Two Plus Two Older Archives  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:17 AM
tylerdurden tylerdurden is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: actually pvn
Posts: 0
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

No. Government *REQUIRES* the use of (unprovoked) force.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do governments require the use of force?

[/ QUOTE ]

How are you planning on paying for it? How are you planning on implementing any government decisions?

[ QUOTE ]
My definition of government comes straight from Hobbes and Locke. Are you trying to say that a government is only a government when there is killing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Killing isn't the only form of force.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:19 AM
MMMMMM MMMMMM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,103
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
If rights are not synonymous with abilities, then what ARE they?

[/ QUOTE ]

Rights are what you know in your heart that others would not want to be wrongly dispossessed of--just as there are some things of your own: your life, your liberty and your essential property--of which you would not want to be wrongly dispossessed by others.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:21 AM
The Don The Don is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 399
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
The government is people. People are the government. How can you not see that?

[/ QUOTE ]

"People" are not individuals. Only individuals have rights. Groups of people don't make decisions, individuals within the groups do. Unless 100% of the people agree on something, some individuals' rights are being infringed upon. They (the individuals) are being forced to do something against their will. That is why "people" don't have rights and that is why government doesn't have rights.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:29 AM
XxGodJrxX XxGodJrxX is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 64
Default Re: Civil War arguments

Let me start off by saying that I think it is a ridiculous notion that a person has rights, but people don't. But it's okay, I love a challenge.

According to you, governments have no rights. The Confederacy was a new government. Then, it logically follows, that the Confederacy had no rights. So why are you complaining that the Union waged war against them? The Confederates had no rights to life, liberty, or property, ACCORDING TO YOU. Therefore, killing them and taking their liberty and property did not violate any rights.

I'll wait for you to change your definition again, although I don't see how you could. Either the Union had rights, or the Confederacy did not.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:35 AM
XxGodJrxX XxGodJrxX is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 64
Default Re: Civil War arguments

So then, MMMMMM, if you had a really beautiful girlfriend, that I know in my heart you would not like to be dispossessed of, would I be violating your rights if she fell in love with me and we go to another country? How about if I am better qualified for your job, and you get fired and I get put in, did somebody violate a right since you lost something you did not want dipossessed?

My point is this. "Rights" are a lot like love, morals, goodness, and badness. Everybody has their own definition, and none can absolutely be considered wrong or right. What is good for you may be bad for me. What you consider a right may not be what I consider a right. They are not concrete, but are rather man-made concepts that may not actually have any real significance.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:53 AM
The Don The Don is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 399
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
Let me start off by saying that I think it is a ridiculous notion that a person has rights, but people don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Explain to me how a group of people can have rights.

[ QUOTE ]

According to you, governments have no rights. The Confederacy was a new government. Then, it logically follows, that the Confederacy had no rights. So why are you complaining that the Union waged war against them? The Confederates had no rights to life, liberty, or property, ACCORDING TO YOU. Therefore, killing them and taking their liberty and property did not violate any rights.

I'll wait for you to change your definition again, although I don't see how you could. Either the Union had rights, or the Confederacy did not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Individuals in the Confederacy had rights, and they were infringed upon by the Union government. This is not to say that the Confereracy didn't infringe on the rights of individuals who were citizens of the Union (Fort Sumter comes to mind). The North was just much worse about it.

You need to stop personifying government and groups of people. It is impossible to quantify human action.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 12-23-2005, 02:36 AM
BCPVP BCPVP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Whitewater, WI
Posts: 830
Default Re: Civil War arguments

I've yet to hear any of the local anarchists explain how the attack on Fort Sumter by the Confederacy doesn't constitute an act of war or explain how the Union was trespassing in FEDERAL forts, presumably built with federal funds by federal troops. While it may not justify the level of violence that occurred because of it, because the South attacked first, I think they lose some of their moral superiority in justifying their secession. If they had waited till the Union struck first, it'd be a different story.

But I'm glad a semi-intelligent discussion has brewed besides the normal bush-lied drivel that litters this board.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 12-23-2005, 07:16 AM
BluffTHIS! BluffTHIS! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 375
Default Re: Civil War arguments

Although I've made clear in this thread that I think the North was morally justified in fighting the war solely to free the slaves, and gave a little of the history re Ft. Sumter, the South's argument would go like this:

1) Upon secession, in which South Carolina ceased to be part of the federal union, there could exist no federal property within the boundaries of South Carolina.

2) In consideration of the above, the refusal of Federal troops to vacate installations in South Carolina constituted tresspass and forcible occupation.

3) South Carolina and its southern allies were then justified in using force to remove federal troops and recover property now belonging to South Carolina, the same as if a 3rd country had invaded the US.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:03 PM
SheetWise SheetWise is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 841
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
The government is people. People are the government. How can you not see that?

[/ QUOTE ]
Under the rules, the governments "just" powers are derived by the consent of the people. Under the rules, there was no consent to the powers the government had assumed. At that point, under the rules, it was no longer a government of the people -- and hasn't been ever since.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 12-23-2005, 01:06 PM
BCPVP BCPVP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Whitewater, WI
Posts: 830
Default Re: Civil War arguments

[ QUOTE ]
1) Upon secession, in which South Carolina ceased to be part of the federal union, there could exist no federal property within the boundaries of South Carolina.

[/ QUOTE ]
I still don't buy that. How did what was federal property turn into state property merely because the South seceeded? The South may have been a different country then, but those forts would still be the property of the Federal U.S. government and an attack on them by a foreign power would be a declaration of war.

If your girlfriend decides to leave you and take her stuff out of your house, she's not justified in taking your stuff too, much less attacking you for not giving her your stuff.
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 09:35 AM.


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