Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 12-22-2005, 04:59 PM
The Don The Don is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 399
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
Peter, you are really losing your grip. You place 600,000 dead versus the millions enslaved and who also often were treated harshly or killed at the whim of their owners. You posit that an agricultural society is morally superior (WTF?). And you attribute the rise of the KKK which oppressed and lynched blacks as an evil worse than the enslavement of those black slaves. All this shows that your value system and anlystical skills are in need of adjustment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously his argument is a poor one...

Still, can you defend the "two wrongs make a right" case? That being mass enslavement (and, of course, death) through consciption, as a means of abolishing the other people's enslavement.

Again, I don't seem to understand why you think America is different than other places in the world, where slavery ended peacefully. It merely requires a paradigm shift (and even a minor one is likely to end such an egregious practice).
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-22-2005, 05:06 PM
XxGodJrxX XxGodJrxX is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 64
Default Re: Civil War arguments

I didn't say that people want force used on them, but that people will use force against others out of necessity. I would contend that human nature is the same as every other animal and plant in the world. The most important thing to something that is living, is to preserve itself. Look at the animals in the wild, they kill each other constantly because they feel that it would be better for them. I look out my window, and I see ducks that live in a large group, fight all the time because of food and sex.

I agree that it is in our interests to not kill each other, but without anything to prevent us, we will. You say that the majority will punish the minority that uses force, but they will do so by using force. It is an endless cycle that I do not think will stop without any agreement. An agreement to not use force, and punish those that do, is government.

I think we're going off-topic here, so lets get back to the Civil War [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-22-2005, 06:15 PM
Peter666 Peter666 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 346
Default Re: Civil War arguments

- How many slaves were simply murdered at the whim of their owners?

- If you use Catholic morality as a basis for argument, which you always do, then surely you should be aware of the Catholic land movement and moral inferiority of an industrial state, the same type of industrial state whose injustices lead to communism

- the historical KKK is merely an inordinate response to the injustices legitimately felt by southerners, it would not exist today of those grievances were handled correctly

- there is no response to the total war concept initiated by the North on the South, a modern American military precedent making its way felt all the way to the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

- And just the whole notion of being able to declare war on nations whom you feel morally superior over, despite the fact that you are breaking moral law itself in doing so: a modern example being the invasion of Iraq.

Here's a hypothetical question: if Russia were to outlaw abortion, and then nuke parts of the US and invade others because abortion here is legal, whose side would you fight on?
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-22-2005, 06:32 PM
BluffTHIS! BluffTHIS! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 375
Default Re: Civil War arguments

Conscription is no less valid an action for a nation to take in this example than if it were under attack from another. The federal government was protecting its black citizens.

And as I have said before, only if seccession had not happened was there a reasonable chance of slavery being abolished. With the South left to itself, there was no reasonable such expectation because of the political dominance of the slave owning aristocracy and the likelihood that even poorer non-slave owning southerners would not relish the prospect of so many blacks being freed (KKK after the war shows this).
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-22-2005, 06:38 PM
peritonlogon peritonlogon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 120
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]

- there is no response to the total war concept initiated by the North on the South, a modern American military precedent making its way felt all the way to the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki


[/ QUOTE ]

Total War is really nothing new...read the Herodotus... and to blame Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the civil war is quite a stretch.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 12-22-2005, 06:45 PM
BluffTHIS! BluffTHIS! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 375
Default Re: Civil War arguments

The catholic land movement, despite being enthusiastically written about by Belloc, did not have its core principles endorsed as doctrine by the church. Despite their good inentions, there was an element of Ludditeism in their beliefs. This is not pertinent to the civil war discussion.

There was no excuse for the KKK and it is disgusting to justify under the guise of the wrongs southerners felt at being made to free the slaves and pay the price for not doing so voluntarily.

The specific tactics used by the Nothern military have nothing to do with their justification for going to war. And Sherman's march burned a path through the Carolinas and Georgia, but he did not slaughter all the southern civilians he encountered.

I'm not going to respond to that hypothetical question because it the same logic used by those misguided people who bomb abortion clinics and is not applicable to this discussion.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 12-22-2005, 06:46 PM
adios adios is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,298
Default Re: Civil War arguments

Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 12-22-2005, 06:55 PM
adios adios is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,298
Default Re: Civil War arguments

Supposedly one of the reasons that Jefferson Davis was never brought to trial on treason charges (he was ultimately released from imprisonment after an indictment) was that the issue of secession and it's legality would have been used as a defense by Davis and the government didn't have a good legal argument as to why secession was illegal. The post Civil War US government just didn't want to go there.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 12-22-2005, 07:14 PM
BluffTHIS! BluffTHIS! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 375
Default Re: Civil War arguments

From what I remember, the main reason Davis was not prosecuted is that he had the support of prominent northerners like Horace Greeley who helped post his bail because they felt he was being singled out unfairly since there were so many others also instrumental in bringing about secession who were not similarly being pursued.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 12-22-2005, 07:48 PM
SheetWise SheetWise is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 841
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
Machineguns, bomber planes, and tanks give people the right to do anything they want.

[/ QUOTE ]
The ability. Not the right.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.