Welcome to the BDSM Library.
  • Login:
beymenslotgir.com kalebet34.net escort bodrum bodrum escort
Results 1 to 30 of 116

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    60
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by denuseri View Post
    No not at all, the south just wanted to seperate itself from the country they had previously made an oath to abide within (and our constitution btw too) so they could keep their slaves.

    Which would have made the whole of Brittan (as well as some other western european counties at the time more than happy since it would open the dooor to their being able to more readily drive a wedge in any united front we may have previously presented against further domination by them perfectly.

    Which is why we ratified the constitution to begin with. (Read the Federalist Papers if you dont believe me)
    The success of the South relied absolutely on recognition by Britain; and Britain refused to supply it because of the pro-slavery stance taken by the confederacy. In fact the failure of the South worked to Britain's favour- it managed to establish cotton farms in labour cheap parts of the Empire and in Egypt as well as weakening France in its misguided pursuit of a Mexican crown. workers in the cotton mills in the north of England sent letters of support to Lincoln and even contributed money to the Northern war effort while their mills stood idle for want of Southern cotton. Liverpool dock workers refused to unload much of the cotton that was smuggled out of the South. Britain put principle above interest in this matter.
    the Southern seccession was very obviously a ploy to overthrow the government of the US by making Lincoln's presidency untenable and returning to the Union under its own terms.
    I am not in love- but i am open to persuasion.

    In truth is there no beauty?

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    "the Southern seccession was very obviously a ploy to overthrow the government of the US by making Lincoln's presidency untenable and returning to the Union under its own terms."

    Evidence? Curious.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    60
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
    "the Southern seccession was very obviously a ploy to overthrow the government of the US by making Lincoln's presidency untenable and returning to the Union under its own terms."

    Evidence? Curious.
    from the outset, except in radical journals and radical speeches, the aim of the threat of secession was to change the constitutional arrangements for entry of states into the Union so that parts of the south could be used to balance the plains states and keep a balance in the Senate and House. the nomination of Lincoln as Republican candidate against a divided democrat ticket meant that there was a real chance that an abolitionist would sit in the White House. the aim of the threat was maintained, but there was an additional purpose in attempting to keep Lincoln from being elected and, if elected, from being sworn in.
    of course the Republicans won the election and Lincoln was sworn in. the delay between the ceremony and the first shot was used to arm the militias of both sides but also to find a compromise that would allow the south to return; it could not return under anything less than a full backdown by the north and this was never an option. the south's retention of slavery relied on a non-abolitionist president and a balance of states as represented in the House and Senate. there was also the issue of the economic and demographic preponderance of the north- as I noted to Denusseri there is a real element of now or never in the writings of the leadership of the south.
    because neither side was prepared to back down the war began; but in order for the South to retain slavery for as long as it needed it had to overturn Lincoln's election and change the constitutional basis for statehood. though the attempt failed it was still an attempt to overthrow the US and the presidency.


    the main alternative envisaged by elements of the south was an American Empire in Central America and the Carribean with perhaps extensions into South America. just as Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico were incorporated as conquered lands into the Union it was envisaged that other Mexican states would be included as slave states. of course the north was opposed to this on two fronts- the westward expansion already took up a great deal of energy and resources and the idea of extending slavery to areas where it had been banned. Ironically, the south alone did not have the resources to implement this dream.
    I am not in love- but i am open to persuasion.

    In truth is there no beauty?

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    Some of that was not covered in classes I took.
    But the summary does make a stronger case that the prime issue of the war was States Rights.
    If you consider the attempt to unseat Lincoln an attempt to "overthrow ... the presidency. Can not be said of the actions of those in Florida in 2000? Just an aside.
    I am not so certain that it was the issue of slavery that drove the South. Though the existence of slavery was a large factor in the nature of the Southern economy. With the tech available and the size of the work force paying wages must have been seen as a "death knell" for the entire economy of those states.
    Oh yes, while slaves did exist in the North the vast majority were in the South. So in some respects the argument about slavery was Pot/Kettle.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bren122 View Post
    from the outset, except in radical journals and radical speeches, the aim of the threat of secession was to change the constitutional arrangements for entry of states into the Union so that parts of the south could be used to balance the plains states and keep a balance in the Senate and House. the nomination of Lincoln as Republican candidate against a divided democrat ticket meant that there was a real chance that an abolitionist would sit in the White House. the aim of the threat was maintained, but there was an additional purpose in attempting to keep Lincoln from being elected and, if elected, from being sworn in.
    of course the Republicans won the election and Lincoln was sworn in. the delay between the ceremony and the first shot was used to arm the militias of both sides but also to find a compromise that would allow the south to return; it could not return under anything less than a full backdown by the north and this was never an option. the south's retention of slavery relied on a non-abolitionist president and a balance of states as represented in the House and Senate. there was also the issue of the economic and demographic preponderance of the north- as I noted to Denusseri there is a real element of now or never in the writings of the leadership of the south.
    because neither side was prepared to back down the war began; but in order for the South to retain slavery for as long as it needed it had to overturn Lincoln's election and change the constitutional basis for statehood. though the attempt failed it was still an attempt to overthrow the US and the presidency.


    the main alternative envisaged by elements of the south was an American Empire in Central America and the Carribean with perhaps extensions into South America. just as Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico were incorporated as conquered lands into the Union it was envisaged that other Mexican states would be included as slave states. of course the north was opposed to this on two fronts- the westward expansion already took up a great deal of energy and resources and the idea of extending slavery to areas where it had been banned. Ironically, the south alone did not have the resources to implement this dream.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top