own sovereign nation which was an act followed the by other states who would vote for secession and eventually form together as the Confederate States of America. It was not a war between the same country, it was an invasion of a free people who only wished to be left alone.

Matt Collins
03-28-2009, 03:09 PM
Dictionary: civil war


1. A war between factions or regions of the same country.
Except that the Confederacy was not the same country as the Union. Remember each State is sovereign.

tonesforjonesbones
03-28-2009, 03:17 PM
Well, If you remember , Jefferson was a democrat. The democrats used to be the constitutional, anti federalist free marketers...the southern folk were the free marketers. The new englanders were the federalists who wanted big government, and central banks etc. It was the southerners who demanded the 10th amendment...they KNEW from day one that the federalists wanted total control..and demanded the sovereignity of the states. The south was actually more wealthy and more educated than the north. The War of Northern aggression destroyed the south ...and it has never recovered. The south was more religious, the north was more humanitarian. Tones

tonesforjonesbones
03-28-2009, 03:26 PM
10 Causes Of The Civil War
THE 10 CAUSES OF THE WAR BETWEEN THE STATES
Historians have long debated the causes of the war and the Southern perspective differs greatly from the Northern perspective. Based upon the study of original documents of the
War Between The States (Civil War) era and facts and information published by Confederate Veterans, Confederate Chaplains, Southern writers and Southern Historians before, during, and after the war, I present the facts, opinions, and conclusions stated in the following article.
I respectfully disagree with those who claim that the War Between the States was fought over slavery or that the abolition of slavery in the Revolutionary Era or early Federal period would have prevented war. It is my opinion that war was inevitable between the North and South due to complex political and personal differences. The famous Englishman Winston Churchill stated that the war between the North and South was one of the most unpreventable wars in history. The Cause that the Confederate States of America fought for (1861-1865) was Southern Independence from the United States of America. Many parallels exist between the War for American Independence ( 1775-1783 ) and the War for Southern Independence.
There were 10 political causes of the war ---one of which was slavery-- which was a scapegoat for all the differences that existed between the North and South. The Northern industrialists had wanted a war since about 1830 to get the South's resources ( land-cotton-coal-timber-minerals ) for pennies on the dollar. All wars are economic and are always between centralists and decentralists.The North would have found an excuse to invade the South even if slavery had never existed.
A war almost occurred during 1828-1832 over the tariff when South Carolina passed nullification laws. The U.S. congress had increased the tariff rate on imported products to 40% ( known as the tariff of abominations in Southern States ). This crisis had nothing to do with slavery. If slavery had never existed --period--or had been eliminated at the time the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776 or anytime prior to 1860 it is my opinion that there would still have been a war sooner or later.
On a human level there were 4 causes of the war--New England Greed--New England Fanatics--New England Zealots--and New England Hypocrites. During "So Called Reconstruction" ( 1865-1877 ) the New England Industrialists got what they had really wanted for 40 years--THE SOUTH'S RESOURCES FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR. It was a political coalition between the New England economic interests and the New England fanatics and zealots that caused Southern secession to be necessary for economic survival and safety of the population.

1. TARIFF--Prior to the war about 75% of the money to operate the Federal Government was derived from the Southern States via an unfair sectional tariff on imported goods and 50% of the total 75% was from just 4 Southern states--Virginia-North Carolina--South Carolina and Georgia. Only 10%--20% of this tax money was being returned to the South. The Southern states were being treated as an agricultural colony of the North and bled dry. John Randolph of Virginia's remarks in opposition to the tariff of 1820 demonstrates that fact. The North claimed that they fought the war to preserve the Union but the New England Industrialists who were in control of the North were actually supporting preservation of the Union to maintain and increase revenue from the tariff. The industrialists wanted the South to pay for the industrialization of America at no expense to themselves. Revenue bills introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives prior to the War Between the States were biased, unfair and inflammatory to the South. Abraham Lincoln had promised the Northern industrialists that he would increase the tariff rate if he was elected president of the United States. Lincoln increased the rate to a level that exceeded even the "Tariff of Abominations" 40% rate that had so infuriated the South during the 1828-1832 era ( between 50 and 51% on iron goods). The election of a president that was Anti-Southern on all issues and politically associated with the New England industrialists, fanatics, and zealots brought about the Southern secession movement.

2. CENTRALIZATION VERSUS STATES RIGHTS---The United States of America was founded as a Constitutional Federal Republic in 1789 composed of a Limited Federal Government and Sovereign States. The North wanted to and did alter the form of Government this nation was founded upon. The Confederate States of America fought to preserve Constitutional Limited Federal Government as established by America’s founding fathers who were primarily Southern Gentlemen from Virginia. Thus Confederate soldiers were fighting for rights that had been paid for in blood by their forefathers upon the battlefields of the American Revolution. Abraham Lincoln had a blatant disregard for The Constitution of the United States of America. His War of aggression Against the South changed America from a Constitutional Federal Republic to a Democracy ( with Socialist leanings ) and broke the original Constitution. The infamous Socialist Karl Marx sent Lincoln a letter of congratulations after his reelection in 1864. A considerable number of European Socialists came to America and fought for the Union (North).

3. CHRISTIANITY VERSUS SECULAR HUMANISM--The South believed in basic Christianity as presented in the Holy Bible.The North had many Secular Humanists ( atheists, transcendentalists and non-Christians ). Southerners were afraid of what kind of country America might become if the North had its way. Secular Humanism is the belief that there is no God and that man,science and government can solve all problems. This philosophy advocates human rather than religious values. Reference : Frank Conner’s book “The South Under Siege 1830-2000.”

4. CULTURAL DIFFERENCES--Southerners and Northerners were of different Genetic Lineages. Southerners were primarily of Western English (original Britons),Scottish,and Irish linage (Celtic) whereas Northerners tended to be of Anglo-Saxon and Danish (Viking) extraction. The two cultures had been at war and at odds for over 1000 years before they arrived in America. Our ancient ancestors in Western England under King Arthur humbled the Saxon princes at the battle of Baden Hill ( circa 497 AD --516 AD ). The cultural differences that contributed to the War Between the States (1861-1865 ) had existed for 1500 years or more.

5. CONTROL OF WESTERN TERRITORIES--The North wanted to control Western States and Territories such as Kansas and Nebraska. New England formed Immigrant Aid Societies and sent settlers to these areas that were politically attached to the North. They passed laws against slavery that Southerners considered punitive. These political actions told Southerners they were not welcome in the new states and territories. It was all about control--slavery was a scapegoat.

6. NORTHERN INDUSTRIALISTS WANTED THE SOUTH'S RESOURCES. The Northern Industrialists wanted a war to use as an excuse to get the South's resources for pennies on the dollar. They began a campaign about 1830 that would influence the common people of the North and create enmity that would allow them to go to war against the South. These Northern Industrialists brought up a morality claim against the South alleging the evils of slavery. The Northern Hypocrites conveniently neglected to publicize the fact that 5 New England States ( Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and New York ) were primarily responsible for the importation of most of the slaves from Africa to America. These states had both private and state owned fleets of ships.

7. SLANDER OF THE SOUTH BY NORTHERN NEWSPAPERS. This political cause ties in to the above listed efforts by New England Industrialists. Beginning about 1830 the Northern Newspapers began to slander the South. The Industrialists used this tool to indoctrinate the common people of the North. They used slavery as a scapegoat and brought the morality claim up to a feverish pitch. Southerners became tired of reading in the Northern Newspapers about what bad and evil people they were just because their neighbor down the road had a few slaves. This propaganda campaign created hostility between the ordinary citizens of the two regions and created the animosity necessary for war. The Northern Industrialists worked poor whites in the factories of the North under terrible conditions for 18 hours a day ( including children ). When the workers became old and infirm they were fired. It is a historical fact that during this era there were thousands of old people living homeless on the streets in the cities of the North. In the South a slave was cared for from birth to death. Also the diet and living conditions of Southern slaves was superior to that of most white Northern factory workers. Southerners deeply resented this New England hypocrisy and slander.

8. NEW ENGLANDERS ATTEMPTED TO INSTIGATE MASSIVE SLAVE REBELLIONS IN THE SOUTH. Abolitionists were a small but vocal and militant group in New England who demanded instant abolition of slavery in the South. These fanatics and zealots were calling for massive slave uprisings that would result in the murder of Southern men, women and children. Southerners were aware that such an uprising had occurred in Santa Domingo in the 1790 era and that the French (white) population had been massacred. The abolitionists published a terrorist manifesto and tried to smuggle 100,000 copies into the South showing slaves how to murder their masters at night. Then when John Brown raided Harpers Ferry,Virginia in 1859 the political situation became inflammatory. Prior to this event there had been five times as many abolition societies in the South as in the North. Lincoln and most of the Republican Party ( 64 members of congress ) had adopted a political platform in support of terrorist acts against the South. Some (allegedly including Lincoln) had contributed monetarily as supporters of John Browns terrorist activities.. Again slavery was used as a scapegoat for all differences that existed between the North and South.

9. SLAVERY. Indirectly slavery was a cause of the war. Most Southerners did not own slaves and would not have fought for the protection of slavery. However they believed that the North had no Constitutional right to free slaves held by citizens of Sovereign Southern States. Prior to the war there were five times as many abolition societies in the South as in the North. Virtually all educated Southerners were in favor of gradual emancipation of slaves. Gradual emancipation would have allowed the economy and labor system of the South to gradually adjust to a free paid labor system without economic collapse. Furthermore, since the New England States were responsible for the development of slavery in America, Southerners saw the morality claims by the North as blatant hypocrisy. The first state to legalize slavery had been Massachusetts in 1641 and this law was directed primarily at Indians. In colonial times the economic infrastructure of the port cities of the North was dependent upon the slave trade. The first slave ship in America, "THE DESIRE", was fitted out in Marblehead, Massachusetts. Further proof that Southerners were not fighting to preserve slavery is found in the diary of an officer in the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia. He stated that "he had never met a man in the Army of Northern Virginia that claimed he was fighting to preserve slavery". If the war had been over slavery, the composition of the politicians, officers, enlisted men, and even African Americans would have been different. Confederate General Robert E. Lee had freed his slaves (Custis estate) prior to 1863 whereas Union General Grant's wife Julia did not free her slaves until after the war when forced to do so by the 13th amendment to the constitution and court action. Grant even stated that if the abolitionists claimed he was fighting to free slaves that he would offer his services to the South. Mildred Lewis Rutherford ( 1852-1928 ) was for many years the historian for the United Daughters Of The Confederacy (UDC). In her book Truths Of History she stated that there were more slaveholders in the Union Army ( 315,000 ) than the Confederate Army ( 200,000 ). Statistics also show that about 300,000 blacks supported the Confederacy versus about 200,000 for the Union. Clearly the war would have been fought along different lines if it had been fought over slavery. The famous English author Charles Dickens stated “ the Northern onslaught upon Southern slavery is a specious piece of humbug designed to mask their desire for the economic control of the Southern states.”

10, NORTHERN AGGRESSION AGAINST SOUTHERN STATES, Proof that Abraham Lincoln wanted war may be found in the manner he handled the Fort Sumter incident. Original correspondence between Lincoln and Naval Captain G.V.Fox shows proof that Lincoln acted with deceit and willfully provoked South Carolina into firing on the fort ( A TARIFF COLLECTION FACILITY ). It was politically important that the South be provoked into firing the first shot so that Lincoln could claim the Confederacy started the war. Additional proof that Lincoln wanted war is the fact that Lincoln refused to meet with a Confederate peace delegation. They remained in Washington for 30 days and returned to Richmond only after it became apparent that Lincoln wanted war and refused to meet and discuss a peace agreement. After setting up the Fort Sumter incident for the purpose of starting a war, Lincoln called for 75,000 troops to put down what he called a rebellion. He intended to march Union troops across Virginia and North Carolina to attack South Carolina. Virginia and North Carolina were not going to allow such an unconstitutional and criminal act of aggression against a sovereign sister Southern State. Lincoln's act of aggression caused the secession of the upper Southern States.
On April 17th 1861, Governor Letcher of Virginia sent this message to Washington DC: “ I have only to say that the militia of Virginia will not be furnished to the powers of Washington for any such use or purpose as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate the Southern states and the requisition made upon me for such a object-an object in my judgement not within the purview of the constitution or the act of 1795, will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate civil war; having done so we will meet you in a spirit as determined as the administration has exhibited toward the South.”

The WAR BETWEEN THE STATES 1861-1865 occurred due to many complex causes and factors as enumerated above. Those who make claims that "the war was over slavery" or that if slavery had been abolished in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was signed or in 1789 when The Constitution of the United States of America was signed, that war would not have occurred between North and South are being very simplistic in their views and opinions.

The Union victory in 1865 destroyed the right of secession in America,which had been so cherished by America's founding fathers as the principle of their revolution. British historian and political philosopher Lord Acton, one of the most intellectual figures in Victorian England, understood the deeper meaning of Southern defeat. In a letter to former Confederate General Robert E. Lee dated November 4,1866, Lord Acton wrote " I saw in States Rights the only available check upon the absolutism of the sovereign will, and secession filled me with hope, not as the destruction but as the redemption of Democracy. I deemed you were fighting the battles of our liberty, our progress, and our civilization and I mourn for that which was lost at Richmond more deeply than I rejoice over that which was saved at Waterloo (defeat of Napoleon). As Illinois Governor Richard Yates stated in a message to his state assembly on January 2,1865, the war had " tended, more than any other event in the history of the country, to militate against the Jeffersonian Ideal ( Thomas Jefferson ) that the best government is that which governs least.
Years after the war former Confederate president Jefferson Davis stated " I Am saddened to Hear Southerners Apologize For Fighting To Preserve Our Inheritance". Some years later former U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt stated " Those Who Will Not Fight For The Graves Of Their Ancestors Are Beyond Redemption".

James W. King
Commander Camp 141
Lt. Col. Thomas M. Nelson
Sons of Confederate Veterans
PO Box 70577 Albany, Georgia 31708
229-436-0397
jkingantiquearms@bellsouth.net

James W. King's blog | login or register to post comments

malkusm
03-28-2009, 03:39 PM
10 Causes Of The Civil War
THE 10 CAUSES OF THE WAR BETWEEN THE STATES
Historians have long debated the causes of the war and the Southern perspective differs greatly from the Northern perspective. Based upon the study of original documents of the
War Between The States (Civil War) era and facts and information published by Confederate Veterans, Confederate Chaplains, Southern writers and Southern Historians before, during, and after the war, I present the facts, opinions, and conclusions stated in the following article.
I respectfully disagree with those who claim that the War Between the States was fought over slavery or that the abolition of slavery in the Revolutionary Era or early Federal period would have prevented war. It is my opinion that war was inevitable between the North and South due to complex political and personal differences. The famous Englishman Winston Churchill stated that the war between the North and South was one of the most unpreventable wars in history. The Cause that the Confederate States of America fought for (1861-1865) was Southern Independence from the United States of America. Many parallels exist between the War for American Independence ( 1775-1783 ) and the War for Southern Independence.
There were 10 political causes of the war ---one of which was slavery-- which was a scapegoat for all the differences that existed between the North and South. The Northern industrialists had wanted a war since about 1830 to get the South's resources ( land-cotton-coal-timber-minerals ) for pennies on the dollar. All wars are economic and are always between centralists and decentralists.The North would have found an excuse to invade the South even if slavery had never existed.
A war almost occurred during 1828-1832 over the tariff when South Carolina passed nullification laws. The U.S. congress had increased the tariff rate on imported products to 40% ( known as the tariff of abominations in Southern States ). This crisis had nothing to do with slavery. If slavery had never existed --period--or had been eliminated at the time the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776 or anytime prior to 1860 it is my opinion that there would still have been a war sooner or later.
On a human level there were 4 causes of the war--New England Greed--New England Fanatics--New England Zealots--and New England Hypocrites. During "So Called Reconstruction" ( 1865-1877 ) the New England Industrialists got what they had really wanted for 40 years--THE SOUTH'S RESOURCES FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR. It was a political coalition between the New England economic interests and the New England fanatics and zealots that caused Southern secession to be necessary for economic survival and safety of the population.

1. TARIFF--Prior to the war about 75% of the money to operate the Federal Government was derived from the Southern States via an unfair sectional tariff on imported goods and 50% of the total 75% was from just 4 Southern states--Virginia-North Carolina--South Carolina and Georgia. Only 10%--20% of this tax money was being returned to the South. The Southern states were being treated as an agricultural colony of the North and bled dry. John Randolph of Virginia's remarks in opposition to the tariff of 1820 demonstrates that fact. The North claimed that they fought the war to preserve the Union but the New England Industrialists who were in control of the North were actually supporting preservation of the Union to maintain and increase revenue from the tariff. The industrialists wanted the South to pay for the industrialization of America at no expense to themselves. Revenue bills introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives prior to the War Between the States were biased, unfair and inflammatory to the South. Abraham Lincoln had promised the Northern industrialists that he would increase the tariff rate if he was elected president of the United States. Lincoln increased the rate to a level that exceeded even the "Tariff of Abominations" 40% rate that had so infuriated the South during the 1828-1832 era ( between 50 and 51% on iron goods). The election of a president that was Anti-Southern on all issues and politically associated with the New England industrialists, fanatics, and zealots brought about the Southern secession movement.

2. CENTRALIZATION VERSUS STATES RIGHTS---The United States of America was founded as a Constitutional Federal Republic in 1789 composed of a Limited Federal Government and Sovereign States. The North wanted to and did alter the form of Government this nation was founded upon. The Confederate States of America fought to preserve Constitutional Limited Federal Government as established by America’s founding fathers who were primarily Southern Gentlemen from Virginia. Thus Confederate soldiers were fighting for rights that had been paid for in blood by their forefathers upon the battlefields of the American Revolution. Abraham Lincoln had a blatant disregard for The Constitution of the United States of America. His War of aggression Against the South changed America from a Constitutional Federal Republic to a Democracy ( with Socialist leanings ) and broke the original Constitution. The infamous Socialist Karl Marx sent Lincoln a letter of congratulations after his reelection in 1864. A considerable number of European Socialists came to America and fought for the Union (North).

3. CHRISTIANITY VERSUS SECULAR HUMANISM--The South believed in basic Christianity as presented in the Holy Bible.The North had many Secular Humanists ( atheists, transcendentalists and non-Christians ). Southerners were afraid of what kind of country America might become if the North had its way. Secular Humanism is the belief that there is no God and that man,science and government can solve all problems. This philosophy advocates human rather than religious values. Reference : Frank Conner’s book “The South Under Siege 1830-2000.”

4. CULTURAL DIFFERENCES--Southerners and Northerners were of different Genetic Lineages. Southerners were primarily of Western English (original Britons),Scottish,and Irish linage (Celtic) whereas Northerners tended to be of Anglo-Saxon and Danish (Viking) extraction. The two cultures had been at war and at odds for over 1000 years before they arrived in America. Our ancient ancestors in Western England under King Arthur humbled the Saxon princes at the battle of Baden Hill ( circa 497 AD --516 AD ). The cultural differences that contributed to the War Between the States (1861-1865 ) had existed for 1500 years or more.

5. CONTROL OF WESTERN TERRITORIES--The North wanted to control Western States and Territories such as Kansas and Nebraska. New England formed Immigrant Aid Societies and sent settlers to these areas that were politically attached to the North. They passed laws against slavery that Southerners considered punitive. These political actions told Southerners they were not welcome in the new states and territories. It was all about control--slavery was a scapegoat.

6. NORTHERN INDUSTRIALISTS WANTED THE SOUTH'S RESOURCES. The Northern Industrialists wanted a war to use as an excuse to get the South's resources for pennies on the dollar. They began a campaign about 1830 that would influence the common people of the North and create enmity that would allow them to go to war against the South. These Northern Industrialists brought up a morality claim against the South alleging the evils of slavery. The Northern Hypocrites conveniently neglected to publicize the fact that 5 New England States ( Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and New York ) were primarily responsible for the importation of most of the slaves from Africa to America. These states had both private and state owned fleets of ships.

7. SLANDER OF THE SOUTH BY NORTHERN NEWSPAPERS. This political cause ties in to the above listed efforts by New England Industrialists. Beginning about 1830 the Northern Newspapers began to slander the South. The Industrialists used this tool to indoctrinate the common people of the North. They used slavery as a scapegoat and brought the morality claim up to a feverish pitch. Southerners became tired of reading in the Northern Newspapers about what bad and evil people they were just because their neighbor down the road had a few slaves. This propaganda campaign created hostility between the ordinary citizens of the two regions and created the animosity necessary for war. The Northern Industrialists worked poor whites in the factories of the North under terrible conditions for 18 hours a day ( including children ). When the workers became old and infirm they were fired. It is a historical fact that during this era there were thousands of old people living homeless on the streets in the cities of the North. In the South a slave was cared for from birth to death. Also the diet and living conditions of Southern slaves was superior to that of most white Northern factory workers. Southerners deeply resented this New England hypocrisy and slander.

8. NEW ENGLANDERS ATTEMPTED TO INSTIGATE MASSIVE SLAVE REBELLIONS IN THE SOUTH. Abolitionists were a small but vocal and militant group in New England who demanded instant abolition of slavery in the South. These fanatics and zealots were calling for massive slave uprisings that would result in the murder of Southern men, women and children. Southerners were aware that such an uprising had occurred in Santa Domingo in the 1790 era and that the French (white) population had been massacred. The abolitionists published a terrorist manifesto and tried to smuggle 100,000 copies into the South showing slaves how to murder their masters at night. Then when John Brown raided Harpers Ferry,Virginia in 1859 the political situation became inflammatory. Prior to this event there had been five times as many abolition societies in the South as in the North. Lincoln and most of the Republican Party ( 64 members of congress ) had adopted a political platform in support of terrorist acts against the South. Some (allegedly including Lincoln) had contributed monetarily as supporters of John Browns terrorist activities.. Again slavery was used as a scapegoat for all differences that existed between the North and South.

9. SLAVERY. Indirectly slavery was a cause of the war. Most Southerners did not own slaves and would not have fought for the protection of slavery. However they believed that the North had no Constitutional right to free slaves held by citizens of Sovereign Southern States. Prior to the war there were five times as many abolition societies in the South as in the North. Virtually all educated Southerners were in favor of gradual emancipation of slaves. Gradual emancipation would have allowed the economy and labor system of the South to gradually adjust to a free paid labor system without economic collapse. Furthermore, since the New England States were responsible for the development of slavery in America, Southerners saw the morality claims by the North as blatant hypocrisy. The first state to legalize slavery had been Massachusetts in 1641 and this law was directed primarily at Indians. In colonial times the economic infrastructure of the port cities of the North was dependent upon the slave trade. The first slave ship in America, "THE DESIRE", was fitted out in Marblehead, Massachusetts. Further proof that Southerners were not fighting to preserve slavery is found in the diary of an officer in the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia. He stated that "he had never met a man in the Army of Northern Virginia that claimed he was fighting to preserve slavery". If the war had been over slavery, the composition of the politicians, officers, enlisted men, and even African Americans would have been different. Confederate General Robert E. Lee had freed his slaves (Custis estate) prior to 1863 whereas Union General Grant's wife Julia did not free her slaves until after the war when forced to do so by the 13th amendment to the constitution and court action. Grant even stated that if the abolitionists claimed he was fighting to free slaves that he would offer his services to the South. Mildred Lewis Rutherford ( 1852-1928 ) was for many years the historian for the United Daughters Of The Confederacy (UDC). In her book Truths Of History she stated that there were more slaveholders in the Union Army ( 315,000 ) than the Confederate Army ( 200,000 ). Statistics also show that about 300,000 blacks supported the Confederacy versus about 200,000 for the Union. Clearly the war would have been fought along different lines if it had been fought over slavery. The famous English author Charles Dickens stated “ the Northern onslaught upon Southern slavery is a specious piece of humbug designed to mask their desire for the economic control of the Southern states.”

10, NORTHERN AGGRESSION AGAINST SOUTHERN STATES, Proof that Abraham Lincoln wanted war may be found in the manner he handled the Fort Sumter incident. Original correspondence between Lincoln and Naval Captain G.V.Fox shows proof that Lincoln acted with deceit and willfully provoked South Carolina into firing on the fort ( A TARIFF COLLECTION FACILITY ). It was politically important that the South be provoked into firing the first shot so that Lincoln could claim the Confederacy started the war. Additional proof that Lincoln wanted war is the fact that Lincoln refused to meet with a Confederate peace delegation. They remained in Washington for 30 days and returned to Richmond only after it became apparent that Lincoln wanted war and refused to meet and discuss a peace agreement. After setting up the Fort Sumter incident for the purpose of starting a war, Lincoln called for 75,000 troops to put down what he called a rebellion. He intended to march Union troops across Virginia and North Carolina to attack South Carolina. Virginia and North Carolina were not going to allow such an unconstitutional and criminal act of aggression against a sovereign sister Southern State. Lincoln's act of aggression caused the secession of the upper Southern States.
On April 17th 1861, Governor Letcher of Virginia sent this message to Washington DC: “ I have only to say that the militia of Virginia will not be furnished to the powers of Washington for any such use or purpose as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate the Southern states and the requisition made upon me for such a object-an object in my judgement not within the purview of the constitution or the act of 1795, will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate civil war; having done so we will meet you in a spirit as determined as the administration has exhibited toward the South.”

The WAR BETWEEN THE STATES 1861-1865 occurred due to many complex causes and factors as enumerated above. Those who make claims that "the war was over slavery" or that if slavery had been abolished in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was signed or in 1789 when The Constitution of the United States of America was signed, that war would not have occurred between North and South are being very simplistic in their views and opinions.

The Union victory in 1865 destroyed the right of secession in America,which had been so cherished by America's founding fathers as the principle of their revolution. British historian and political philosopher Lord Acton, one of the most intellectual figures in Victorian England, understood the deeper meaning of Southern defeat. In a letter to former Confederate General Robert E. Lee dated November 4,1866, Lord Acton wrote " I saw in States Rights the only available check upon the absolutism of the sovereign will, and secession filled me with hope, not as the destruction but as the redemption of Democracy. I deemed you were fighting the battles of our liberty, our progress, and our civilization and I mourn for that which was lost at Richmond more deeply than I rejoice over that which was saved at Waterloo (defeat of Napoleon). As Illinois Governor Richard Yates stated in a message to his state assembly on January 2,1865, the war had " tended, more than any other event in the history of the country, to militate against the Jeffersonian Ideal ( Thomas Jefferson ) that the best government is that which governs least.
Years after the war former Confederate president Jefferson Davis stated " I Am saddened to Hear Southerners Apologize For Fighting To Preserve Our Inheritance". Some years later former U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt stated " Those Who Will Not Fight For The Graves Of Their Ancestors Are Beyond Redemption".

James W. King
Commander Camp 141
Lt. Col. Thomas M. Nelson
Sons of Confederate Veterans
PO Box 70577 Albany, Georgia 31708
229-436-0397
jkingantiquearms@bellsouth.net

James W. King's blog | login or register to post comments

Do you have a link to this? I'd like to bookmark it.

tonesforjonesbones
03-28-2009, 03:39 PM
The issue of slavery was not for humanitarian reasons but for this:

The Slave Power
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Slave Power (sometimes referred to as the "Slaveocracy") was a term used in the Northern United States (primarily in the period 1840-1875) to characterize the political power of the slaveholding class in the South.

Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 House divided
3 Henry Adams' views
4 References
4.1 Primary sources



[edit] Background
The problem posed by slavery, according to many Northern politicians, was not so much the mistreatment of slaves (a theme that abolitionists emphasized), but rather the political threat to American republicanism, especially as embraced in Northern free states. The Free Soil Party first raised this warning in 1848, arguing that the annexation of Texas as a slave state was a terrible mistake. The Free Soilers rhetoric was taken up by the Republican party as it emerged in 1854.

The Republicans also argued that slavery was economically inefficient, compared to free labor, and was a deterrent to the long-term modernization of America. Worse, said the Republicans, the Slave Power, deeply entrenched in the "Solid South", was systematically seizing control of the White House, the Congress, and the Supreme Court. Senator and governor Salmon P. Chase of Ohio was an articulate enemy of the Slave Power, as was Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts.


[edit] House divided
In his celebrated "House Divided" speech of June 1858, Abraham Lincoln charged that Senator Stephen A. Douglas, President James Buchanan, his predecessor, Franklin Pierce, and Chief Justice Roger Taney were all part of a plot to nationalize slavery, as proven by the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision of 1857.

Other Republicans pointed to the violence in Kansas, the brutal assault on Senator Sumner, attacks upon the abolitionist press, and efforts to take over Cuba (Ostend Manifesto) as evidence that the Slave Power was violent, aggressive, and expansive.

The only solution, Republicans insisted, was a new commitment to free labor, and a deliberate effort to stop any more territorial expansion of slavery. Northern Democrats answered that it was all an exaggeration and that the Republicans were paranoid. Their Southern colleagues spoke of secession, arguing that the John Brown raid of 1859 proved that the Republicans were ready to attack their region and destroy their way of life.

In congratulating President-elect Lincoln in 1860, Salmon P. Chase exclaimed, "The object of my wishes and labors for nineteen years is accomplished in the overthrow of the Slave Power", adding that the way was now clear "for the establishment of the policy of Freedom" — something that would come only after four destructive years of Civil War.


[edit] Henry Adams' views
Historian Henry Brooks Adams explained that the Slave Power was a force for centralization:[1]

“ Between the slave power and states' rights there was no necessary connection. The slave power, when in control, was a centralizing influence, and all the most considerable encroachments on states' rights were its acts. The acquisition and admission of Louisiana; the Embargo; the War of 1812; the annexation of Texas "by joint resolution" [rather than treaty]; the war with Mexico, declared by the mere announcement of President Polk; the Fugitive Slave Law; the Dred Scott decision — all triumphs of the slave power — did far more than either tariffs or internal improvements, which in their origin were also southern measures, to destroy the very memory of states' rights as they existed in 1789. Whenever a question arose of extending or protecting slavery, the slaveholders became friends of centralized power, and used that dangerous weapon with a kind of frenzy. Slavery in fact required centralization in order to maintain and protect itself, but it required to control the centralized machine; it needed despotic principles of government, but it needed them exclusively for its own use. Thus, in truth, states' rights were the protection of the free states, and as a matter of fact, during the domination of the slave power, Massachusetts appealed to this protecting principle as often and almost as loudly as South Carolina.

emazur
03-28-2009, 03:40 PM
I haven't read it yet but in case you're interested:
"The War for Southern Independence - a radical libertarian perspective"
http://mises.org/journals/jls/3_1/3_1_3.pdf

tonesforjonesbones
03-28-2009, 03:41 PM
here's the link:

http://www.thecitizen.com/node/10857

nbruno322
03-28-2009, 06:27 PM
It seems that many of the most principled defenders of the Constitution in Congress are from the South.

Ron Paul
Larry McDonald
Bob Barr
John Duncan
Paul Broun

etc.

Is there a reason for this?

Ron Paul was born in Pennsylvania and Judge Andrew Napolitano is from New Jersey. There are freedom lovers everywhere!

raiha
03-28-2009, 07:16 PM
Yeah but the Mises Institute is in Alabama.:D
Hamilton's Curse by Thomas diLorenzo is a good one to see how wrong you really went with Lincolnian, Hamiltonian, Clayian Whiggery!! MERCANTILISM = CORPORATISM = MEDIOCRISTAN = LOBBYISTS = SPECIAL INTERESTS = CORRUPTION = MAYHEM :mad:

anaconda
03-29-2009, 02:51 AM
Except that the Confederacy was not the same country as the Union. Remember each State is sovereign.


I stand corrected. thank you Matt and jdmyprez_deo_vindice for the insight.

Auntie Republicrat
03-29-2009, 07:16 AM
LOL!...

REALITY: 'The South' are LARGELY "RED STATES"..i.e. 'majority' supporters of the stinking, rotten Republican conservatives..

...(apparently some math-challenged Republican/conservatives have been deluded that there is some important difference between 'Liberals' and 'Conservatives' as to the size of the tax bill these Republicrats hand us!)

:wacko:

Matt Collins
03-29-2009, 08:57 AM
I stand corrected. thank you Matt and jdmyprez_deo_vindice for the insight.It's ok. It had to be explained to me too. Read Kevin Gutzman's book - Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution. He goes into much greater detail there and it's a great read.

tonesforjonesbones
03-29-2009, 09:01 AM
Yes the south is red. Conservatism is good when it hasn't been corrupted. People have been brainwashed...by the media. It' up to us to deprogram them. I guarantee you ...we will have more success with the republicans than the socialist democrats..at least at the grass roots level because they do still believe in the constitution, 10th amendment, limited government and free market capitalism. They have been thrown off by socialists who have infiltrated the top of the GOP. I am hedging my bets towards the republican grassroots folks. tones

tonesforjonesbones
03-29-2009, 09:03 AM
It seems that my local GOP folks like Ron Paul..we've had no problems with our GOP down here. tones

amy31416
03-29-2009, 09:08 AM
Wanting to do the right thing by yourself and your neighbors knows no geographical bounds. I could as easily made a list of people who love liberty from the North and claim that the Southerners are a bunch of fascists.

(And to reiterate, Ron Paul is from PA.)

jdmyprez_deo_vindice
03-29-2009, 09:10 AM
Wanting to do the right thing by yourself and your neighbors knows no geographical bounds. I could as easily made a list of people who love liberty from the North and claim that the Southerners are a bunch of fascists.

(And to reiterate, Ron Paul is from PA.)

I don't think anyone was trying to bash people from north of the Mason-Dixon line. I would proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with my fellow liberty lovers from north,south,east and west but the South is my home and the home of my ancestors and I am very proud of how historically independent they have been.

Auntie Republicrat
03-29-2009, 12:04 PM
TONESFORJONESBONES WRITES: "...we will have more success with the republicans than the socialist democrats.."

Maybe..if abortion prohibition, etc. crap, is your goal/priority

..But Again Tones, the budget that 'conservative' Republicrats Mccain, Romney, Huckabee, etc. and a Republican Congress would give us may differ slightly from the 'liberal' Republicrats..QUALITATIVELY...

..But QUANTITATIVELY, ALL these REPUBLICRATS will hand you virtually the same 'tax bill'..

...in my experience, not a stinking dime's difference.. ;)

UnReconstructed
03-29-2009, 06:18 PM
not much of a friend of freedom when you live off money taken through theft and extortion

tonesforjonesbones
03-29-2009, 06:23 PM
I was referring to the republican GRASSROOTS...not the fakes at the top of the party..tones

malkusm
03-29-2009, 07:10 PM
I don't think anyone was trying to bash people from north of the Mason-Dixon line. I would proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with my fellow liberty lovers from north,south,east and west but the South is my home and the home of my ancestors and I am very proud of how historically independent they have been.

And I feel you'll take my side in saying that the Eastern Shore of MD is very much more aligned with "the South" than it is with Baltimore or NJ, which it is much closer to geographically. If it weren't for the tyranny of Lincoln, Maryland likely would be a southern state because about 90% of the counties were pro-South - the only reason there wasn't a revolt was because the full force of the federal government was threatened upon the rural areas of MD....

Auntie Republicrat
03-30-2009, 06:00 AM
TONESFORBONES: "I was referring to the republican GRASSROOTS...not the fakes at the top of the party..tones"

(..APPARENTLY YOUR REPUBLICAN GRASSROOTS ARE DISEASED AS THEY HAVE GIVEN US CROP AFTER CROP OF STINKING REPUBLICAN POISON IVY!!)

raiha
03-30-2009, 12:33 PM
You use the word 'stinking' rather alot Auntie.

nate895
03-30-2009, 01:25 PM
not much of a friend of freedom when you live off money taken through theft and extortion

Considering the people who they are taken the money from burned their country to the ground, I can see how it can happen. As long as we have the system of legal plunder we can't blame people for taking part.

nate895
03-30-2009, 01:26 PM
And I feel you'll take my side in saying that the Eastern Shore of MD is very much more aligned with "the South" than it is with Baltimore or NJ, which it is much closer to geographically. If it weren't for the tyranny of Lincoln, Maryland likely would be a southern state because about 90% of the counties were pro-South - the only reason there wasn't a revolt was because the full force of the federal government was threatened upon the rural areas of MD....

Baltimore was pro-Confederate too. Union soldiers had to garrison the city and before they had the forces, they'd avoid it altogether.

sailor
03-30-2009, 03:04 PM
The Scotch-Irish history most certainly lends itself to independence. If you were beat down by Britain for your whole life, as were your parents, and their parents, and their parents....and then they took your land and made you move to Ireland because they wanted to take control over Ireland as well...yeah I guess you'd probably be pretty anti-establishment. ;)

Ehm, were you being sarcastic?

Thats not really Ulster-Scots history.

anaconda
03-30-2009, 03:07 PM
It seems that my local GOP folks like Ron Paul..we've had no problems with our GOP down here. tones

Great news. May I ask what state and possibly how urban your area is? A lot of big cities turn blue in a surrounding sea of red. Here in California, there is wide spread red state mentality until you venture in to the Bay Area or L.A. And, in California, it's not all about urban, as San Diego (6th largest U.S. city) is very conservative. Also Orange County, which includes places like Irvine, Costa Mesa, and Mission Viejo. These last three seem like very modern high tech trendy areas that you would think would vote very Democrat but they don't, from what I understand.

malkusm
03-30-2009, 03:16 PM
Ehm, were you being sarcastic?

Thats not really Ulster-Scots history.

Feel free to enlighten me, but that's how I understand it. The British crown desperately wanted control over Ireland, and more or less used force to send Scots to northern Ireland as a way to slowly indoctrinate the people there into a pro-British government mindset via breeding over hundreds of years.

But it's been several years since I read anything on the subject, so again, feel free to point me to something if I'm way off base.

sailor
03-30-2009, 03:25 PM
3. CHRISTIANITY VERSUS SECULAR HUMANISM--The South believed in basic Christianity as presented in the Holy Bible.The North had many Secular Humanists ( atheists, transcendentalists and non-Christians ). Southerners were afraid of what kind of country America might become if the North had its way. Secular Humanism is the belief that there is no God and that man,science and government can solve all problems. This philosophy advocates human rather than religious values. Reference : Frank Conner’s book “The South Under Siege 1830-2000.”

It was actually the North that was into Christian fundamentalism. Battle Hym of the Republic anyone? Know-nothings anyone? The North was Puritan and pietist. The South at the time was liturgical and relaxed.


4. CULTURAL DIFFERENCES--Southerners and Northerners were of different Genetic Lineages. Southerners were primarily of Western English (original Britons),Scottish,and Irish linage (Celtic) whereas Northerners tended to be of Anglo-Saxon and Danish (Viking) extraction. The two cultures had been at war and at odds for over 1000 years before they arrived in America. Our ancient ancestors in Western England under King Arthur humbled the Saxon princes at the battle of Baden Hill ( circa 497 AD --516 AD ). The cultural differences that contributed to the War Between the States (1861-1865 ) had existed for 1500 years or more.

Genetic differences caused the war? :eek:

Actually the only meaningful cultural difference was that the establishment in the South were culturaly of Stuartian and Jacobite extraction while in the North it was of Puritan (Yankee) extraction.

You would expect that therefore the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians would settle in the North among fellow Calvinists insteand, and indeed the first wave did, but Puritans proved such sons of bitches that they moved to the South instead where the Aglicans (and Lutherans and Catholics) proved more tolerant.

torchbearer
03-30-2009, 03:28 PM
It was actually the North that was into Christian fundamentalism. Battle Hym of the Republic anyone? Know-nothings anyone? The North was Puritan and pietist. The South at the time was liturgical and relaxed.



Genetic differences caused the war? :eek:

Actually the only meaningful cultural difference was that the establishment in the South were culturaly of Stuartian and Jacobite extraction while in the North it was of Puritan (Yankee) extraction.

You would expect that therefore the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians would settle in the North among fellow Calvinists insteand, and indeed the first wave did, but Puritans proved such sons of bitches that they moved to the South instead where the Aglicans (and Lutherans and Catholics) proved more tolerant.


Louisiana doesn't really fit into your generalizations. The last state to surrender, the last state out of reconstruction, and the state most likely to weather the recession.
And up til Bill Clinton extorting the state legislature, the last state to allow 18 years old to drink alcohol.
And still, after the law passed, it was not enforced in my home parish of evangeline for a few months afterwards because a sitting district judge declared it unconstitutional.

sailor
03-30-2009, 04:05 PM
Louisiana doesn't really fit into your generalizations. The last state to surrender, the last state out of reconstruction, and the state most likely to weather the recession.
And up til Bill Clinton extorting the state legislature, the last state to allow 18 years old to drink alcohol.
And still, after the law passed, it was not enforced in my home parish of evangeline for a few months afterwards because a sitting district judge declared it unconstitutional.

What are you talking about?

Matt Collins
03-30-2009, 04:44 PM
Louisiana doesn't really fit into your generalizations. the state most likely to weather the recession.How so?:confused:

torchbearer
03-30-2009, 05:58 PM
How so?:confused:

BusinessWeek generated a “Best Cities for Riding Out a Recession” (http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/10/1014_recession_cities/index.htm)


1. Arlington, VA
2. District of Columbia
3. Durham, NC
4. Madison, WI
5. Boston, MA
6. Pittsburgh, PA
7. Baltimore, MD
8. Baton Rouge, LA
9. New Orleans, LA
10. Philadelphia, PA
11. Lubbock, TX
12. Anchorage, AK
13. Lexington-Fayette, KY
14. Buffalo, NY
15. Lincoln, NE
16. Irvine, CA
17. Seattle, WA
18. Chesapeake, VA
19. Albuquerque, NM
20. Corpus Christi, TX


And by their criteria, Alexandria, Monroe and Shreveport or in better condition than Baton Rouge. Lafayette is another city not in the survey. It is the tops in economic boom in the state.
Alexandria was honor by Bush before he left office for being one of the few cities to show dramatic growth over the last year.
I call it Katrina stimulus effect.

torchbearer
03-30-2009, 05:59 PM
What are you talking about?

your generalization do not match louisiana.

anaconda
03-31-2009, 12:20 AM
How so?:confused:


Less infrastructure dependent?