|
Post by HolyMoly on Sept 24, 2023 21:57:50 GMT
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.
Struck a nerve, rattled. Oh no. What's next? Shattered? "Mindreading" wingnuts are so funny. I didn't realize you had a copyright on certain words. Why? Because the evidence for slavery as the cause is more powerful and convincing than that against. It's easy for you to declare victory for the same reason it's easy for anyone to do so. The victory is only in your mind and nowhere else. I could not figure out the reason you would post a link that contradicts your Marx quote. And then write in all caps that they were both from the same post. That only makes you look more deceptive. Why you lied about it is hard to understand. Independence from a go'vt that they thought (mistakenly) wanted to abolish their right to own people. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. They were stupid and arrogant enough to think they could win their war for slavery. They turned out to be wrong. Your evidence consists of a letter from Border State Congressmen and newspaper rumors, second hand stuff. Asking for first hand evidence is not arbitrary, it's what most history is based on. That you don't have that evidence is not my problem. Your evidence is Lost Cause fantasies and rumors. It's easy to remain smart. Just disregard all the Lost Cause absurdities and you'll be fine. Last, but not least, it's not nice to insult meat puppets.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,173
Member is Online
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 25, 2023 14:12:59 GMT
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.
Struck a nerve, rattled. Oh no. What's next? Shattered? "Mindreading" wingnuts are so funny. I didn't realize you had a copyright on certain words. Why? Because the evidence for slavery as the cause is more powerful and convincing than that against. It's easy for you to declare victory for the same reason it's easy for anyone to do so. The victory is only in your mind and nowhere else. I could not figure out the reason you would post a link that contradicts your Marx quote. And then write in all caps that they were both from the same post. That only makes you look more deceptive. Why you lied about it is hard to understand. Independence from a go'vt that they thought (mistakenly) wanted to abolish their right to own people. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. They were stupid and arrogant enough to think they could win their war for slavery. They turned out to be wrong. Your evidence consists of a letter from Border State Congressmen and newspaper rumors, second hand stuff. Asking for first hand evidence is not arbitrary, it's what most history is based on. That you don't have that evidence is not my problem. Your evidence is Lost Cause fantasies and rumors. It's easy to remain smart. Just disregard all the Lost Cause absurdities and you'll be fine. Last, but not least, it's not nice to insult meat puppets. So, this meat puppet believes what he believes because "the evidence for slavery as the cause is more powerful and convincing than that against", but he becomes intellectually impotent when asked to make his own case here based on that belief. Like most fanatics, he imagines that what he believes is sacred and cannot be challenged in any way, because that's what he's been told to believe. He's been told that it's all settled and he should make sure that it stays that way, even though his beliefs are based on a lie. But we get his deer-in-the headlights attitude when his fairy tale is actually challenged with clear facts and evidence.
Instead, we get the HolyMoly equivalent of "NUH-UH!!!" as the only response....are you incapable of making your own case here? Is your mind that so flaccid that you have performance issues when asked to support your beliefs?
The link proves that I didn't lie about the Marx quote, but since your whole set of beliefs are based on the lie that slavery was the South's cause, no one is surprised by your Marx quote fetish.
There was no threat to slavery in anything that Lincoln or the Republicans were saying prior to 1860, but the ascendance of the Republicans did threaten the balance of power that held Clay's American System in check until that 1860 contest. The only stupid, arrogant and wrong claim here is that it was ever about something as superficial and simplistic as slavery when it went far deeper than that. Once again, you show us you've been fed soundbites, not history. Claiming it was a "war for slavery" ignores that fact that secession damaged slavery immediately (and Southerners knew it) and full slavery protection (Corwin) was utterly rejected. Combine that with a full slave importation ban and a brand new prohibition against protective tariffs in the Confederate Constitution and you look pretty stupid claiming that slavery was their cause. But you seem pretty comfortable spewing your brainwashing without supporting what you claim, so not a surprise.
Dismissing the clear and undeniable evidence at hand for the CSA offer to abolish slavery still looks like a mindless goalpost move on your part, when you hypocritically make the "South was stupid" and "Northerners knew better" guesses without ANY evidence at all.
And there's no possibility that you can "remain smart", meat puppet, since you were never there to start with. You'd get a little less stupid if you'd objectively consider what I've told you, but you display even less capability for open minded analysis.
You're little more than a follower of the herd; when I ask why you're going that way, we get nothing from you except praise for the herd. When I suggest a better, less conformative path for you, I get scolded for daring to question the herd's sense of direction.
If you think you can dispute that assessment, all you have to do is stop running away and make your case. You'll lose if you try, of course, but it would be a more honorable effort than your current "NUH-UH!!!" tactic of denials. I'll be here if you ever have the courage to give it a try.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,355
|
Post by thor on Sept 25, 2023 15:06:36 GMT
Struck a nerve, rattled. Oh no. What's next? Shattered? "Mindreading" wingnuts are so funny. I didn't realize you had a copyright on certain words. Why? Because the evidence for slavery as the cause is more powerful and convincing than that against. It's easy for you to declare victory for the same reason it's easy for anyone to do so. The victory is only in your mind and nowhere else. I could not figure out the reason you would post a link that contradicts your Marx quote. And then write in all caps that they were both from the same post. That only makes you look more deceptive. Why you lied about it is hard to understand. Independence from a go'vt that they thought (mistakenly) wanted to abolish their right to own people. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. They were stupid and arrogant enough to think they could win their war for slavery. They turned out to be wrong. Your evidence consists of a letter from Border State Congressmen and newspaper rumors, second hand stuff. Asking for first hand evidence is not arbitrary, it's what most history is based on. That you don't have that evidence is not my problem. Your evidence is Lost Cause fantasies and rumors. It's easy to remain smart. Just disregard all the Lost Cause absurdities and you'll be fine. Last, but not least, it's not nice to insult meat puppets. So, this meat puppet believes what he believes because "the evidence for slavery as the cause is more powerful and convincing than that against", but he becomes intellectually impotent when asked to make his own case here based on that belief. Like most fanatics, he imagines that what he believes is sacred and cannot be challenged in any way, because that's what he's been told to believe. He's been told that it's all settled and he should make sure that it stays that way, even though his beliefs are based on a lie. But we get his deer-in-the headlights attitude when his fairy tale is actually challenged with clear facts and evidence.
Instead, we get the HolyMoly equivalent of "NUH-UH!!!" as the only response....are you incapable of making your own case here? Is your mind that so flaccid that you have performance issues when asked to support your beliefs?
You're evidently too dishonest to admit that the link proves that I didn't lie about the Marx quote, but since your whole set of beliefs are based on the lie that slavery was the South's cause, no one is surprised by your Marx quote fetish.
There was no threat to slavery in anything that Lincoln or the Republicans were saying prior to 1860, but the ascendance of the Republicans did threaten the balance of power that held Clay's American System in check until that 1860 contest. The only stupid, arrogant and wrong claim here is that it was ever about something as superficial and simplistic as slavery when it went far deeper than that. Once again, you show us you've been fed soundbites, not history. Claiming it was a "war for slavery" ignores that fact that secession damaged slavery immediately (and Southerners knew it) and full slavery protection (Corwin) was utterly rejected. Combine that with a full slave importation ban and a brand new prohibition against protective tariffs in the Confederate Constitution and you look pretty stupid claiming that slavery was their cause. But you seem pretty comfortable spewing without supporting what you claim, so not a surprise.
Dismissing the clear and undeniable evidence at hand for the CSA offer to abolish slavery still looks like a mindless goalpost move on your part, when you hypocritically make the "South was stupid" and "Northerners knew better" guesses without ANY evidence at all.
And there's no possibility that you can "remain smart", meat puppet, since you've were never there to start with. You'd get a little less stupid if you'd objectively consider what I've told you, but you display even less capability for open minded analysis.
You're little more than a follower of the herd; when I ask why you're going that way, we get nothing from you except praise for the herd. When I suggest a better, less conformative path for you, I get scolded for daring to question the herd's sense of direction.
If you think you can dispute that assessment, all you have to do is stop running away and make your case. You'll lose if you try, of course, but it would be a more honorable effort than your current "NUH-UH!!!" tactic of denials. I'll be here if you ever have the courage to give it a try.
In which Paleo admits the Southern States seceded because of the threat to slavery.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,173
Member is Online
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 25, 2023 17:15:58 GMT
So, this meat puppet believes what he believes because "the evidence for slavery as the cause is more powerful and convincing than that against", but he becomes intellectually impotent when asked to make his own case here based on that belief. Like most fanatics, he imagines that what he believes is sacred and cannot be challenged in any way, because that's what he's been told to believe. He's been told that it's all settled and he should make sure that it stays that way, even though his beliefs are based on a lie. But we get his deer-in-the headlights attitude when his fairy tale is actually challenged with clear facts and evidence.
Instead, we get the HolyMoly equivalent of "NUH-UH!!!" as the only response....are you incapable of making your own case here? Is your mind that so flaccid that you have performance issues when asked to support your beliefs?
You're evidently too dishonest to admit that the link proves that I didn't lie about the Marx quote, but since your whole set of beliefs are based on the lie that slavery was the South's cause, no one is surprised by your Marx quote fetish.
There was no threat to slavery in anything that Lincoln or the Republicans were saying prior to 1860, but the ascendance of the Republicans did threaten the balance of power that held Clay's American System in check until that 1860 contest. The only stupid, arrogant and wrong claim here is that it was ever about something as superficial and simplistic as slavery when it went far deeper than that. Once again, you show us you've been fed soundbites, not history. Claiming it was a "war for slavery" ignores that fact that secession damaged slavery immediately (and Southerners knew it) and full slavery protection (Corwin) was utterly rejected. Combine that with a full slave importation ban and a brand new prohibition against protective tariffs in the Confederate Constitution and you look pretty stupid claiming that slavery was their cause. But you seem pretty comfortable spewing without supporting what you claim, so not a surprise.
Dismissing the clear and undeniable evidence at hand for the CSA offer to abolish slavery still looks like a mindless goalpost move on your part, when you hypocritically make the "South was stupid" and "Northerners knew better" guesses without ANY evidence at all.
And there's no possibility that you can "remain smart", meat puppet, since you've were never there to start with. You'd get a little less stupid if you'd objectively consider what I've told you, but you display even less capability for open minded analysis.
You're little more than a follower of the herd; when I ask why you're going that way, we get nothing from you except praise for the herd. When I suggest a better, less conformative path for you, I get scolded for daring to question the herd's sense of direction.
If you think you can dispute that assessment, all you have to do is stop running away and make your case. You'll lose if you try, of course, but it would be a more honorable effort than your current "NUH-UH!!!" tactic of denials. I'll be here if you ever have the courage to give it a try.
In which Paleo admits the Southern States seceded because of the threat to slavery. ^Thor lying again. He's too stupid to know that Clay's American System had nothing to do with slavery and everything to do with over-sizing and adding more power to the federal government for the economic/infrastructure benefit of the Congressional majority region and at the expense of the minority region.
This pussy hat eunuch is nothing but a shit-in-the-grass animal and should be designated as the forum pet (but I vote him back to the pound).
Grow a new pair and educate yourself, dumbass.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,173
Member is Online
|
Post by Paleocon on Apr 12, 2024 13:06:48 GMT
Bump for 2024....and because it really is important to remember the ugly tyranny of the Union:
On April 12th, 1861... 163 years ago.....Confederate forces in the sovereign and independent state of South Carolina defended themselves against the terrorist like threats from armed Union occupiers that were infesting the unfinished (and long unoccupied until Dec. 1860) Fort Sumter.
For four long months after the legal secession of South Carolina, the Confederates had asked these foreign invaders to leave peacefully.
Right up to the week previous to April 12th, the Confederates had actually sold food to the fort's occupants, despite the fact that the Yankees had their cannon trained on the sovereign waters and defenses of their very patient hosts.
After Lincoln's promise to the S.C. Governor that the Yankees would force the harbor with an armed convoy (first Union ship arrived at 3 am on the 12th), the Confederates were finally forced, after four months of seeking a peaceful solution, to end the illegal Northern menace with the April 12th barrage.
No one was killed on either side during the bombardment. Actually, the Union commander, Major Anderson, killed the first Yankees of the war by insisting on a 100 gun salute after the surrender. During the salute, two of his own Yankee troops in the fort were killed.
On this day, remember all of those brave Southern soldiers and their defense of their homes and their rights against the Yankee occupiers and against Dear Leader Lincoln, who was determined to subjugate anyone who dared to break away from the overreach of the monstrous central authority that he dreamed of creating (he succeeded).
If you doubt what Lincoln was about, look up Clay's American System and look up Lincoln's desire to colonize blacks back to Africa.
|
|
sokpupet
Legend
Go Dark Brandon!
Posts: 5,069
|
Post by sokpupet on Apr 12, 2024 13:34:40 GMT
The war could be argued to have been about State’s Rights. That may be true; but it is an esoteric explanation. The core of the conflict was Slavery. Slavery was the backbone of the South’s economical foundation. To start a fire, you must have fuel, oxygen & heat. The South didn’t want that taken away. Slavery just happened to be one component. After, and during, the war, I believe everyone found out that what the Southern man had been doing to the Slaves and how horrible they were treated that freeing the slaves became a more important postscript. Sure, the South felt it was about government overreach; but what the government was reaching for ended up freeing slaves.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,173
Member is Online
|
Post by Paleocon on Apr 12, 2024 14:42:43 GMT
The war could be argued to have been about State’s Rights. That may be true; but it is an esoteric explanation. The core of the conflict was Slavery. Slavery was the backbone of the South’s economical foundation. To start a fire, you must have fuel, oxygen & heat. The South didn’t want that taken away. Slavery just happened to be one component. After, and during, the war, I believe everyone found out that what the Southern man had been doing to the Slaves and how horrible they were treated that freeing the slaves became a more important postscript. Sure, the South felt it was about government overreach; but what the government was reaching for ended up freeing slaves. Not even close, but it's OK. No one expects a liberal like you to have a clue about reality. Your little fairy tale about the noble heroes of the North came South and discovering some horrible treatment of slaves is garbage....slave states that remained in the Union continued to keep their slaves during the war and slavery was well known long before the war. Lincoln started making it all about slavery in desperation when he was losing on the battlefield; he wanted to ship blacks back to Africa rather than let them live among us
Let's try a little exercise to see what it was really all about. When a radical step like secession occurs, the best indicator of the cause for that step is to look at what changes after the divorce.
Did slavery where it existed change at all due to slavery? No.
Did the Southern demand for slavery in U.S. territories change or improve? Secession made this impossible, so a negative change to slavery from secession.
Did the Southern efforts to get fugitive slaves back from the North change? Secession made this impossible, so another negative change to slavery from secession.
Did the Union propose to protect slavery in the Constitution? Yes, and it was utterly rejected, an odd reaction if the core of the conflict really was slavery.
Was the longevity of slavery improved by secession? Most agreed that secession, even without war, would have caused Southern slavery to end more quickly vs. remaining in the Union.
Did the tariffs imposed on imports change? In a big way, with the South outlawing protective tariffs and offering a lower import tariff vs. the Northern duties.
Did the taxation of the South change? Again, quite a bit, since the revenue came from the higher tariffs imposed by the Northern controlled Congress
Did the internal improvement outlay imbalance change? The South was no longer subsidizing the road, rail canal, etc. projects disproportionately in the North.
Did the legislative imbalance that empowered Northern interests get resolved? The South, legally seceded, separated itself from the Northern machinations for U.S. Senate majorities.
Once again, the best measure of the cause of secession is what did and didn't change for the better.
|
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,738
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 12, 2024 15:35:39 GMT
Well damn .. The cesspool's sprung a leak again ..
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,355
|
Post by thor on Apr 12, 2024 21:28:50 GMT
In which Paleo admits the Southern States seceded because of the threat to slavery. ^Thor lying again. He's too stupid to know that Clay's American System had nothing to do with slavery and everything to do with over-sizing and adding more power to the federal government for the economic/infrastructure benefit of the Congressional majority region and at the expense of the minority region.
This pussy hat eunuch is nothing but a shit-in-the-grass animal and should be designated as the forum pet (but I vote him back to the pound).
Grow a new pair and educate yourself, dumbass.
|
|