US civil war

Why did it take brutal bloody conflict to resolve the slavery question in murrica? What conditions existed in early American society that distinguished it from other countries like canada that were apparently able to end slavery peacefully? Though we don't dwell on it too much here, slavery was actually a quite brutal practice founded on intimidation and extreme violence. Blacks had to deal with a lot of shit. Clearly that the war of independence was a mistake.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Power
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

The average confederate foot soldier probably imagined he was fighting for muh states rights, but clearly were fighting for special interests (in this case the plantation owning oligarchs).
We see the same pattern today, stooges refusing to allow the government to regulate risky investments by financial institutions, out of control health insurance premiums, predatory practices pharmaceutical companies, reasonable gun control, selling of personal data.

All because of "muh free market, muh 2nd 'mendment, muh states rights"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Power
Basically, in Slave States you could breed more niggers to acquire more representation in congress. It's actually not much different than what they do now.

You do realize California is literally nullifying the law right now so it can have it's cheap illegal wage slaves for labor right? What Democrats are doing right now is not much different than what they did a couple hundred years ago. This includes the rampant moralism and self-righteous indignation when people criticism their system.

Slavery was an excuse to wage a war against state's rights. The south would have ended slavery on their own.

Thats a funny comparison to make, going to use that in the future
I have a friend who insists on this, and I can see where he's coming from, but it WAS the states' rights to own slaves. Slavery is outrageously immoral and was at odds with the founding documents. Woyldnt the federal government have had an obligation to step in?

And again, why was were Americans so stubborn about this? Is the American system innately corrupt in some way? Why is the medical industry given so much leeway to rape the public here in ways that other societies don't tolerate?

If Lincoln had said that the war was about ending slavery from the beginning, the border states would have seceded before the war could have happened. Lincoln only took that position in 1862 via the emancipation proclamation as a means to hinder the South's war efforts, and even then only ending slavery in the South and not the border states.
Liberal fantasy:
>Lincoln was motivated by his desire to eliminate slavery

Reality:
>I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service … holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

Slavery was secondary, Lincoln wanted power. He was willing to make slavery a constitutionally protected institution beyond the reach of congress, provided it meant keeping the Union together. The Southern states rejected the proposal because they weren't motivated by slavery either. Lincoln ended up emancipating the slaves as a vindictive measure against the south, nothing more.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment

>Slavery is outrageously immoral and was at odds with the founding documents.
If it was at odds with the "founding documents" then why the fuck did we need an amendment? Stupid

Aristocrats didnt want to give up their slaves, so there's the funding
Average southerner didnt want to live with niggers, so theres the manpower
Lincoln didnt get a single vote in the south, so theres the powder keg
Lincoln was known to be sympathetic to anti-slavery so theres the match.

Generally true but keep in mind the average Northerner didn't want anything to do with niggers either. They treated them worse actually, and the KKK was a Democratic institution to harass Southern whites and blacks.

You know, all men created equal, pursuit of happiness and all that. People romanticize the founding principles meanwhile people were being tortured and murdered arbitrarily, forced to labor for 12-16 hrs per day... Sure slavery may not have been prominent in all regions of the country, but the whole economy benifited. Northern industry processed southern cotton to produce the majority of the world's output. The backbone of our economy was an ongoing atrocity, meanwhile the self serving founding fathers were blathering about the human rights.

>all men created equal,
All white men actually.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790

Everything else you said was ignored & discarded. Go be a Gramscian faggot somewhere else

I need more absurd and abstract pepe's

When I was a kid in school, the founding stuff was framed in a very universalist terms, and still is by most mainstream conservative commentators.

Also why did the south want to secede?....to keep their slaves. I feel people who insist that states rights was the primary issue are just playing semantic games. People to this day try to downplay the staggering moral dissonance.

Looking up gramscian now, you pervert

>Also why did the south want to secede?....to keep their slaves.
You did not read the thread so I will continue to ignore your pinko drivel

Upon review of relevant Wikipedia articles, it seems that some participants in the nation's founding were genuinely idealistic and hoped to abolish slavery within the new union from start, but were forced to compromise to accomdate southern representatives who would have refused to join otherwise. Like i stated earlier, slavery was the crux of the conflict, and the "states rights" that people talk about were the just the rights related to keeping black bodies in bondage.

This type of moral cognitive dissonance is a theme throughout Americas history and has persisted to this day....selective blindness while grasping for some lofty principle or ideal. Gun rights, free speech, free markets, school choice, sanctity of marriage, pro life

Ignoring mass shootings, fatally incendiary hatespeech, exploitative working conditions, price gouging of demand inelastic goods and services like medicine and education, for profit military contracting, for profit private schools siphoning funds from public schools, oppression of gays, oppression of womens' bodies, sexual repression.

America is rotten

if americas so rotten why dont you go live with the other commies in china or some shit faggot bitch, atleast we have health regulations and other shit that protects civvies china doesnt have shit and lets people breath cancerous fog sure the past aint pretty but fuck history, you commies deny that communism killed millions and millions so why not just forget the other retarded parts aswell, instead of screeching about some shit that happened 200 years ago

Your little one hour Wikipedia intellectual escapade proved to be worthless to anything other than doubling down on what you already incorrectly believe

You are posting prattle and pretending you learned something. Sad

I'm mainly comparing us to other huwyatt countries

That happens in America too, oil companies have no qualms destroying local resivoirs with toxic wastes, pharma companies have no problem marketing deadly addictive substances to customers when safer options are available. American citizens are shot like dogs on a regular basis by paramilitary law enforcement.

what is this sickening imagery you post

Why is California going to start civil war 2 over mexicans and weed?

can you explain this pic to me?

I won't deny that im posting prattle, but what's incorrect about the slavery/states right thing?

Btw are you a holocaust revisionist?

William T Sherman did the right thing

You sound like a massive faggot, your birth was a mistake

Wojak thinks he is intelligent, but his hubris has got the better of him. His pepe brain has actually driven him mad, and in a moment of "divine clarity", and believing he is a woman, he removes his genitalia with a kitchen knife. An Israeli trained officer of the peace confronts him and orders him to drip the knife, but unfortunately he does not comply and is shot dead moments later.

That is an edited version of a painting allegedly owned by the chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and dc insider John Podesta. Pizza related

makes sense but why is there shit and piss coming out of his head?

>Slavery is outrageously immoral and was at odds with the founding documents
nope. america was founded as an anglo ethnostate and god given rights did not apply to subhuman non anglos like niggers and germans. not joking either. the "all men!" bullshit is a perversion of the founders intentions

Its a nod to the poo poo pepes that were popular circa 2015. It is actually a mashup of poopoopepe and tfw too smart

its a beautiful piece

>germans are on the same level as niggers
Holy shit the memeflag is fucking stupid who would have guessed

>Wojak

You answered your own question jackass. So I’m guessing you just wanted to blogpost your opinions on the civil war, GG.

But yes like you said, it’s because the southern agriculture industry was almost totally reliant on slavery and were not going to give that up without a tooth and nail fight. Of course they masqueraded it as a states right issue to gain support of the commoners.

Ive heard many intelligent people insist on framing it as a states rights issue. I know an old attorney who won't budge on it. I wondered if it was ideologically motivated or if there was some decisive historical fact I couldn't remember. I actually didn't know that lincoln offered to shield the institution from congressional meddling in a last ditch effort to appease the south , that does muddy things up a bit

This. This all day long

What will ending chain migration do to the demographics of this country?