thor
Legend
Posts: 17,492
|
Post by thor on Sept 17, 2023 20:06:23 GMT
Cartoonish. That's another word to add to your meaningless epithets along with brainwashed and herd. Of course I'm full of denials about the Lost Cause story. That should come as no surprise. A member of the herd always denies being a member of the herd. So dumb it's not worth a reply. Cower. Another fake word to add. Historians can't help it if the evidence is so strong, though I'm sure they approach the subject in various manners. Sacred and holy. Two more exaggerations to add. It's only an unfounded weakly supported lie to the Lost Cause crowd, which doesn't have a leg to stand on. Slavery was the cause is based on the evidence, it has nothing to do with zealotry or holy scripture. Add those and cult/cultist to the list. If a Jew is triggered by the k word they would be unlikely to use it. The same with the word slavery. If I was truly triggered by that word I wouldn't tend to use it. Once again you're trying to bring contemporary words into a situation that make no sense. It's just another of your many linguistic absurdities. I meant to write intellectual curiosity, but believing that slavery was the cause takes no intellectual courage. Yes, you'll ignore the evidence and go into one of your herd, brainwashing, lies, blah blah blah routines. Add idols, priests, sacred to the list. I thought you said you've already seen the evidence and have totally refuted it--in your own delusional mind. No sense in doing it again. Not a fetish. I just enjoy pointing out your deceptiveness on this topic. Actually the added link proves your dishonesty. It shows that Marx was quoting the opinion of the British press, which he disagreed with. Yet you still tried to present the quote as if it was Marx's own opinion. So your own link contradicted you. Talk about being clueless. It's historical accuracy with irony thrown in. The colonists who were fighting the British imperialistas later became the American imperialistas who were trying to control the Filipinos. You can get into all the deeper details, complexities, and contradictions you want. That doesn't change the fact that secession was caused by the fear that Abe wanted to abolish slavery. Again, the only place you've proven anyone wrong is in your own mind, which counts for zero to anyone else. Sure secession hurt slavery. The dumb southerners managed to end slavery in four years when they went to war to save it. Expanding slavery into other territories not being able to catch their fugitive slave up north were secondary concerns compared to preserving slavery in the Confederate states. Lincoln's letter to the Border State Congressmen was an attempt to get them to go along with his plan of gradual and compensated emancipation in the Border States. They weren't interested. I don't see where there is anything about the Confederate States dealing to abolish slavery for foreign intervention. Unless you can provide that first-hand evidence I guess that's a thing you made up. I guess I don't look too ridiculous. The people on this thread seem to have the same opinion of your so-called evidence as I do. Yes there're a pile of historians out there who believe slavery was the cause, and most of them are right here, not overseas. They follow the evidence, not your absurd Lost Cause junk. It's a lie because it's a lie. Gee, that's so persuasive and profound. The great bulk of your evidence is repetitive linguistic nonsense. Herd, brainwashed, cultist, northern lies, priest, holy, zealots, sacred and its goes on and on as if it really means anything. It means nothing. So, now you've expanded your laughable series of constant denials of the truth to include the words that I use to express the truth. Seriously, you are the champion at being a one trick pony. Holy’s M.O.: Deny! Deny! Deny! Obfuscate so no one notices that I've got nothing! Shuck and jive proclaiming historians are on my side! Bait and switch so that no one notices that I’ve provided no evidence at all to support that!
Evidently, the truth sounds like a meaningless epithet to the ears of a fanatic. After all, in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. The lie that slavery was the South's cause is, above all else, universal deceit. No one is surprised that you have followed the herd and spend your time denying anything that challenges your herd's narrative. You lack the self awareness to see that I'm feeding you reality.....and the reality is that you really are cowering behind historians, that you actually are part of a herd mentality and that you surely have embraced a cartoonish lie tailored for the pleasure of the brainwashed simpletons. Those aren't fake nor are they empty epithets, they are words of truth and the truth is not your friend on this thread. Claiming that the evidence held by these historians is "strong" is utter nonsense since their ideas are so easily refuted. That very fact seems to be why you refuse to even try to provide any evidence from those historians that you grovel behind. Your intransigence shows everyone how empty and weak your little fairy tale is and has always been. Why don't you man up and post what you think is "evidence" from the historians? What are you afraid of, cultist? Are you too slow and weak minded to make your own case here? Looks like it. You're right...it takes zero intellectual courage (or curiosity) to mindlessly line up behind the politically correct lie that slavery was the South's cause. It does take intellectual courage and integrity to look deeper and see the undeniable contradictions that refute that Northern lie. Instead from you we get unsupported pinhead proclamations that the seceding Southerns were too dumb to know they were irreparably damaging slavery and that Northern Congressmen knew better what Southerners wanted than Southerners themselves. The "k" word to a Jew is a personal, direct affront....when you hear "slavery", is it directed AT you? Is someone calling you a "slavery"? You can't even get an analogy right. Yes, personally derogatory words may be avoided if one is triggered, but slavery is not one of those words. As I said, you embrace rather than shun the word slavery because you use it as either as a set of blinders for you or bludgeon against an opponent. You should endeavor to be less stupid about word meanings, but less stupid doesn't seem to be a path you're interested in. Look at him run again, tail tucked neatly between his legs. So, since I already know what the Northern lies are, he’s conveniently absolving yourself of having the courage to make the case himself. You're like a boxer whose excuse for not entering the ring is that his opponent is already very knowledgeable in pugilism. We can see that you're afraid and it's understandable....if you engage, if you step into that ring, you lose. Your refusal to man up and defend your ideas is just sad and pathetic. Again, if you're not afraid, if you believe that you've got the goods, let’s see you meet the challenge. Claiming there was any deception with the Marx quote is a lie, but you seem to have a fetish for embracing lies. Are you really stupid enough to pretend that, because I honestly and completely linked to my source when I posted the Marx quote, that somehow proves a deception on my part? You really are a desperate fool looking for a victory, aren’t you? If that’s the case, you might as well get lost, because you’ll find no victory on this thread. Claiming that I’ve made anything up is another lie (anyone noticing a pattern from this cultist?). No one has said that Lincoln’s letter to the Congressmen said anything about the CSA plan to offer to abolish slavery, yet it was a well known point of fact shared in the letter responding to Lincoln’s letter. Here’s your problem…there IS evidence that the CSA was offering manumission for intervention in 1862, and you’ve given us neither firsthand evidence or hearsay that challenges the veracity of any of that evidence. Do you think that U.S. Border Congressmen and newspapers hallway around the world were in cahoots to tell the same exact story? All you do is deny and demand more without delivering anything yourself, which makes you a joke on this thread. Instead of your constant screaming of “NUH-UH!”, strap on a pair and start providing your own evidence to support your own narrative. Those historians can't help you when you don't have the courage to share what you claim that they have.
Remember, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
|
|
|
Post by HolyMoly on Sept 17, 2023 22:23:46 GMT
Cartoonish. That's another word to add to your meaningless epithets along with brainwashed and herd. Of course I'm full of denials about the Lost Cause story. That should come as no surprise. A member of the herd always denies being a member of the herd. So dumb it's not worth a reply. Cower. Another fake word to add. Historians can't help it if the evidence is so strong, though I'm sure they approach the subject in various manners. Sacred and holy. Two more exaggerations to add. It's only an unfounded weakly supported lie to the Lost Cause crowd, which doesn't have a leg to stand on. Slavery was the cause is based on the evidence, it has nothing to do with zealotry or holy scripture. Add those and cult/cultist to the list. If a Jew is triggered by the k word they would be unlikely to use it. The same with the word slavery. If I was truly triggered by that word I wouldn't tend to use it. Once again you're trying to bring contemporary words into a situation that make no sense. It's just another of your many linguistic absurdities. I meant to write intellectual curiosity, but believing that slavery was the cause takes no intellectual courage. Yes, you'll ignore the evidence and go into one of your herd, brainwashing, lies, blah blah blah routines. Add idols, priests, sacred to the list. I thought you said you've already seen the evidence and have totally refuted it--in your own delusional mind. No sense in doing it again. Not a fetish. I just enjoy pointing out your deceptiveness on this topic. Actually the added link proves your dishonesty. It shows that Marx was quoting the opinion of the British press, which he disagreed with. Yet you still tried to present the quote as if it was Marx's own opinion. So your own link contradicted you. Talk about being clueless. It's historical accuracy with irony thrown in. The colonists who were fighting the British imperialistas later became the American imperialistas who were trying to control the Filipinos. You can get into all the deeper details, complexities, and contradictions you want. That doesn't change the fact that secession was caused by the fear that Abe wanted to abolish slavery. Again, the only place you've proven anyone wrong is in your own mind, which counts for zero to anyone else. Sure secession hurt slavery. The dumb southerners managed to end slavery in four years when they went to war to save it. Expanding slavery into other territories not being able to catch their fugitive slave up north were secondary concerns compared to preserving slavery in the Confederate states. Lincoln's letter to the Border State Congressmen was an attempt to get them to go along with his plan of gradual and compensated emancipation in the Border States. They weren't interested. I don't see where there is anything about the Confederate States dealing to abolish slavery for foreign intervention. Unless you can provide that first-hand evidence I guess that's a thing you made up. I guess I don't look too ridiculous. The people on this thread seem to have the same opinion of your so-called evidence as I do. Yes there're a pile of historians out there who believe slavery was the cause, and most of them are right here, not overseas. They follow the evidence, not your absurd Lost Cause junk. It's a lie because it's a lie. Gee, that's so persuasive and profound. The great bulk of your evidence is repetitive linguistic nonsense. Herd, brainwashed, cultist, northern lies, priest, holy, zealots, sacred and its goes on and on as if it really means anything. It means nothing. So, now you've expanded your laughable series of constant denials of the truth to include the words that I use to express the truth. Seriously, you are the champion at being a one trick pony. Holy’s M.O.: Deny! Deny! Deny! Obfuscate so no one notices that I've got nothing! Shuck and jive proclaiming historians are on my side! Bait and switch so that no one notices that I’ve provided no evidence at all to support that!
Evidently, the truth sounds like a meaningless epithet to the ears of a fanatic. After all, in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. The lie that slavery was the South's cause is, above all else, universal deceit. No one is surprised that you have followed the herd and spend your time denying anything that challenges your herd's narrative. You lack the self awareness to see that I'm feeding you reality.....and the reality is that you really are cowering behind historians, that you actually are part of a herd mentality and that you surely have embraced a cartoonish lie tailored for the pleasure of the brainwashed simpletons. Those aren't fake nor are they empty epithets, they are words of truth and the truth is not your friend on this thread. Claiming that the evidence held by these historians is "strong" is utter nonsense since their ideas are so easily refuted. That very fact seems to be why you refuse to even try to provide any evidence from those historians that you grovel behind. Your intransigence shows everyone how empty and weak your little fairy tale is and has always been. Why don't you man up and post what you think is "evidence" from the historians? What are you afraid of, cultist? Are you too slow and weak minded to make your own case here? Looks like it. You're right...it takes zero intellectual courage (or curiosity) to mindlessly line up behind the politically correct lie that slavery was the South's cause. It does take intellectual courage and integrity to look deeper and see the undeniable contradictions that refute that Northern lie. Instead from you we get unsupported pinhead proclamations that the seceding Southerns were too dumb to know they were irreparably damaging slavery and that Northern Congressmen knew better what Southerners wanted than Southerners themselves. The "k" word to a Jew is a personal, direct affront....when you hear "slavery", is it directed AT you? Is someone calling you a "slavery"? You can't even get an analogy right. Yes, personally derogatory words may be avoided if one is triggered, but slavery is not one of those words. As I said, you embrace rather than shun the word slavery because you use it as either as a set of blinders for you or bludgeon against an opponent. You should endeavor to be less stupid about word meanings, but less stupid doesn't seem to be a path you're interested in. Look at him run again, tail tucked neatly between his legs. So, since I already know what the Northern lies are, he’s conveniently absolving yourself of having the courage to make the case himself. You're like a boxer whose excuse for not entering the ring is that his opponent is already very knowledgeable in pugilism. We can see that you're afraid and it's understandable....if you engage, if you step into that ring, you lose. Your refusal to man up and defend your ideas is just sad and pathetic. Again, if you're not afraid, if you believe that you've got the goods, let’s see you meet the challenge. Claiming there was any deception with the Marx quote is a lie, but you seem to have a fetish for embracing lies. Are you really stupid enough to pretend that, because I honestly and completely linked to my source when I posted the Marx quote, that somehow proves a deception on my part? You really are a desperate fool looking for a victory, aren’t you? If that’s the case, you might as well get lost, because you’ll find no victory on this thread. Claiming that I’ve made anything up is another lie (anyone noticing a pattern from this cultist?). No one has said that Lincoln’s letter to the Congressmen said anything about the CSA plan to offer to abolish slavery, yet it was a well known point of fact shared in the letter responding to Lincoln’s letter. Here’s your problem…there IS evidence that the CSA was offering manumission for intervention in 1862, and you’ve given us neither firsthand evidence or hearsay that challenges the veracity of any of that evidence. Do you think that U.S. Border Congressmen and newspapers hallway around the world were in cahoots to tell the same exact story? All you do is deny and demand more without delivering anything yourself, which makes you a joke on this thread. Instead of your constant screaming of “NUH-UH!”, strap on a pair and start providing your own evidence to support your own narrative. Those historians can't help you when you don't have the courage to share what you claim that they have.
Remember, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
One trick pony. I'll add that to my linguistic howlers list. Yes, I deny the Lost Cause fantasy. Thought that was clear. Meaningless epithets are the words you use without using them in any sensible way. They're just things you throw out because your evidence is so weak. Brainwash, herd, lies, blah, blah, blah. Why waste time on them? I've already provided some links earlier in the discussion. Maybe I'll find some more, though since you live in an alternative reality they won't do any good. PC, there's another howler. You said I am triggered by the word slavery. Jew or Gentile, when someone is triggered by a word they will shy away from using it. That obviously doesn't apply in this situation. You just brought in triggered to make it seem contemporary words had something to do with the Civil War, which is as silly as it sounds. Politically correct is just more of the same absurdity. Another boxing metaphor. How relevant. Of course you were deceptive. If you actually read the link you would know the context of Marx's quote. But you went ahead and quoted it out of context, pretending Marx said something when he was actually talking about the position of the British press. Either you didn't read your link or you did and went ahead and misquoted it anyway. Not a good look either way. I'm not looking for victory here. I already have it outside of here. And none of your Lost Cause nonsense will change that. Didn't you put it in all caps. OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE or something along those lines. No doubt it was that, but the problem is there is nothing about a deal for the Confederacy to abolish slavery. Lincoln's letter was pretty brief, the Border States reply very lengthy, but I didn't see anything about the deal in either. You made the claim, so it's your responsibility to back it up. So far, you haven't come close. I'm denying the Lost Cause story and I'm denying there is any evidence for the 1862 abolishment deal. Just like I've been doing for months. Nothing wrong with denying ahistorical garbage. From poster feedback, you are the joke on this thread. A tired joke. You can't make anyone less stupid, you can only make them more stupid with your Lost Cause mumbo jumbo. Of course I'm resisting this junk. What else would an intelligent person do?
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,492
|
Post by thor on Sept 17, 2023 22:48:58 GMT
So, now you've expanded your laughable series of constant denials of the truth to include the words that I use to express the truth. Seriously, you are the champion at being a one trick pony. Holy’s M.O.: Deny! Deny! Deny! Obfuscate so no one notices that I've got nothing! Shuck and jive proclaiming historians are on my side! Bait and switch so that no one notices that I’ve provided no evidence at all to support that!
Evidently, the truth sounds like a meaningless epithet to the ears of a fanatic. After all, in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. The lie that slavery was the South's cause is, above all else, universal deceit. No one is surprised that you have followed the herd and spend your time denying anything that challenges your herd's narrative. You lack the self awareness to see that I'm feeding you reality.....and the reality is that you really are cowering behind historians, that you actually are part of a herd mentality and that you surely have embraced a cartoonish lie tailored for the pleasure of the brainwashed simpletons. Those aren't fake nor are they empty epithets, they are words of truth and the truth is not your friend on this thread. Claiming that the evidence held by these historians is "strong" is utter nonsense since their ideas are so easily refuted. That very fact seems to be why you refuse to even try to provide any evidence from those historians that you grovel behind. Your intransigence shows everyone how empty and weak your little fairy tale is and has always been. Why don't you man up and post what you think is "evidence" from the historians? What are you afraid of, cultist? Are you too slow and weak minded to make your own case here? Looks like it. You're right...it takes zero intellectual courage (or curiosity) to mindlessly line up behind the politically correct lie that slavery was the South's cause. It does take intellectual courage and integrity to look deeper and see the undeniable contradictions that refute that Northern lie. Instead from you we get unsupported pinhead proclamations that the seceding Southerns were too dumb to know they were irreparably damaging slavery and that Northern Congressmen knew better what Southerners wanted than Southerners themselves. The "k" word to a Jew is a personal, direct affront....when you hear "slavery", is it directed AT you? Is someone calling you a "slavery"? You can't even get an analogy right. Yes, personally derogatory words may be avoided if one is triggered, but slavery is not one of those words. As I said, you embrace rather than shun the word slavery because you use it as either as a set of blinders for you or bludgeon against an opponent. You should endeavor to be less stupid about word meanings, but less stupid doesn't seem to be a path you're interested in. Look at him run again, tail tucked neatly between his legs. So, since I already know what the Northern lies are, he’s conveniently absolving yourself of having the courage to make the case himself. You're like a boxer whose excuse for not entering the ring is that his opponent is already very knowledgeable in pugilism. We can see that you're afraid and it's understandable....if you engage, if you step into that ring, you lose. Your refusal to man up and defend your ideas is just sad and pathetic. Again, if you're not afraid, if you believe that you've got the goods, let’s see you meet the challenge. Claiming there was any deception with the Marx quote is a lie, but you seem to have a fetish for embracing lies. Are you really stupid enough to pretend that, because I honestly and completely linked to my source when I posted the Marx quote, that somehow proves a deception on my part? You really are a desperate fool looking for a victory, aren’t you? If that’s the case, you might as well get lost, because you’ll find no victory on this thread. Claiming that I’ve made anything up is another lie (anyone noticing a pattern from this cultist?). No one has said that Lincoln’s letter to the Congressmen said anything about the CSA plan to offer to abolish slavery, yet it was a well known point of fact shared in the letter responding to Lincoln’s letter. Here’s your problem…there IS evidence that the CSA was offering manumission for intervention in 1862, and you’ve given us neither firsthand evidence or hearsay that challenges the veracity of any of that evidence. Do you think that U.S. Border Congressmen and newspapers hallway around the world were in cahoots to tell the same exact story? All you do is deny and demand more without delivering anything yourself, which makes you a joke on this thread. Instead of your constant screaming of “NUH-UH!”, strap on a pair and start providing your own evidence to support your own narrative. Those historians can't help you when you don't have the courage to share what you claim that they have.
Remember, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
One trick pony. I'll add that to my linguistic howlers list. Yes, I deny the Lost Cause fantasy. Thought that was clear. Meaningless epithets are the words you use without using them in any sensible way. They're just things you throw out because your evidence is so weak. Brainwash, herd, lies, blah, blah, blah. Why waste time on them? I've already provided some links earlier in the discussion. Maybe I'll find some more, though since you live in an alternative reality they won't do any good. PC, there's another howler. You said I am triggered by the word slavery. Jew or Gentile, when someone is triggered by a word they will shy away from using it. That obviously doesn't apply in this situation. You just brought in triggered to make it seem contemporary words had something to do with the Civil War, which is as silly as it sounds. Politically correct is just more of the same absurdity. Another boxing metaphor. How relevant. Of course you were deceptive. If you actually read the link you would know the context of Marx's quote. But you went ahead and quoted it out of context, pretending Marx said something when he was actually talking about the position of the British press. Either you didn't read your link or you did and went ahead and misquoted it anyway. Not a good look either way. I'm not looking for victory here. I already have it outside of here. And none of your Lost Cause nonsense will change that. Didn't you put it in all caps. OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE or something along those lines. No doubt it was that, but the problem is there is nothing about a deal for the Confederacy to abolish slavery. Lincoln's letter was pretty brief, the Border States reply very lengthy, but I didn't see anything about the deal in either. You made the claim, so it's your responsibility to back it up. So far, you haven't come close. I'm denying the Lost Cause story and I'm denying there is any evidence for the 1862 abolishment deal. Just like I've been doing for months. Nothing wrong with denying ahistorical garbage. From poster feedback, you are the joke on this thread. A tired joke. You can't make anyone less stupid, you can only make them more stupid with your Lost Cause mumbo jumbo. Of course I'm resisting this junk. What else would an intelligent person do? Paleo got his ass kicked. Again.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,221
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 18, 2023 1:46:45 GMT
So, now you've expanded your laughable series of constant denials of the truth to include the words that I use to express the truth. Seriously, you are the champion at being a one trick pony. Holy’s M.O.: Deny! Deny! Deny! Obfuscate so no one notices that I've got nothing! Shuck and jive proclaiming historians are on my side! Bait and switch so that no one notices that I’ve provided no evidence at all to support that!
Evidently, the truth sounds like a meaningless epithet to the ears of a fanatic. After all, in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. The lie that slavery was the South's cause is, above all else, universal deceit. No one is surprised that you have followed the herd and spend your time denying anything that challenges your herd's narrative. You lack the self awareness to see that I'm feeding you reality.....and the reality is that you really are cowering behind historians, that you actually are part of a herd mentality and that you surely have embraced a cartoonish lie tailored for the pleasure of the brainwashed simpletons. Those aren't fake nor are they empty epithets, they are words of truth and the truth is not your friend on this thread. Claiming that the evidence held by these historians is "strong" is utter nonsense since their ideas are so easily refuted. That very fact seems to be why you refuse to even try to provide any evidence from those historians that you grovel behind. Your intransigence shows everyone how empty and weak your little fairy tale is and has always been. Why don't you man up and post what you think is "evidence" from the historians? What are you afraid of, cultist? Are you too slow and weak minded to make your own case here? Looks like it. You're right...it takes zero intellectual courage (or curiosity) to mindlessly line up behind the politically correct lie that slavery was the South's cause. It does take intellectual courage and integrity to look deeper and see the undeniable contradictions that refute that Northern lie. Instead from you we get unsupported pinhead proclamations that the seceding Southerns were too dumb to know they were irreparably damaging slavery and that Northern Congressmen knew better what Southerners wanted than Southerners themselves. The "k" word to a Jew is a personal, direct affront....when you hear "slavery", is it directed AT you? Is someone calling you a "slavery"? You can't even get an analogy right. Yes, personally derogatory words may be avoided if one is triggered, but slavery is not one of those words. As I said, you embrace rather than shun the word slavery because you use it as either as a set of blinders for you or bludgeon against an opponent. You should endeavor to be less stupid about word meanings, but less stupid doesn't seem to be a path you're interested in. Look at him run again, tail tucked neatly between his legs. So, since I already know what the Northern lies are, he’s conveniently absolving yourself of having the courage to make the case himself. You're like a boxer whose excuse for not entering the ring is that his opponent is already very knowledgeable in pugilism. We can see that you're afraid and it's understandable....if you engage, if you step into that ring, you lose. Your refusal to man up and defend your ideas is just sad and pathetic. Again, if you're not afraid, if you believe that you've got the goods, let’s see you meet the challenge. Claiming there was any deception with the Marx quote is a lie, but you seem to have a fetish for embracing lies. Are you really stupid enough to pretend that, because I honestly and completely linked to my source when I posted the Marx quote, that somehow proves a deception on my part? You really are a desperate fool looking for a victory, aren’t you? If that’s the case, you might as well get lost, because you’ll find no victory on this thread. Claiming that I’ve made anything up is another lie (anyone noticing a pattern from this cultist?). No one has said that Lincoln’s letter to the Congressmen said anything about the CSA plan to offer to abolish slavery, yet it was a well known point of fact shared in the letter responding to Lincoln’s letter. Here’s your problem…there IS evidence that the CSA was offering manumission for intervention in 1862, and you’ve given us neither firsthand evidence or hearsay that challenges the veracity of any of that evidence. Do you think that U.S. Border Congressmen and newspapers hallway around the world were in cahoots to tell the same exact story? All you do is deny and demand more without delivering anything yourself, which makes you a joke on this thread. Instead of your constant screaming of “NUH-UH!”, strap on a pair and start providing your own evidence to support your own narrative. Those historians can't help you when you don't have the courage to share what you claim that they have.
Remember, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
One trick pony. I'll add that to my linguistic howlers list. Yes, I deny the Lost Cause fantasy. Thought that was clear. Meaningless epithets are the words you use without using them in any sensible way. They're just things you throw out because your evidence is so weak. Brainwash, herd, lies, blah, blah, blah. Why waste time on them? I've already provided some links earlier in the discussion. Maybe I'll find some more, though since you live in an alternative reality they won't do any good. PC, there's another howler. You said I am triggered by the word slavery. Jew or Gentile, when someone is triggered by a word they will shy away from using it. That obviously doesn't apply in this situation. You just brought in triggered to make it seem contemporary words had something to do with the Civil War, which is as silly as it sounds. Politically correct is just more of the same absurdity. Another boxing metaphor. How relevant. Of course you were deceptive. If you actually read the link you would know the context of Marx's quote. But you went ahead and quoted it out of context, pretending Marx said something when he was actually talking about the position of the British press. Either you didn't read your link or you did and went ahead and misquoted it anyway. Not a good look either way. I'm not looking for victory here. I already have it outside of here. And none of your Lost Cause nonsense will change that. Didn't you put it in all caps. OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE or something along those lines. No doubt it was that, but the problem is there is nothing about a deal for the Confederacy to abolish slavery. Lincoln's letter was pretty brief, the Border States reply very lengthy, but I didn't see anything about the deal in either. You made the claim, so it's your responsibility to back it up. So far, you haven't come close. I'm denying the Lost Cause story and I'm denying there is any evidence for the 1862 abolishment deal. Just like I've been doing for months. Nothing wrong with denying ahistorical garbage. From poster feedback, you are the joke on this thread. A tired joke. You can't make anyone less stupid, you can only make them more stupid with your Lost Cause mumbo jumbo. Of course I'm resisting this junk. What else would an intelligent person do? I've used words that expose who you really are and you don't like it....you're nothing but a pretender and a follower and it shows in your refusal to produce supporting evidence. You'll never ever be mistaken for a critical thinker. When you deny my narrative, you deny the truth, but you already know that. Your whiny repetition of "Lost Cause! Lost Cause! Lost Cause!" makes it clear that you're mightily projecting when you claim my narrative is "weak". If it truly was weak, you'd have abandoned this thread long ago.
"I've already provided some links earlier in the discussion" say HolyMoly. Is this an attempt to deceive the forum? One of his early links was to a Mises.org garbage opinion piece on tariffs while the second was a Google book preview that omitted most of the book's pages (you had to buy it to read it) with zero quotes from this cultist from the book at all. Not even the courtesy to say "Hey, look at page X, paragraph Y". Nothing. The claim that anything but a trifle has been offered by you is untrue and an attempt to mislead this forum. Nothing of vialue has been introduced by you to attempt a defense of the lie that slavery was the South's cause.
And I've already schooled you on the meaning of the word triggered, but you're still too narrow minded to realize that your alleged definition is wrong. Like everything here you've done here, you take a shallow generalization of a word meaning and become fanatical about it, never looking for more deeper meanings. By your own self inflicted lack of awareness that you are even doing it, you prove me right about your lack of depth every time. You've made shallow your lifestyle choice.
I notice that you omitted the fact in post above that I DID include the link to the article in the same post as Marx's quote. Are you trying to deceive the forum by leaving that exonerating fact out of your last statement? Why be so dishonest by leaving out that contextual fact? Why the deception when it would have been easy for you to make sure that you clearly pointed out the fact that I had included the link to the article? Was it just your carelessness or was there an intent to lie to this forum? Not a good look for you either way.
You'll never attain victory here because the truth does not support your narrative. You're still here because I have gutted your narrative...your "victory" outside of here will always have that asterisk beside it. "HolyMoly...he always won when there was no real opposition". That's why you lose here, cultist.
This is the third time I've had to school this fool in the evidence in the official correspondence received by the U.S. President from those Border Congressmen:
On July 12, 1862, Lincoln met with border state congressmen to discuss his proposal for compensated emancipation, a ploy to keep them from considering secession. On July 15, 1862, these Congressmen sent two letters to Lincoln with their reply. In the "minority" letter, a statement was made that might cause weeping and gnashing of teeth among those who falsely believe that slavery was the cause: That in order to carry out these views, we will so far as may be in our power ask the people of the border states, calmly, deliberately,and fairly, to consider your recommendations. We are the more emboldened to assume this position from the fact, now become history, that the leaders of the Southern rebellion have offered to abolish slavery amongst them as a condition to foreign intervention in favor of their independence as a nation.
If they can give up slavery to destroy the Union; We can surely ask our people to consider the question of Emancipation to save the Union.www.loc.gov/item/mal1713000/As early as 1862, the Southerners were offering to give up slavery in exchange for help gaining their independence. If slavery was the cause, why were they so willing to give that up? The "majority" letter from the same group was sent to Lincoln on July 14, 1862 and contained these statements: The rebellion derives its strength from the union of all classes in the insurgent states; and while that union lasts, it the war will never end, until they are utterly exhausted. We know that at the inception of these troubles Southern Society was divided, and that a large portion, probably a majority, were opposed to secession. Now the great mass of Southern people are united. To discover why they are so, we must glance at Southern Society, and notice the classes into which it has been divided, and which still distinguish it. They are in arms but not for the same object; they are moved to a common end but by different, and even inconsistent reasons. The leaders, which comprehend what was previously known as the State rights party, (which is much the lesser class) seek to break down national independence, and set up State domination. With them it is a war against nationality. The other class is fighting, as it supposes, to maintain and preserve its rights of property and domestic Safety, which, it has been made to believe, are assailed by this government. This latter class are not disunionists per se. They are so, only because they have been made to believe, that your administration is inimical to their rights, & is making war on their domestic institutions.
Nor do we, permit us to say Mr President with all respect for you, agree that the institution of slavery is “the lever of their power” but we are of the opinion that “the lever of their power” is the apprehension that the powers of a common government created for common and equal protection to the interests of all will be wielded against the institutions of the Southern States.www.loc.gov/item/mal1708800/
There are also newspapers from the other side of the world saying the same thing that these Congressmen were saying to Lincoln.
Once again, in claiming that there is no evidence despite being repeatedly shown the evidence above, did you just try to deceive the forum with your deliberate omission and denial of its existence. Why are you lying to this forum instead of honorably trying to refute this evidence?
"From poster feedback, you are the joke on this thread. A tired joke." crows HolyMoly. He means the cadre of fellow leftist morons that make up his side of the forum. You ought to be ashamed that your desperation has made you turn to the lowest forms of life on this forum in your continued appeal to any mob that you can find. Truly pathetic.
"What else would an intelligent person do?" he says. You're completely unqualified to ask or deserve an answer that question. An intelligent person would never have been stupid enough to swallow the lie that slavery was the South's cause.
|
|
|
Post by HolyMoly on Sept 18, 2023 21:24:14 GMT
One trick pony. I'll add that to my linguistic howlers list. Yes, I deny the Lost Cause fantasy. Thought that was clear. Meaningless epithets are the words you use without using them in any sensible way. They're just things you throw out because your evidence is so weak. Brainwash, herd, lies, blah, blah, blah. Why waste time on them? I've already provided some links earlier in the discussion. Maybe I'll find some more, though since you live in an alternative reality they won't do any good. PC, there's another howler. You said I am triggered by the word slavery. Jew or Gentile, when someone is triggered by a word they will shy away from using it. That obviously doesn't apply in this situation. You just brought in triggered to make it seem contemporary words had something to do with the Civil War, which is as silly as it sounds. Politically correct is just more of the same absurdity. Another boxing metaphor. How relevant. Of course you were deceptive. If you actually read the link you would know the context of Marx's quote. But you went ahead and quoted it out of context, pretending Marx said something when he was actually talking about the position of the British press. Either you didn't read your link or you did and went ahead and misquoted it anyway. Not a good look either way. I'm not looking for victory here. I already have it outside of here. And none of your Lost Cause nonsense will change that. Didn't you put it in all caps. OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE or something along those lines. No doubt it was that, but the problem is there is nothing about a deal for the Confederacy to abolish slavery. Lincoln's letter was pretty brief, the Border States reply very lengthy, but I didn't see anything about the deal in either. You made the claim, so it's your responsibility to back it up. So far, you haven't come close. I'm denying the Lost Cause story and I'm denying there is any evidence for the 1862 abolishment deal. Just like I've been doing for months. Nothing wrong with denying ahistorical garbage. From poster feedback, you are the joke on this thread. A tired joke. You can't make anyone less stupid, you can only make them more stupid with your Lost Cause mumbo jumbo. Of course I'm resisting this junk. What else would an intelligent person do? I've used words that expose who you really are and you don't like it....you're nothing but a pretender and a follower and it shows in your refusal to produce supporting evidence. You'll never ever be mistaken for a critical thinker. When you deny my narrative, you deny the truth, but you already know that. Your whiny repetition of "Lost Cause! Lost Cause! Lost Cause!" makes it clear that you're mightily projecting when you claim my narrative is "weak". If it truly was weak, you'd have abandoned this thread long ago.
"I've already provided some links earlier in the discussion" say HolyMoly. Is this an attempt to deceive the forum? One of his early links was to a Mises.org garbage opinion piece on tariffs while the second was a Google book preview that omitted most of the book's pages (you had to buy it to read it) with zero quotes from this cultist from the book at all. Not even the courtesy to say "Hey, look at page X, paragraph Y". Nothing. The claim that anything but a trifle has been offered by you is untrue and an attempt to mislead this forum. Nothing of vialue has been introduced by you to attempt a defense of the lie that slavery was the South's cause.
And I've already schooled you on the meaning of the word triggered, but you're still too narrow minded to realize that your alleged definition is wrong. Like everything here you've done here, you take a shallow generalization of a word meaning and become fanatical about it, never looking for more deeper meanings. By your own self inflicted lack of awareness that you are even doing it, you prove me right about your lack of depth every time. You've made shallow your lifestyle choice.
I notice that you omitted the fact in post above that I DID include the link to the article in the same post as Marx's quote. Are you trying to deceive the forum by leaving that exonerating fact out of your last statement? Why be so dishonest by leaving out that contextual fact? Why the deception when it would have been easy for you to make sure that you clearly pointed out the fact that I had included the link to the article? Was it just your carelessness or was there an intent to lie to this forum? Not a good look for you either way.
You'll never attain victory here because the truth does not support your narrative. You're still here because I have gutted your narrative...your "victory" outside of here will always have that asterisk beside it. "HolyMoly...he always won when there was no real opposition". That's why you lose here, cultist.
This is the third time I've had to school this fool in the evidence in the official correspondence received by the U.S. President from those Border Congressmen:
On July 12, 1862, Lincoln met with border state congressmen to discuss his proposal for compensated emancipation, a ploy to keep them from considering secession. On July 15, 1862, these Congressmen sent two letters to Lincoln with their reply. In the "minority" letter, a statement was made that might cause weeping and gnashing of teeth among those who falsely believe that slavery was the cause: That in order to carry out these views, we will so far as may be in our power ask the people of the border states, calmly, deliberately,and fairly, to consider your recommendations. We are the more emboldened to assume this position from the fact, now become history, that the leaders of the Southern rebellion have offered to abolish slavery amongst them as a condition to foreign intervention in favor of their independence as a nation.
If they can give up slavery to destroy the Union; We can surely ask our people to consider the question of Emancipation to save the Union.www.loc.gov/item/mal1713000/As early as 1862, the Southerners were offering to give up slavery in exchange for help gaining their independence. If slavery was the cause, why were they so willing to give that up? The "majority" letter from the same group was sent to Lincoln on July 14, 1862 and contained these statements: The rebellion derives its strength from the union of all classes in the insurgent states; and while that union lasts, it the war will never end, until they are utterly exhausted. We know that at the inception of these troubles Southern Society was divided, and that a large portion, probably a majority, were opposed to secession. Now the great mass of Southern people are united. To discover why they are so, we must glance at Southern Society, and notice the classes into which it has been divided, and which still distinguish it. They are in arms but not for the same object; they are moved to a common end but by different, and even inconsistent reasons. The leaders, which comprehend what was previously known as the State rights party, (which is much the lesser class) seek to break down national independence, and set up State domination. With them it is a war against nationality. The other class is fighting, as it supposes, to maintain and preserve its rights of property and domestic Safety, which, it has been made to believe, are assailed by this government. This latter class are not disunionists per se. They are so, only because they have been made to believe, that your administration is inimical to their rights, & is making war on their domestic institutions.
Nor do we, permit us to say Mr President with all respect for you, agree that the institution of slavery is “the lever of their power” but we are of the opinion that “the lever of their power” is the apprehension that the powers of a common government created for common and equal protection to the interests of all will be wielded against the institutions of the Southern States.www.loc.gov/item/mal1708800/
There are also newspapers from the other side of the world saying the same thing that these Congressmen were saying to Lincoln.
Once again, in claiming that there is no evidence despite being repeatedly shown the evidence above, did you just try to deceive the forum with your deliberate omission and denial of its existence. Why are you lying to this forum instead of honorably trying to refute this evidence?
"From poster feedback, you are the joke on this thread. A tired joke." crows HolyMoly. He means the cadre of fellow leftist morons that make up his side of the forum. You ought to be ashamed that your desperation has made you turn to the lowest forms of life on this forum in your continued appeal to any mob that you can find. Truly pathetic.
"What else would an intelligent person do?" he says. You're completely unqualified to ask or deserve an answer that question. An intelligent person would never have been stupid enough to swallow the lie that slavery was the South's cause.
You use those words repetitively because your other augments are so threadbare. So in comes brainwashed, herd, lies, critical thinker, blah, blah, blah. Everyone with a different opinion from yours is brainwashed, a herd member, a non-critical thinker. Talk about simplistic and shallow. I use Lost Cause because you're a Lost Causer. It's no different from calling a conservative a conservative or a liberal a liberal. You haven't abandoned the thread either, so that idea makes no sense. You haven't schooled me on anything except the stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy and I was already aware of that. I've been discussing the Marx quote for a while. I presume I have mentioned that it was in the same post as your link. You're too clueless to notice that the fact of the two statements being in the same post doesn't exonerate you, it just makes it easier to prove your deception. You had the link that showed the context of Marx's quote, but you ignored that when you quoted Marx to make it seem he supported the tariff theory when he didn't. A worse look. Anyone can declare victory, it's doesn't mean anything when only one person is doing it. Claim victory as many times as you like, it's irrelevant. It's a fact that now become history. The only problem is there is no first-hand evidence for this "fact." You can't refute what, so far, doesn't exist. Leftist morons, lowest form of life, a mob. A mob of four or five people. Very impressive. And objective and common sensical. Not at all emotional. If an intelligent person is one who doesn't believe that slavery was the cause, then there are relatively few intelligent people around. Fortunately, very few people hold that as a sign of intelligence. www.vox.com/2015/8/12/9132561/civil-war-slavery-video
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,221
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 18, 2023 23:05:07 GMT
I've used words that expose who you really are and you don't like it....you're nothing but a pretender and a follower and it shows in your refusal to produce supporting evidence. You'll never ever be mistaken for a critical thinker. When you deny my narrative, you deny the truth, but you already know that. Your whiny repetition of "Lost Cause! Lost Cause! Lost Cause!" makes it clear that you're mightily projecting when you claim my narrative is "weak". If it truly was weak, you'd have abandoned this thread long ago.
"I've already provided some links earlier in the discussion" say HolyMoly. Is this an attempt to deceive the forum? One of his early links was to a Mises.org garbage opinion piece on tariffs while the second was a Google book preview that omitted most of the book's pages (you had to buy it to read it) with zero quotes from this cultist from the book at all. Not even the courtesy to say "Hey, look at page X, paragraph Y". Nothing. The claim that anything but a trifle has been offered by you is untrue and an attempt to mislead this forum. Nothing of vialue has been introduced by you to attempt a defense of the lie that slavery was the South's cause.
And I've already schooled you on the meaning of the word triggered, but you're still too narrow minded to realize that your alleged definition is wrong. Like everything here you've done here, you take a shallow generalization of a word meaning and become fanatical about it, never looking for more deeper meanings. By your own self inflicted lack of awareness that you are even doing it, you prove me right about your lack of depth every time. You've made shallow your lifestyle choice.
I notice that you omitted the fact in post above that I DID include the link to the article in the same post as Marx's quote. Are you trying to deceive the forum by leaving that exonerating fact out of your last statement? Why be so dishonest by leaving out that contextual fact? Why the deception when it would have been easy for you to make sure that you clearly pointed out the fact that I had included the link to the article? Was it just your carelessness or was there an intent to lie to this forum? Not a good look for you either way.
You'll never attain victory here because the truth does not support your narrative. You're still here because I have gutted your narrative...your "victory" outside of here will always have that asterisk beside it. "HolyMoly...he always won when there was no real opposition". That's why you lose here, cultist.
This is the third time I've had to school this fool in the evidence in the official correspondence received by the U.S. President from those Border Congressmen:
On July 12, 1862, Lincoln met with border state congressmen to discuss his proposal for compensated emancipation, a ploy to keep them from considering secession. On July 15, 1862, these Congressmen sent two letters to Lincoln with their reply. In the "minority" letter, a statement was made that might cause weeping and gnashing of teeth among those who falsely believe that slavery was the cause: That in order to carry out these views, we will so far as may be in our power ask the people of the border states, calmly, deliberately,and fairly, to consider your recommendations. We are the more emboldened to assume this position from the fact, now become history, that the leaders of the Southern rebellion have offered to abolish slavery amongst them as a condition to foreign intervention in favor of their independence as a nation.
If they can give up slavery to destroy the Union; We can surely ask our people to consider the question of Emancipation to save the Union.www.loc.gov/item/mal1713000/As early as 1862, the Southerners were offering to give up slavery in exchange for help gaining their independence. If slavery was the cause, why were they so willing to give that up? The "majority" letter from the same group was sent to Lincoln on July 14, 1862 and contained these statements: The rebellion derives its strength from the union of all classes in the insurgent states; and while that union lasts, it the war will never end, until they are utterly exhausted. We know that at the inception of these troubles Southern Society was divided, and that a large portion, probably a majority, were opposed to secession. Now the great mass of Southern people are united. To discover why they are so, we must glance at Southern Society, and notice the classes into which it has been divided, and which still distinguish it. They are in arms but not for the same object; they are moved to a common end but by different, and even inconsistent reasons. The leaders, which comprehend what was previously known as the State rights party, (which is much the lesser class) seek to break down national independence, and set up State domination. With them it is a war against nationality. The other class is fighting, as it supposes, to maintain and preserve its rights of property and domestic Safety, which, it has been made to believe, are assailed by this government. This latter class are not disunionists per se. They are so, only because they have been made to believe, that your administration is inimical to their rights, & is making war on their domestic institutions.
Nor do we, permit us to say Mr President with all respect for you, agree that the institution of slavery is “the lever of their power” but we are of the opinion that “the lever of their power” is the apprehension that the powers of a common government created for common and equal protection to the interests of all will be wielded against the institutions of the Southern States.www.loc.gov/item/mal1708800/
There are also newspapers from the other side of the world saying the same thing that these Congressmen were saying to Lincoln.
Once again, in claiming that there is no evidence despite being repeatedly shown the evidence above, did you just try to deceive the forum with your deliberate omission and denial of its existence. Why are you lying to this forum instead of honorably trying to refute this evidence?
"From poster feedback, you are the joke on this thread. A tired joke." crows HolyMoly. He means the cadre of fellow leftist morons that make up his side of the forum. You ought to be ashamed that your desperation has made you turn to the lowest forms of life on this forum in your continued appeal to any mob that you can find. Truly pathetic.
"What else would an intelligent person do?" he says. You're completely unqualified to ask or deserve an answer that question. An intelligent person would never have been stupid enough to swallow the lie that slavery was the South's cause.
You use those words repetitively because your other augments are so threadbare. So in comes brainwashed, herd, lies, critical thinker, blah, blah, blah. Everyone with a different opinion from yours is brainwashed, a herd member, a non-critical thinker. Talk about simplistic and shallow. I use Lost Cause because you're a Lost Causer. It's no different from calling a conservative a conservative or a liberal a liberal. You haven't abandoned the thread either, so that idea makes no sense. You haven't schooled me on anything except the stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy and I was already aware of that. I've been discussing the Marx quote for a while. I presume I have mentioned that it was in the same post as your link. You're too clueless to notice that the fact of the two statements being in the same post doesn't exonerate you, it just makes it easier to prove your deception. You had the link that showed the context of Marx's quote, but you ignored that when you quoted Marx to make it seem he supported the tariff theory when he didn't. A worse look. Anyone can declare victory, it's doesn't mean anything when only one person is doing it. Claim victory as many times as you like, it's irrelevant. It's a fact that now become history. The only problem is there is no first-hand evidence for this "fact." You can't refute what, so far, doesn't exist. Leftist morons, lowest form of life, a mob. A mob of four or five people. Very impressive. And objective and common sensical. Not at all emotional. If an intelligent person is one who doesn't believe that slavery was the cause, then there are relatively few intelligent people around. Fortunately, very few people hold that as a sign of intelligence. www.vox.com/2015/8/12/9132561/civil-war-slavery-videoMy "augments" are so threadbare? No, I use those words because, like a child, you need to be taught what you're doing wrong. They help you build character and integrity....I use them often because you're a needy little fellow. I'm trying to help you be less stupid, but sometimes such efforts are a lost cause.
And there you go with anther straw man fallacy, bleating that I think that EVERYONE with a different opinion form me fits those characteristics, which of course is another attempt at deception by you. Those are valid descriptions of someone who still believes the lie that slavery was the South's cause when I've proven them wrong. If you call me a "lost causer" because that is what I am, I call you brainwashed, a member of the herd and a poor critical thinker because you ARE those things.
My narrative is strong enough and threatening enough to keep you coming back time and again, proof enough that your claim that it's weak is just another attempt by you to deceive this forum.
If the "stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy" is so obvious, you must be pretty stupid for failing to make that case on this thread. But "Lost Cause fantasy" is just another lie to cover that reek of desperation, isn't it? Just one more thing that you have made up to mask your ignorance. If you disagree, man up and let's see you prove any of your nonsense.
You're still desperately making stuff up about the Marx quote, I see. Your deception concerning what I posted is reaching epic levels. It's dishonest to claim that I ignored the context of Marx when I posted the link showing the context at the same time that I listed the quote. In case you haven't noticed, most people here only quote parts of stories and sayings rather than post all of the text. I just proved that you left off important context from your previous post where you failed to mention that I did include the link. Not a good look for you after you falsely accused me of deception.
I've told the truth here and I've backed it all up with facts and evidence. You've provided none. That's why you lose here and why you keep pathetically trying to scrape out some kind of "win" for yourself...i.e., the false take on the Marx quote.
So, all of those Congressmen in official correspondence to POTUS and those newspapers were reporting on something that doesn't exist? And yet, despite your denials, there's the evidence right in front of you and it's not going away, but because it's so devastating to your narrative, you must childishly cover your eyes and make believe it's not there. You've offered no first-hand, second-hand or third-hand proof for ANY of your fairy tale, which makes you look utterly stupid for demanding it from anyone else.
A sign of intelligence is looking deeply and objectively into the contradictions and conundrums in the historical record. Your intransigence and fanaticism for the slavery was the cause lie indicates us no sign of any intelligence, just conformity. That's a reputation that you've earned for yourself.
And the icing on the cake is your mindless re-introduction of a clueless goofball like Ty Seidule and his idiotic cartoon on PragerU. That's already been tried earlier on this thread, but as usual, you tend to forget what you said yesterday, much less remembering something many pages ago. Vox mentions Seidule's garbage about the South not really in favor of state's rights because Mississippi complained about New York, but that leftist cue ball Seidule fails to mention that the regulation of interstate commerce was a power delegated to the federal government by the states; it was no longer in the hands of the states, BY THEIR AGREEMENT. The South advocated that the states should live up to their Constitutional agreement and obligations and the North failed to do so both on Mississippi's complaint and on fugitive slaves.
As I said, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,492
|
Post by thor on Sept 19, 2023 13:23:51 GMT
You use those words repetitively because your other augments are so threadbare. So in comes brainwashed, herd, lies, critical thinker, blah, blah, blah. Everyone with a different opinion from yours is brainwashed, a herd member, a non-critical thinker. Talk about simplistic and shallow. I use Lost Cause because you're a Lost Causer. It's no different from calling a conservative a conservative or a liberal a liberal. You haven't abandoned the thread either, so that idea makes no sense. You haven't schooled me on anything except the stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy and I was already aware of that. I've been discussing the Marx quote for a while. I presume I have mentioned that it was in the same post as your link. You're too clueless to notice that the fact of the two statements being in the same post doesn't exonerate you, it just makes it easier to prove your deception. You had the link that showed the context of Marx's quote, but you ignored that when you quoted Marx to make it seem he supported the tariff theory when he didn't. A worse look. Anyone can declare victory, it's doesn't mean anything when only one person is doing it. Claim victory as many times as you like, it's irrelevant. It's a fact that now become history. The only problem is there is no first-hand evidence for this "fact." You can't refute what, so far, doesn't exist. Leftist morons, lowest form of life, a mob. A mob of four or five people. Very impressive. And objective and common sensical. Not at all emotional. If an intelligent person is one who doesn't believe that slavery was the cause, then there are relatively few intelligent people around. Fortunately, very few people hold that as a sign of intelligence. www.vox.com/2015/8/12/9132561/civil-war-slavery-videoMy "augments" are so threadbare? No, I use those words because, like a child, you need to be taught what you're doing wrong. They help you build character and integrity....I use them often because you're a needy little fellow. I'm trying to help you be less stupid, but sometimes such efforts are a lost cause.
And there you go with anther straw man fallacy, bleating that I think that EVERYONE with a different opinion form me fits those characteristics, which of course is another attempt at deception by you. Those are valid descriptions of someone who still believes the lie that slavery was the South's cause when I've proven them wrong. If you call me a "lost causer" because that is what I am, I call you brainwashed, a member of the herd and a poor critical thinker because you ARE those things.
My narrative is strong enough and threatening enough to keep you coming back time and again, proof enough that your claim that it's weak is just another attempt by you to deceive this forum.
If the "stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy" is so obvious, you must be pretty stupid for failing to make that case on this thread. But "Lost Cause fantasy" is just another lie to cover that reek of desperation, isn't it? Just one more thing that you have made up to mask your ignorance. If you disagree, man up and let's see you prove any of your nonsense.
You're still desperately making stuff up about the Marx quote, I see. Your deception concerning what I posted is reaching epic levels. It's dishonest to claim that I ignored the context of Marx when I posted the link showing the context at the same time that I listed the quote. In case you haven't noticed, most people here only quote parts of stories and sayings rather than post all of the text. I just proved that you left off important context from your previous post where you failed to mention that I did include the link. Not a good look for you after you falsely accused me of deception.
I've told the truth here and I've backed it all up with facts and evidence. You've provided none. That's why you lose here and why you keep pathetically trying to scrape out some kind of "win" for yourself...i.e., the false take on the Marx quote.
So, all of those Congressmen in official correspondence to POTUS and those newspapers were reporting on something that doesn't exist? And yet, despite your denials, there's the evidence right in front of you and it's not going away, but because it's so devastating to your narrative, you must childishly cover your eyes and make believe it's not there. You've offered no first-hand, second-hand or third-hand proof for ANY of your fairy tale, which makes you look utterly stupid for demanding it from anyone else.
A sign of intelligence is looking deeply and objectively into the contradictions and conundrums in the historical record. Your intransigence and fanaticism for the slavery was the cause lie indicates us no sign of any intelligence, just conformity. That's a reputation that you've earned for yourself.
And the icing on the cake is your mindless re-introduction of a clueless goofball like Ty Seidule and his idiotic cartoon on PragerU. That's already been tried earlier on this thread, but as usual, you tend to forget what you said yesterday, much less remembering something many pages ago. Vox mentions Seidule's garbage about the South not really in favor of state's rights because Mississippi complained about New York, but that leftist cue ball Seidule fails to mention that the regulation of interstate commerce was a power delegated to the federal government by the states; it was no longer in the hands of the states, BY THEIR AGREEMENT. The South advocated that the states should live up to their Constitutional agreement and obligations and the North failed to do so both on Mississippi's complaint and on fugitive slaves.
As I said, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
|
|
|
Post by HolyMoly on Sept 19, 2023 21:31:49 GMT
You use those words repetitively because your other augments are so threadbare. So in comes brainwashed, herd, lies, critical thinker, blah, blah, blah. Everyone with a different opinion from yours is brainwashed, a herd member, a non-critical thinker. Talk about simplistic and shallow. I use Lost Cause because you're a Lost Causer. It's no different from calling a conservative a conservative or a liberal a liberal. You haven't abandoned the thread either, so that idea makes no sense. You haven't schooled me on anything except the stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy and I was already aware of that. I've been discussing the Marx quote for a while. I presume I have mentioned that it was in the same post as your link. You're too clueless to notice that the fact of the two statements being in the same post doesn't exonerate you, it just makes it easier to prove your deception. You had the link that showed the context of Marx's quote, but you ignored that when you quoted Marx to make it seem he supported the tariff theory when he didn't. A worse look. Anyone can declare victory, it's doesn't mean anything when only one person is doing it. Claim victory as many times as you like, it's irrelevant. It's a fact that now become history. The only problem is there is no first-hand evidence for this "fact." You can't refute what, so far, doesn't exist. Leftist morons, lowest form of life, a mob. A mob of four or five people. Very impressive. And objective and common sensical. Not at all emotional. If an intelligent person is one who doesn't believe that slavery was the cause, then there are relatively few intelligent people around. Fortunately, very few people hold that as a sign of intelligence. www.vox.com/2015/8/12/9132561/civil-war-slavery-videoMy "augments" are so threadbare? No, I use those words because, like a child, you need to be taught what you're doing wrong. They help you build character and integrity....I use them often because you're a needy little fellow. I'm trying to help you be less stupid, but sometimes such efforts are a lost cause.
And there you go with anther straw man fallacy, bleating that I think that EVERYONE with a different opinion form me fits those characteristics, which of course is another attempt at deception by you. Those are valid descriptions of someone who still believes the lie that slavery was the South's cause when I've proven them wrong. If you call me a "lost causer" because that is what I am, I call you brainwashed, a member of the herd and a poor critical thinker because you ARE those things.
My narrative is strong enough and threatening enough to keep you coming back time and again, proof enough that your claim that it's weak is just another attempt by you to deceive this forum.
If the "stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy" is so obvious, you must be pretty stupid for failing to make that case on this thread. But "Lost Cause fantasy" is just another lie to cover that reek of desperation, isn't it? Just one more thing that you have made up to mask your ignorance. If you disagree, man up and let's see you prove any of your nonsense.
You're still desperately making stuff up about the Marx quote, I see. Your deception concerning what I posted is reaching epic levels. It's dishonest to claim that I ignored the context of Marx when I posted the link showing the context at the same time that I listed the quote. In case you haven't noticed, most people here only quote parts of stories and sayings rather than post all of the text. I just proved that you left off important context from your previous post where you failed to mention that I did include the link. Not a good look for you after you falsely accused me of deception.
I've told the truth here and I've backed it all up with facts and evidence. You've provided none. That's why you lose here and why you keep pathetically trying to scrape out some kind of "win" for yourself...i.e., the false take on the Marx quote.
So, all of those Congressmen in official correspondence to POTUS and those newspapers were reporting on something that doesn't exist? And yet, despite your denials, there's the evidence right in front of you and it's not going away, but because it's so devastating to your narrative, you must childishly cover your eyes and make believe it's not there. You've offered no first-hand, second-hand or third-hand proof for ANY of your fairy tale, which makes you look utterly stupid for demanding it from anyone else.
A sign of intelligence is looking deeply and objectively into the contradictions and conundrums in the historical record. Your intransigence and fanaticism for the slavery was the cause lie indicates us no sign of any intelligence, just conformity. That's a reputation that you've earned for yourself.
And the icing on the cake is your mindless re-introduction of a clueless goofball like Ty Seidule and his idiotic cartoon on PragerU. That's already been tried earlier on this thread, but as usual, you tend to forget what you said yesterday, much less remembering something many pages ago. Vox mentions Seidule's garbage about the South not really in favor of state's rights because Mississippi complained about New York, but that leftist cue ball Seidule fails to mention that the regulation of interstate commerce was a power delegated to the federal government by the states; it was no longer in the hands of the states, BY THEIR AGREEMENT. The South advocated that the states should live up to their Constitutional agreement and obligations and the North failed to do so both on Mississippi's complaint and on fugitive slaves.
As I said, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
Yep, even your augments to your arguments are threadbare. And that ain't good. You use the words because name calling makes up the bulk of your argument. Anyone who thinks that slavery was the cause is a lying, brainwashed herd member. That's why your talk about challenges is so humorous. Folks come here to build their character? That would be pretty bizarre. And it's a bad idea to learn integrity from a liar. You keep coming back too, so that argument makes no sense. The Lost Cause fantasy is what you're trying to sell. No one's buying. Not making up anything. For whatever reason you quoted Marx as if he was saying the Civil War was about tariffs, when that was not his opinion. If you had read your link you would have known that. But you went ahead and lied about the full meaning of the quote. Then when you were caught you started to say that Marx was a lying pervert. Why quote a lying pervert? The only false take on the quote was your own. This is of the same caliber as your other "evidence." Worthless. Yes, the Congressmen existed, the newspaper rumors existed. The only thing that doesn't exist is any first-hand proof of this supposed abolition deal. With my intellectual curiosity, I'm still waiting to see it. Haven't seen it yet, likely never will. I have no particular fanaticism for slavery as the cause. I don't go around talking about it everywhere. One can believe in something without being a fanatic. Sure, you know more than a historian at West Point. Tell me another one. A historian brought to you by that group of left-wing radicals, Prager U. It's also a bad idea to take lessons in being less stupid from an idiot. It just never works out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2023 21:33:41 GMT
How is this thread 47 pages long? It feels 47 years long.
It seems like the South ain't the only ones that won't stop fighting the Civil War.
I can't believe you all are even giving the revisionist arguments air and the legitimacy of a response.
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Sept 19, 2023 23:08:49 GMT
How is this thread 47 pages long? It feels 47 years long.
It seems like the South ain't the only ones that won't stop fighting the Civil War.
I can't believe you all are even giving the revisionist arguments air and the legitimacy of a response.
I find it somewhat amusing. This is record-setting!
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,492
|
Post by thor on Sept 20, 2023 12:07:40 GMT
How is this thread 47 pages long? It feels 47 years long.
It seems like the South ain't the only ones that won't stop fighting the Civil War.
I can't believe you all are even giving the revisionist arguments air and the legitimacy of a response.
I find it somewhat amusing. This is record-setting! Demos' thread is beating this one at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by DaveJavu on Sept 20, 2023 12:09:56 GMT
I find it somewhat amusing. This is record-setting! Demos' threat is beating this one at the moment. Demo made a threat? I can't believe it.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,221
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 20, 2023 12:28:14 GMT
How is this thread 47 pages long? It feels 47 years long.
It seems like the South ain't the only ones that won't stop fighting the Civil War.
I can't believe you all are even giving the revisionist arguments air and the legitimacy of a response.
And yet, here you are, adding to it. Folks are drawn to this topic because, deep down in the secret recesses of their minds, they know that the establishment narrative that claims that the South was fighting to preserve slavery is full of lies. It's the quintessential American example of Plato's "noble lie"
I'm not revising; I'm correcting.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,221
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 20, 2023 14:45:00 GMT
My "augments" are so threadbare? No, I use those words because, like a child, you need to be taught what you're doing wrong. They help you build character and integrity....I use them often because you're a needy little fellow. I'm trying to help you be less stupid, but sometimes such efforts are a lost cause.
And there you go with anther straw man fallacy, bleating that I think that EVERYONE with a different opinion form me fits those characteristics, which of course is another attempt at deception by you. Those are valid descriptions of someone who still believes the lie that slavery was the South's cause when I've proven them wrong. If you call me a "lost causer" because that is what I am, I call you brainwashed, a member of the herd and a poor critical thinker because you ARE those things.
My narrative is strong enough and threatening enough to keep you coming back time and again, proof enough that your claim that it's weak is just another attempt by you to deceive this forum.
If the "stupidity of the Lost Cause fantasy" is so obvious, you must be pretty stupid for failing to make that case on this thread. But "Lost Cause fantasy" is just another lie to cover that reek of desperation, isn't it? Just one more thing that you have made up to mask your ignorance. If you disagree, man up and let's see you prove any of your nonsense.
You're still desperately making stuff up about the Marx quote, I see. Your deception concerning what I posted is reaching epic levels. It's dishonest to claim that I ignored the context of Marx when I posted the link showing the context at the same time that I listed the quote. In case you haven't noticed, most people here only quote parts of stories and sayings rather than post all of the text. I just proved that you left off important context from your previous post where you failed to mention that I did include the link. Not a good look for you after you falsely accused me of deception.
I've told the truth here and I've backed it all up with facts and evidence. You've provided none. That's why you lose here and why you keep pathetically trying to scrape out some kind of "win" for yourself...i.e., the false take on the Marx quote.
So, all of those Congressmen in official correspondence to POTUS and those newspapers were reporting on something that doesn't exist? And yet, despite your denials, there's the evidence right in front of you and it's not going away, but because it's so devastating to your narrative, you must childishly cover your eyes and make believe it's not there. You've offered no first-hand, second-hand or third-hand proof for ANY of your fairy tale, which makes you look utterly stupid for demanding it from anyone else.
A sign of intelligence is looking deeply and objectively into the contradictions and conundrums in the historical record. Your intransigence and fanaticism for the slavery was the cause lie indicates us no sign of any intelligence, just conformity. That's a reputation that you've earned for yourself.
And the icing on the cake is your mindless re-introduction of a clueless goofball like Ty Seidule and his idiotic cartoon on PragerU. That's already been tried earlier on this thread, but as usual, you tend to forget what you said yesterday, much less remembering something many pages ago. Vox mentions Seidule's garbage about the South not really in favor of state's rights because Mississippi complained about New York, but that leftist cue ball Seidule fails to mention that the regulation of interstate commerce was a power delegated to the federal government by the states; it was no longer in the hands of the states, BY THEIR AGREEMENT. The South advocated that the states should live up to their Constitutional agreement and obligations and the North failed to do so both on Mississippi's complaint and on fugitive slaves.
As I said, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
Yep, even your augments to your arguments are threadbare. And that ain't good. You use the words because name calling makes up the bulk of your argument. Anyone who thinks that slavery was the cause is a lying, brainwashed herd member. That's why your talk about challenges is so humorous. Folks come here to build their character? That would be pretty bizarre. And it's a bad idea to learn integrity from a liar. You keep coming back too, so that argument makes no sense. The Lost Cause fantasy is what you're trying to sell. No one's buying. Not making up anything. For whatever reason you quoted Marx as if he was saying the Civil War was about tariffs, when that was not his opinion. If you had read your link you would have known that. But you went ahead and lied about the full meaning of the quote. Then when you were caught you started to say that Marx was a lying pervert. Why quote a lying pervert? The only false take on the quote was your own. This is of the same caliber as your other "evidence." Worthless. Yes, the Congressmen existed, the newspaper rumors existed. The only thing that doesn't exist is any first-hand proof of this supposed abolition deal. With my intellectual curiosity, I'm still waiting to see it. Haven't seen it yet, likely never will. I have no particular fanaticism for slavery as the cause. I don't go around talking about it everywhere. One can believe in something without being a fanatic. Sure, you know more than a historian at West Point. Tell me another one. A historian brought to you by that group of left-wing radicals, Prager U. It's also a bad idea to take lessons in being less stupid from an idiot. It just never works out. Looks like a struck a nerve in our persistent little cultist. Claiming that slavery was the South's cause was, is, and will always be a lie and its adherents must live with the reputation for mindless obeisance to seem to be snowflake (oh no! another word this troll won't like!) sensitive when I call you out for peddling that garbage. It's painful for you, I'm sure, to be identified as a conformist, hence your resistance to having your eyes and mind opened. But kicking the conformist habit requires honesty and integrity, so I'm not very hopeful.
As far as continuing to come back to this thread, in case you stupidly forgot (you do that a lot), I STARTED this thread. I'm not coming back....I never left.
If does require courage to meet my repeated challenge to provide evidence from the historians that are claimed as sources. Instead of courage, I get a laughable YouTube cartoon from a neo-con website narrated by a cue ball who was a "Lost Causer" before he went to the dark side. Your "source" is a flip flopper in his own profession! But a conformist like you rarely knows such details. In 30 seconds, I crushed one of this alleged historian's falsehoods right here on this thread, which is a taste of what I'll do to any source you're brave enough to try.You are so enamored with titles and experts that do the thinking for you, so "West Point historian" must send a tingle down your leg.
You're not being honest with yourself or to us about the Marx quote. "For whatever reason...." denotes your denial of the truth that no deception was intended when I provide the source for anyone to see. If partial quotes and leaving off context makes one a liar, then this forum is full of liars. Just a post or two ago, I noted that YOU had left off context when accusing me of deception. The only false take on this quote has always been yours, but you are so pathetic in looking for any small victory that you keep trying to deceive this forum with this Marx quote nonsense.
If you had any intellectual curiosity, you would accept the existing evidence or refute it rather than hauling those goalposts all over the place. Still waiting for YOUR first hand evidence for your goofy fiction that Southerners were too dumb to know they were damaging slavery or that the Northerner Congressmen knew better what the South wanted than the Southerners did. Still waiting on any evidence from you gleaned from the historian that you cower behind. Evidently, you have a gaping double standard where "first and evidence" is only required from an opponent, not from you.
It's good to never take lessons from an idiot.....have you got the self awareness to realize that's the reason that you've never been asked? And that's the reason I've spent so much time correcting your idiotic fairy tale. You're welcome.
Once again, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,492
|
Post by thor on Sept 20, 2023 17:43:28 GMT
Yep, even your augments to your arguments are threadbare. And that ain't good. You use the words because name calling makes up the bulk of your argument. Anyone who thinks that slavery was the cause is a lying, brainwashed herd member. That's why your talk about challenges is so humorous. Folks come here to build their character? That would be pretty bizarre. And it's a bad idea to learn integrity from a liar. You keep coming back too, so that argument makes no sense. The Lost Cause fantasy is what you're trying to sell. No one's buying. Not making up anything. For whatever reason you quoted Marx as if he was saying the Civil War was about tariffs, when that was not his opinion. If you had read your link you would have known that. But you went ahead and lied about the full meaning of the quote. Then when you were caught you started to say that Marx was a lying pervert. Why quote a lying pervert? The only false take on the quote was your own. This is of the same caliber as your other "evidence." Worthless. Yes, the Congressmen existed, the newspaper rumors existed. The only thing that doesn't exist is any first-hand proof of this supposed abolition deal. With my intellectual curiosity, I'm still waiting to see it. Haven't seen it yet, likely never will. I have no particular fanaticism for slavery as the cause. I don't go around talking about it everywhere. One can believe in something without being a fanatic. Sure, you know more than a historian at West Point. Tell me another one. A historian brought to you by that group of left-wing radicals, Prager U. It's also a bad idea to take lessons in being less stupid from an idiot. It just never works out. Looks like a struck a nerve in our persistent little cultist. Claiming that slavery was the South's cause was, is, and will always be a lie and its adherents must live with the reputation for mindless obeisance to seem to be snowflake (oh no! another word this troll won't like!) sensitive when I call you out for peddling that garbage. It's painful for you, I'm sure, to be identified as a conformist, hence your resistance to having your eyes and mind opened. But kicking the conformist habit requires honesty and integrity, so I'm not very hopeful.
As far as continuing to come back to this thread, in case you stupidly forgot (you do that a lot), I STARTED this thread. I'm not coming back....I never left.
If does require courage to meet my repeated challenge to provide evidence from the historians that are claimed as sources. Instead of courage, I get a laughable YouTube cartoon from a neo-con website narrated by a cue ball who was a "Lost Causer" before he went to the dark side. Your "source" is a flip flopper in his own profession! But a conformist like you rarely knows such details. In 30 seconds, I crushed one of this alleged historian's falsehoods right here on this thread, which is a taste of what I'll do to any source you're brave enough to try.You are so enamored with titles and experts that do the thinking for you, so "West Point historian" must send a tingle down your leg.
You're not being honest with yourself or to us about the Marx quote. "For whatever reason...." denotes your denial of the truth that no deception was intended when I provide the source for anyone to see. If partial quotes and leaving off context makes one a liar, then this forum is full of liars. Just a post or two ago, I noted that YOU had left off context when accusing me of deception. The only false take on this quote has always been yours, but you are so pathetic in looking for any small victory that you keep trying to deceive this forum with this Marx quote nonsense.
If you had any intellectual curiosity, you would accept the existing evidence or refute it rather than hauling those goalposts all over the place. Still waiting for YOUR first hand evidence for your goofy fiction that Southerners were too dumb to know they were damaging slavery or that the Northerner Congressmen knew better what the South wanted than the Southerners did. Still waiting on any evidence from you gleaned from the historian that you cower behind. Evidently, you have a gaping double standard where "first and evidence" is only required from an opponent, not from you.
It's good to never take lessons from an idiot.....have you got the self awareness to realize that's the reason that you've never been asked? And that's the reason I've spent so much time correcting your idiotic fairy tale. You're welcome.
Once again, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
|
|
|
Post by HolyMoly on Sept 20, 2023 21:15:09 GMT
Yep, even your augments to your arguments are threadbare. And that ain't good. You use the words because name calling makes up the bulk of your argument. Anyone who thinks that slavery was the cause is a lying, brainwashed herd member. That's why your talk about challenges is so humorous. Folks come here to build their character? That would be pretty bizarre. And it's a bad idea to learn integrity from a liar. You keep coming back too, so that argument makes no sense. The Lost Cause fantasy is what you're trying to sell. No one's buying. Not making up anything. For whatever reason you quoted Marx as if he was saying the Civil War was about tariffs, when that was not his opinion. If you had read your link you would have known that. But you went ahead and lied about the full meaning of the quote. Then when you were caught you started to say that Marx was a lying pervert. Why quote a lying pervert? The only false take on the quote was your own. This is of the same caliber as your other "evidence." Worthless. Yes, the Congressmen existed, the newspaper rumors existed. The only thing that doesn't exist is any first-hand proof of this supposed abolition deal. With my intellectual curiosity, I'm still waiting to see it. Haven't seen it yet, likely never will. I have no particular fanaticism for slavery as the cause. I don't go around talking about it everywhere. One can believe in something without being a fanatic. Sure, you know more than a historian at West Point. Tell me another one. A historian brought to you by that group of left-wing radicals, Prager U. It's also a bad idea to take lessons in being less stupid from an idiot. It just never works out. Looks like a struck a nerve in our persistent little cultist. Claiming that slavery was the South's cause was, is, and will always be a lie and its adherents must live with the reputation for mindless obeisance to seem to be snowflake (oh no! another word this troll won't like!) sensitive when I call you out for peddling that garbage. It's painful for you, I'm sure, to be identified as a conformist, hence your resistance to having your eyes and mind opened. But kicking the conformist habit requires honesty and integrity, so I'm not very hopeful.
As far as continuing to come back to this thread, in case you stupidly forgot (you do that a lot), I STARTED this thread. I'm not coming back....I never left.
If does require courage to meet my repeated challenge to provide evidence from the historians that are claimed as sources. Instead of courage, I get a laughable YouTube cartoon from a neo-con website narrated by a cue ball who was a "Lost Causer" before he went to the dark side. Your "source" is a flip flopper in his own profession! But a conformist like you rarely knows such details. In 30 seconds, I crushed one of this alleged historian's falsehoods right here on this thread, which is a taste of what I'll do to any source you're brave enough to try.You are so enamored with titles and experts that do the thinking for you, so "West Point historian" must send a tingle down your leg.
You're not being honest with yourself or to us about the Marx quote. "For whatever reason...." denotes your denial of the truth that no deception was intended when I provide the source for anyone to see. If partial quotes and leaving off context makes one a liar, then this forum is full of liars. Just a post or two ago, I noted that YOU had left off context when accusing me of deception. The only false take on this quote has always been yours, but you are so pathetic in looking for any small victory that you keep trying to deceive this forum with this Marx quote nonsense.
If you had any intellectual curiosity, you would accept the existing evidence or refute it rather than hauling those goalposts all over the place. Still waiting for YOUR first hand evidence for your goofy fiction that Southerners were too dumb to know they were damaging slavery or that the Northerner Congressmen knew better what the South wanted than the Southerners did. Still waiting on any evidence from you gleaned from the historian that you cower behind. Evidently, you have a gaping double standard where "first and evidence" is only required from an opponent, not from you.
It's good to never take lessons from an idiot.....have you got the self awareness to realize that's the reason that you've never been asked? And that's the reason I've spent so much time correcting your idiotic fairy tale. You're welcome.
Once again, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
Looks like I've struck a nerve.....that's one of the oldest wingnut moves around. It's painful for you, I'm sure. Two for the price of one. Maybe some day your vivid imagination about what you've supposedly done to other people will align with the real world, but I wouldn't wait around for it. There' nothing bad about being a conformist if one conforms with what one believes to be true. I've never left either, which doesn't prove much of anything. You crushed him in the same place you crush everyone--in your own mind. The same place where you rack up those dozens of "victories" and "wins." How impressive that is. People can go back and look at the Marx quote and your link. For whatever reason, you never applied what your link said to Marx's quote. You quoted him out of context to make it sound as if Marx himself said that the tariff was the cause of the war when he said no such thing. Basically you lied about Marx's actual position. Did you think by misquoting a guy as leftist as leftist can be it would prove that even leftists denied slavery was the cause? Who knows. The whole deception was rather bizarre. Proof southerners were dumb? They ended slavery in four years when their goal was to preserve it for decades. Sounds dumb to me. Again, one can't refute evidence that doesn't exist, like the supposed promise made in 1862 to abolish slavery in return for intervention. You haven't corrected anything. All you've done is to parrot the Lost Cause fantasy and wrote herd, brainwashed, critical thinker, northern lie in almost every post, as if using those words actually proves anything except how weak your argument is. You don't have any evidence so you keep on repeating nonsense words. You can only make people more stupid, but no one is listening to your absurdities. So we all can remain smart.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,221
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 21, 2023 21:41:19 GMT
Looks like a struck a nerve in our persistent little cultist. Claiming that slavery was the South's cause was, is, and will always be a lie and its adherents must live with the reputation for mindless obeisance to seem to be snowflake (oh no! another word this troll won't like!) sensitive when I call you out for peddling that garbage. It's painful for you, I'm sure, to be identified as a conformist, hence your resistance to having your eyes and mind opened. But kicking the conformist habit requires honesty and integrity, so I'm not very hopeful.
As far as continuing to come back to this thread, in case you stupidly forgot (you do that a lot), I STARTED this thread. I'm not coming back....I never left.
If does require courage to meet my repeated challenge to provide evidence from the historians that are claimed as sources. Instead of courage, I get a laughable YouTube cartoon from a neo-con website narrated by a cue ball who was a "Lost Causer" before he went to the dark side. Your "source" is a flip flopper in his own profession! But a conformist like you rarely knows such details. In 30 seconds, I crushed one of this alleged historian's falsehoods right here on this thread, which is a taste of what I'll do to any source you're brave enough to try.You are so enamored with titles and experts that do the thinking for you, so "West Point historian" must send a tingle down your leg.
You're not being honest with yourself or to us about the Marx quote. "For whatever reason...." denotes your denial of the truth that no deception was intended when I provide the source for anyone to see. If partial quotes and leaving off context makes one a liar, then this forum is full of liars. Just a post or two ago, I noted that YOU had left off context when accusing me of deception. The only false take on this quote has always been yours, but you are so pathetic in looking for any small victory that you keep trying to deceive this forum with this Marx quote nonsense.
If you had any intellectual curiosity, you would accept the existing evidence or refute it rather than hauling those goalposts all over the place. Still waiting for YOUR first hand evidence for your goofy fiction that Southerners were too dumb to know they were damaging slavery or that the Northerner Congressmen knew better what the South wanted than the Southerners did. Still waiting on any evidence from you gleaned from the historian that you cower behind. Evidently, you have a gaping double standard where "first and evidence" is only required from an opponent, not from you.
It's good to never take lessons from an idiot.....have you got the self awareness to realize that's the reason that you've never been asked? And that's the reason I've spent so much time correcting your idiotic fairy tale. You're welcome.
Once again, I can make you less stupid, but you have to stop resisting.
Looks like I've struck a nerve.....that's one of the oldest wingnut moves around. It's painful for you, I'm sure. Two for the price of one. Maybe some day your vivid imagination about what you've supposedly done to other people will align with the real world, but I wouldn't wait around for it. There' nothing bad about being a conformist if one conforms with what one believes to be true. I've never left either, which doesn't prove much of anything. You crushed him in the same place you crush everyone--in your own mind. The same place where you rack up those dozens of "victories" and "wins." How impressive that is. People can go back and look at the Marx quote and your link. For whatever reason, you never applied what your link said to Marx's quote. You quoted him out of context to make it sound as if Marx himself said that the tariff was the cause of the war when he said no such thing. Basically you lied about Marx's actual position. Did you think by misquoting a guy as leftist as leftist can be it would prove that even leftists denied slavery was the cause? Who knows. The whole deception was rather bizarre. Proof southerners were dumb? They ended slavery in four years when their goal was to preserve it for decades. Sounds dumb to me. Again, one can't refute evidence that doesn't exist, like the supposed promise made in 1862 to abolish slavery in return for intervention. You haven't corrected anything. All you've done is to parrot the Lost Cause fantasy and wrote herd, brainwashed, critical thinker, northern lie in almost every post, as if using those words actually proves anything except how weak your argument is. You don't have any evidence so you keep on repeating nonsense words. You can only make people more stupid, but no one is listening to your absurdities. So we all can remain smart. Now, this cultist is so rattled, he has started repeating what I said....what are you, a parrot? More likely a meat puppet, regurgitating what he's been told to say. Like most who believe the Northern lie, he seems incapable of making an intelligent case as to WHY he conforms to Northern propaganda that has been clearly refuted. Other than following the herd, why do you believe what you believe? You seem incapable of making your own case, so why should you be taken seriously here? Man up and show us that you can think for yourself.
Not much hope of that, since all you seem to do is deny and ignore the evidence that I've repeatedly put in front of you. It's easy for me to declare victory when all you do is roll over and show us your belly when you hear a challenge. As an example of the misinformation that we get from these cultists, in the Vox article that was linked earlier, was this statement:
Seidule's argument is especially compelling because he's mostly just quoting Confederates' own words. He points out, for instance, that the secession document in every Confederate state stated that protecting the South's "peculiar institution" (that is, slavery) was its reason for leaving the Union.
That, folks, is an out and out lie. Only four states out of eleven issued Declarations of Causes, and only three indicated slavery as a primary cause. There were thirteen Ordinances of Secession and not a single one stated that protecting slavery was the state's reason for leaving the Union. In all of those thirteen Ordinances, the phrase "slaveholding states" (denoting an area) was seen just three times.
Lies like the one above is why Northern lie cultists should not be trusted or believed. They will not be honest about the facts that tend to contradict their narrative, nor will they be tolerant of any dissenting views, regardless of the evidence that supports those views.
Has anyone noticed that this fool keeps saying "for whatever reason" as he makes his false accusation against me? Looks like he's not honest enough to admit that he already knows the "reason" which is that there never was any deception or lie from me, a fact that is clearly evidenced by the inclusion of the link IN THE SAME POST AS THE QUOTE. As I said above, don't ever trust these Northern lie cultists. But have pity on this pathetic little conformist.....he's so desperate for a victory that he has developed a fetish over this Marx quote.
As for as your alleged "proof" of Southern dumbness, you failed miserably again because your reasoning is so one dimensional and subjective. You can't fathom that perhaps the better, more logical explanation is that Southerners weren't dumb at all and really did know that they were putting slavery at risk (if a couple of amateurs like us can see that risk, the people that were living it in 1860 surely did) and damaging slavery by seceding. Those Southerners were willing to sacrifice slavery BECAUSE it wasn't their cause, just a symptom of the federal power disease. Slavery put at risk by these Confederates because their real cause was independence and sovereignty from an increasingly authoritarian, parasitic central government.
And I've presented plenty of unchallenged evidence to you of the 1862 CSA offer to end slavery, so claiming that the evidence "doesn't exist" is another attempt to deceive the forum and move the goalposts. By arbitrarily demanding "first hand" evidence as your latest excuse, you show us that your failure to dispute the existing proof.
I've presented far more evidence here than you ever have, so claiming that I've presented none is yet another falsehood to cover your failure here to make a case. It's impossible for you to "remain smart"; you'd have get there first and no one that is stupid enough to believe that slavery was the South's cause is eligible for that milestone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2023 21:43:05 GMT
How is this thread 47 pages long? It feels 47 years long.
It seems like the South ain't the only ones that won't stop fighting the Civil War.
I can't believe you all are even giving the revisionist arguments air and the legitimacy of a response.
And yet, here you are, adding to it. Folks are drawn to this topic because, deep down in the secret recesses of their minds, they know that the establishment narrative that claims that the South was fighting to preserve slavery is full of lies. It's the quintessential American example of Plato's "noble lie"
I'm not revising; I'm correcting.
Oh don't worry! I haven't read any of this thread.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,221
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 21, 2023 21:45:05 GMT
And yet, here you are, adding to it. Folks are drawn to this topic because, deep down in the secret recesses of their minds, they know that the establishment narrative that claims that the South was fighting to preserve slavery is full of lies. It's the quintessential American example of Plato's "noble lie"
I'm not revising; I'm correcting.
Oh don't worry! I haven't read any of this thread.
Whew, I'm glad to hear that. After all, it's intended for adults only.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2023 21:49:50 GMT
Oh don't worry! I haven't read any of this thread.
Whew, I'm glad to hear that. After all, it's intended for adults only.
Carry on de la Mancha.
I'll be over here smoking a bong and spending time on more fruitful pursuits.
|
|