thor
Legend
Posts: 17,428
|
Post by thor on Apr 18, 2024 18:47:50 GMT
So, an emphasis on racial identity by blacks in the 21st century is because white people forced them to do it? Sounds kinda stupid when I put it that way, doesn't it?
The "shared trauma" has mostly been self inflicted for the last 50 years as the black community has made its own cultural decisions. THEY have destroyed black families, not us. They have created a crime epidemic in their communities, not us. The "social issues" that you mention were not prevalent in the black community before the mid to late 1960s.
And past trauma is no excuse for them to be racists. And I never said that race was their only consideration, just their primary consideration.
It certainly can't be disconnected from that recent history, much of which is still within living memory. Those effects compound. It certainly fosters a shared sense of us vs them (right or wrong). This us vs them context goes beyond mere skin color and is rooted in something much deeper, violence, dehumanization and generational trauma. How that affects a black person's sense of self and tribe is not something that we can simply reduce to racism. I can't understand how this history *wouldn't* impact the current situation. We don't get to wipe the slate clean. Past informs present. Where you see racism I see sociology, cause and effect. It shouldn't be any other way. Consider the long term impact of redlining, of not having access to credit, or a good education, or a good job, not to mention all the little things like dirty looks or not getting to use the public pool, etc. All that social stuff, big and small, adds up and plays a part in the story. I don't think there is something peculiar about black people that just renders them especially conscious of skin color, or race; I think there is a historical process playing out connected to their status as less than humans or more recently, as second class citizens. And some of the racist framework is still embedded in our society, working its magic. So the story isn't over. The good guys didn't win. They just moved the ball forward some. Speaking of 'redlining' (although I am not sure what else this phenomena I observed could be called), many years ago I was heading east through Atlanta on I-20. I needed to stop for the night and got off near Peachtree (looking at Google Maps shows it to be a lot different that I remember it). Anyhow, the difference between the north and south sides of I-20 were staggering. |
|
|
|
Post by RinsePrius on Apr 18, 2024 18:56:40 GMT
It certainly can't be disconnected from that recent history, much of which is still within living memory. Those effects compound. It certainly fosters a shared sense of us vs them (right or wrong). This us vs them context goes beyond mere skin color and is rooted in something much deeper, violence, dehumanization and generational trauma. How that affects a black person's sense of self and tribe is not something that we can simply reduce to racism. I can't understand how this history *wouldn't* impact the current situation. We don't get to wipe the slate clean. Past informs present. Where you see racism I see sociology, cause and effect. It shouldn't be any other way. Consider the long term impact of redlining, of not having access to credit, or a good education, or a good job, not to mention all the little things like dirty looks or not getting to use the public pool, etc. All that social stuff, big and small, adds up and plays a part in the story. I don't think there is something peculiar about black people that just renders them especially conscious of skin color, or race; I think there is a historical process playing out connected to their status as less than humans or more recently, as second class citizens. And some of the racist framework is still embedded in our society, working its magic. So the story isn't over. The good guys didn't win. They just moved the ball forward some. Speaking of 'redlining' (although I am not sure what else this phenomena I observed could be called), many years ago I was heading east through Atlanta on I-20. I needed to stop for the night and got off near Peachtree (looking at Google Maps shows it to be a lot different that I remember it). Anyhow, the difference between the north and south sides of I-20 were staggering. You're speaking about "urban renewal" and the racial motivation to segregate black and brown neighborhoods. We're living with the effects of those decisions today. Another example of just the very thing I am talking about being embedded in our society, just below the radar. Here is a great overview of the topic: www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OWSre7dNbY |
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,428
|
Post by thor on Apr 18, 2024 19:05:51 GMT
Speaking of 'redlining' (although I am not sure what else this phenomena I observed could be called), many years ago I was heading east through Atlanta on I-20. I needed to stop for the night and got off near Peachtree (looking at Google Maps shows it to be a lot different that I remember it). Anyhow, the difference between the north and south sides of I-20 were staggering. You're speaking about "urban renewal" and the racial motivation to segregate black and brown neighborhoods. We're living with the effects of those decisions today. Another example of just the very thing I am talking about being embedded in our society, just below the radar. Here is a great overview of the topic: www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OWSre7dNbYI have seen that guy's videos before, He does good work! |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Apr 21, 2024 18:24:01 GMT
Is Igor claiming to be a super duper scientist while making statements that have have no documentation, studies, or reports or anything that can possibly back up what he's saying again? No.. But how dare he muscle in on your territory.. I've never claimed to be a scientist. Igor claims to be a scientist that knows more than anyone not trained in "tha science!" I consistently post links to studies, reports, and documentation. Igor refuses to do so. The ground. Your face. That has to hurt.  |
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,779
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 21, 2024 19:48:11 GMT
No.. But how dare he muscle in on your territory.. I've never claimed to be a scientist.
LMAO.. You needn't worry.. People don't even see you as sentient ..
|
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Apr 21, 2024 19:51:24 GMT
I've never claimed to be a scientist.
LMAO.. You needn't worry.. People don't even see you as sentient ..
Captain Faceplant, "Nu uh!! U b dum!" *Fart, drool, spit* Do better Captain Faceplant. This is pathetic. |
|
DaveJavu
Legend
Posts: 2,906
Member is Online
|
Post by DaveJavu on Apr 21, 2024 19:53:38 GMT
LMAO.. You needn't worry.. People don't even see you as sentient ..
Captain Faceplant, "Nu uh!! U b dum!" *Fart, drool, spit* Do better Captain Faceplant. This is pathetic. You're a cockroach. |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Apr 21, 2024 19:54:16 GMT
Captain Faceplant, "Nu uh!! U b dum!" *Fart, drool, spit* Do better Captain Faceplant. This is pathetic. You're a cockroach. You're french. |
|
DaveJavu
Legend
Posts: 2,906
Member is Online
|
Post by DaveJavu on Apr 21, 2024 19:57:18 GMT
You're doubling down on being a cockroach. |
|
|
|
Post by johnnybgood on Apr 21, 2024 20:15:46 GMT
Just goes to show that the extreme right does not own science denial. You'll see left-wing anti-vaxxers, and lefties who believe in HAARP and directed energy weapons. There are also those that believe 9/11 was an inside job (jet fuel can't melt steel!) It can weaken it. Idiots need to explain one thing. Why the hell wouldn't the "Inside job" place the blame on Iraq? Would have made more sense to waist our time and lives in that 4th world country. |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Apr 21, 2024 20:30:08 GMT
You're doubling down on being a cockroach. And you're french. There is nothing more disgusting, filthy, weak and hideous as a frenchy. You poor thing. |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,219
|
Post by Paleocon on Apr 22, 2024 15:45:02 GMT
So, an emphasis on racial identity by blacks in the 21st century is because white people forced them to do it? Sounds kinda stupid when I put it that way, doesn't it?
The "shared trauma" has mostly been self inflicted for the last 50 years as the black community has made its own cultural decisions. THEY have destroyed black families, not us. They have created a crime epidemic in their communities, not us. The "social issues" that you mention were not prevalent in the black community before the mid to late 1960s.
And past trauma is no excuse for them to be racists. And I never said that race was their only consideration, just their primary consideration.
It certainly can't be disconnected from that recent history, much of which is still within living memory. Those effects compound. It certainly fosters a shared sense of us vs them (right or wrong). This us vs them context goes beyond mere skin color and is rooted in something much deeper, violence, dehumanization and generational trauma. How that affects a black person's sense of self and tribe is not something that we can simply reduce to racism. I can't understand how this history *wouldn't* impact the current situation. We don't get to wipe the slate clean. Past informs present. Where you see racism I see sociology, cause and effect. It shouldn't be any other way. Consider the long term impact of redlining, of not having access to credit, or a good education, or a good job, not to mention all the little things like dirty looks or not getting to use the public pool, etc. All that social stuff, big and small, adds up and plays a part in the story. I don't think there is something peculiar about black people that just renders them especially conscious of skin color, or race; I think there is a historical process playing out connected to their status as less than humans or more recently, as second class citizens. And some of the racist framework is still embedded in our society, working its magic. So the story isn't over. The good guys didn't win. They just moved the ball forward some. What utter woke garbage. Do you think blacks are helpless children who are the first people in history to ever have a hard life? Do you not understand how racist it is to treat blacks as if they are incapable of rising above the past? The giants in the black community in the United States were products of the pre-Civil Rights era of American black history. After the first woke revolution in the 1960s, black leadership has been ugly and divisive.
I see them and treat them as adults and expect EQUAL responsibility regardless of the imagined status of permanent victimhood.
Do you not realize how many individuals in history faced hardships far greater than what you've listed for blacks above? I've seen poor people get a great education because they fought to learn, and made a good living because they struggled to better themselves.
Dirty looks? No pool? THOSE are examples of trauma to you?
But, I'll humor you if you'd like. If history dictates a group's future, let's go back further to the African continent. A bloody, cruel savage place during the time of the slave trade, it's still a bloody, cruel savage place today....no progress at all. How far back do you want to go to makes excuses for them?
|
|
|
|
Post by RinsePrius on Apr 23, 2024 12:19:38 GMT
It certainly can't be disconnected from that recent history, much of which is still within living memory. Those effects compound. It certainly fosters a shared sense of us vs them (right or wrong). This us vs them context goes beyond mere skin color and is rooted in something much deeper, violence, dehumanization and generational trauma. How that affects a black person's sense of self and tribe is not something that we can simply reduce to racism. I can't understand how this history *wouldn't* impact the current situation. We don't get to wipe the slate clean. Past informs present. Where you see racism I see sociology, cause and effect. It shouldn't be any other way. Consider the long term impact of redlining, of not having access to credit, or a good education, or a good job, not to mention all the little things like dirty looks or not getting to use the public pool, etc. All that social stuff, big and small, adds up and plays a part in the story. I don't think there is something peculiar about black people that just renders them especially conscious of skin color, or race; I think there is a historical process playing out connected to their status as less than humans or more recently, as second class citizens. And some of the racist framework is still embedded in our society, working its magic. So the story isn't over. The good guys didn't win. They just moved the ball forward some. What utter woke garbage. Do you think blacks are helpless children who are the first people in history to ever have a hard life? Do you not understand how racist it is to treat blacks as if they are incapable of rising above the past? The giants in the black community in the United States were products of the pre-Civil Rights era of American black history. After the first woke revolution in the 1960s, black leadership has been ugly and divisive.
I see them and treat them as adults and expect EQUAL responsibility regardless of the imagined status of permanent victimhood.
Do you not realize how many individuals in history faced hardships far greater than what you've listed for blacks above? I've seen poor people get a great education because they fought to learn, and made a good living because they struggled to better themselves.
Dirty looks? No pool? THOSE are examples of trauma to you?
But, I'll humor you if you'd like. If history dictates a group's future, let's go back further to the African continent. A bloody, cruel savage place during the time of the slave trade, it's still a bloody, cruel savage place today....no progress at all. How far back do you want to go to makes excuses for them?
No one is saying black people are helpless. We are talking about burdens that have been imposed on them and the way the effects compound and reach into the future. If you can't acknowledge that, I don't think we have much to discuss. |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,219
|
Post by Paleocon on Apr 23, 2024 13:05:56 GMT
What utter woke garbage. Do you think blacks are helpless children who are the first people in history to ever have a hard life? Do you not understand how racist it is to treat blacks as if they are incapable of rising above the past? The giants in the black community in the United States were products of the pre-Civil Rights era of American black history. After the first woke revolution in the 1960s, black leadership has been ugly and divisive.
I see them and treat them as adults and expect EQUAL responsibility regardless of the imagined status of permanent victimhood.
Do you not realize how many individuals in history faced hardships far greater than what you've listed for blacks above? I've seen poor people get a great education because they fought to learn, and made a good living because they struggled to better themselves.
Dirty looks? No pool? THOSE are examples of trauma to you?
But, I'll humor you if you'd like. If history dictates a group's future, let's go back further to the African continent. A bloody, cruel savage place during the time of the slave trade, it's still a bloody, cruel savage place today....no progress at all. How far back do you want to go to makes excuses for them?
No one is saying black people are helpless. We are talking about burdens that have been imposed on them and the way the effects compound and reach into the future. If you can't acknowledge that, I don't think we have much to discuss. Like most liberals, you're ready to run when we challenge your allegedly "settled" narrative. No burdens have been imposed on them that have not been common burdens placed on so many other people in the past. Somehow, others have had the integrity and courage not to whine about being victims and demand special treatment for past wrongs. They rose above their past and excelled by their own merits. Quite a few of the folks that came to America were escaping horrific brutality and intolerance in Europe.
|
|
|
|
Post by RinsePrius on Apr 23, 2024 13:11:47 GMT
No one is saying black people are helpless. We are talking about burdens that have been imposed on them and the way the effects compound and reach into the future. If you can't acknowledge that, I don't think we have much to discuss. Like most liberals, you're ready to run when we challenge your allegedly "settled" narrative. No burdens have been imposed on them that have not been common burdens placed on so many other people in the past. Somehow, others have had the integrity and courage not to whine about being victims and demand special treatment for past wrongs. They rose above their past and excelled by their own merits. Quite a few of the folks that came to America were escaping horrific brutality and intolerance in Europe.
I am interested in discussion but I don't see a real challenge in your post. I see a denial of reality. (ditto for the Lost Cause debate) Show me a thoughtful and rational disagreement and I'll respond. Urban Renewal was a burden imposed that is continuing to harm communities today. Red-ling is another. |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,219
|
Post by Paleocon on Apr 23, 2024 13:30:59 GMT
Like most liberals, you're ready to run when we challenge your allegedly "settled" narrative. No burdens have been imposed on them that have not been common burdens placed on so many other people in the past. Somehow, others have had the integrity and courage not to whine about being victims and demand special treatment for past wrongs. They rose above their past and excelled by their own merits. Quite a few of the folks that came to America were escaping horrific brutality and intolerance in Europe.
I am interested in discussion but I don't see a real challenge in your post. I see a denial of reality. (ditto for the Lost Cause debate) Show me a thoughtful and rational disagreement and I'll respond. Urban Renewal was a burden imposed that is continuing to harm communities today. Red-ling is another. Run, little leftist, run. If your "reality" is so strongly grounded and settled, you should be able to easily engage and take a fellow like me to the woodshed. But you flee instead, showing us your woke credentials but little critical thinking or debating skills. Do you not see how arrogant it is to haughtily decide that the subject of black culture is settled and that the only reality is your woke version? You must be kin to Freon Bale
And please step up if you think you'd have even a slim chance against me in the "Lost Cause debate"; I'd love to show you how clueless you are on that subject anytime you're feeling brave.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,428
|
Post by thor on Apr 23, 2024 20:22:39 GMT
I am interested in discussion but I don't see a real challenge in your post. I see a denial of reality. (ditto for the Lost Cause debate) Show me a thoughtful and rational disagreement and I'll respond. Urban Renewal was a burden imposed that is continuing to harm communities today. Red-ling is another. Run, little leftist, run. If your "reality" is so strongly grounded and settled, you should be able to easily engage and take a fellow like me to the woodshed. But you flee instead, showing us your woke credentials but little critical thinking or debating skills. Do you not see how arrogant it is to haughtily decide that the subject of black culture is settled and that the only reality is your woke version? You must be kin to Freon Bale
And please step up if you think you'd have even a slim chance against me in the "Lost Cause debate"; I'd love to show you how clueless you are on that subject anytime you're feeling brave.
You get your ass kicked every time you trot out your Lost Cause bullshit, Paleocuck. Explain: Once again, since you have no defense: Article I Section 9(4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,219
|
Post by Paleocon on Apr 23, 2024 20:38:23 GMT
Run, little leftist, run. If your "reality" is so strongly grounded and settled, you should be able to easily engage and take a fellow like me to the woodshed. But you flee instead, showing us your woke credentials but little critical thinking or debating skills. Do you not see how arrogant it is to haughtily decide that the subject of black culture is settled and that the only reality is your woke version? You must be kin to Freon Bale
And please step up if you think you'd have even a slim chance against me in the "Lost Cause debate"; I'd love to show you how clueless you are on that subject anytime you're feeling brave.
You get your ass kicked every time you trot out your Lost Cause bullshit, Paleocuck. Explain: Once again, since you have no defense: Article I Section 9(4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Now, in addition to lying about Confederate history, you're lying about what has and hasn't happened here on this forum. You've always been on the receiving end of every ass kicking and it's likely caused you to have more brain damage than before.
So one half sentence added to a Confederate Constitution for clarity has triggered you to conclude that this one little blurb represents the entirely of the Confederate Constitution?
I've already shown you a tariff article in the CSA Constitution that was brand new for the Confederates. It prohibited protective tariffs, the perverted kind of Northern tariff that was at the heart of the ACTUAL cause of secession and war.
But you're too f*cking stupid to catch onto such details while you go full on racist being triggered by the word "slave" (that got you so excited, you leaked a little, didn't you, boy?).
No wonder they stuck your stupid ass on the front line in the military; your lack of intelligence and common sense made you disposable. And you haven't changed one bit.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,428
|
Post by thor on Apr 23, 2024 20:48:46 GMT
You get your ass kicked every time you trot out your Lost Cause bullshit, Paleocuck. Explain: Once again, since you have no defense: Article I Section 9(4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Now, in addition to lying about Confederate history, you're lying about what has and hasn't happened here on this forum. You've always been on the receiving end of every ass kicking and it's likely caused you to have more brain damage than before.
So one half sentence added to a Confederate Constitution for clarity has triggered you to conclude that this one little blurb represents the entirely of the Confederate Constitution?
I've already shown you a tariff article in the CSA Constitution that was brand new for the Confederates. It prohibited protective tariffs, the perverted kind of Northern tariff that was at the heart of the ACTUAL cause of secession and war.
But you're too f*cking stupid to catch onto such details while you go full on racist being triggered by the word "slave" (that got you so excited, you leaked a little, didn't you, boy?).
No wonder they stuck your stupid ass on the front line in the military; your lack of intelligence and common sense made you disposable. And you haven't changed one bit.
You retard. Slavery was protected in their Constitution because of its value to them, dumbshit. Further, much of their Constitution was lifted from the Constitution of the USA, Stupid Boy. So they were not merely morally bankrupt, but intellectually as well. Probably due to all the inbreeding. |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,219
|
Post by Paleocon on Apr 23, 2024 21:03:19 GMT
Now, in addition to lying about Confederate history, you're lying about what has and hasn't happened here on this forum. You've always been on the receiving end of every ass kicking and it's likely caused you to have more brain damage than before.
So one half sentence added to a Confederate Constitution for clarity has triggered you to conclude that this one little blurb represents the entirely of the Confederate Constitution?
I've already shown you a tariff article in the CSA Constitution that was brand new for the Confederates. It prohibited protective tariffs, the perverted kind of Northern tariff that was at the heart of the ACTUAL cause of secession and war.
But you're too f*cking stupid to catch onto such details while you go full on racist being triggered by the word "slave" (that got you so excited, you leaked a little, didn't you, boy?).
No wonder they stuck your stupid ass on the front line in the military; your lack of intelligence and common sense made you disposable. And you haven't changed one bit.
You retard. Slavery was protected in their Constitution because of its value to them, dumbshit. Further, much of their Constitution was lifted from the Constitution of the USA, Stupid Boy. So they were not merely morally bankrupt, but intellectually as well. Probably due to all the inbreeding. They made few changes in their Constitution protecting slavery, while adding some radically different changes on other topics. By your idiotic "logic", each clause unrelated to slavery can be labelled as the South's cause, right?
Wanna watch me launch this moron's ass into orbit? Here goes:
Article I – The Legislature
1.1 CSA: All powers are “delegated” to the Central government.
1.1 US: All powers are “granted” to the Central government.
At law, what is ‘granted’ is gone; what is ‘delegated’ is on a leash and can be taken back at any time, for any reason. Granted powers are to the grantor lost because granted powers embed sovereignty in the recipient. The recipient now owns the granted powers. Therefore, the 1787 Constitution created not only an umbrella Central Government but an entirely New Sovereign Government, a distinct and separate government from the States, one that with the usual behaviours of human nature will engage in conflicts with the States till the country ended in Nationalism.
In contrast, delegated powers create a Central Government on a leash, a true Federal government that precludes the creation of a National, consolidated government. “Dual sovereignty”, the curse of common sense and human pursuits, is gone. Questions of who has power to do what is distinctly settled.
The CSA foundational belief of government is sovereignty resides first within each individual, parcel to our creation by our Creator. It is always personal and must never be yielded nor divided. Sovereignty is the creator of identity. It is independent, raw power: your power to be you, mine to be me and ours to be us. See: www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/understanding-jefferson-and-sovereignty/
1.2.1 CSA: “… electors (voters) in each State shall be citizens of the Confederate States … no person of foreign birth, not a citizen of the Confederate States, shall be allowed to vote for any officer, civil or political, State or Federal.”
1.2.1 US: Qualifications for voters were left to the States to decide so long as they were the same for both State and national elections.
The CSA had seen the manipulations of politicians to stuff ballot boxes, especially with new immigrants to America. The CSA was for cultural assimilation before you could vote. An individual must be a citizen of its own State and the Central government to vote.
Some argue this is splitting sovereignty from CSA States. Yet it grants no power to the Central government. Rather it is a vigilant guard against the political greed of professional politicians.
1.2.5 CSA: “The House of Representatives … shall have the sole power of impeachment except any judicial or other Federal officer, resident and acting solely within the limits of any State, may be impeached by a vote of two-thirds of both branches of the (State’s) Legislature …”
US: Does Not Exist
A State’s use of impeachment power against a Central government official residing and acting solely within that State’s borders is a newly expressed American constitutional power. It again demonstrates the CSA honoring the sovereignty of the peoples in every State.
1.6.2 CSA: Congress may pass legislation granting “the principal officer in each executive department” a seat on the floor of both Houses, with the privilege of discussing any measures pertaining to his department.
US: Does Not Exist
A move toward parliamentary government. Pushed by Alexander Stephens and directly taken by him from British parliamentary procedure, Stephens hoped to provide clarity and immediacy to communications between the Executive and Legislative branches.
1.7.2 CSA: The President has Line-item veto in all appropriation bills. A two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate overturns the veto.
US: Does Not Exist
Meant to provide greater accountability from the President and put Congressional spending on a tighter leash.
1.8.1 and 1.8.3 are Anti-Mercantilist Clauses, that is, the CSA was anti-corporate welfare. The US Constitution does not express support or negation of any particular economic policy.
1.8.1 CSA: Congress has power “… to lay and collect taxes, imposts and excises for revenue necessary to pay the debts, provide for the common defense, and carry on the Government of the Confederate States …
US: Does Not Exist
“Revenue necessary” is a limiting clause requiring the government to be frugal and not financially expansive. It heralds financial accountability.
The General Welfare Clause is again eliminated (as in the Preamble) and substituted with “…to carry on the Government of the Confederate States”. The CSA Founders meant to restrain Congress’s urge and imagination for spending to expand and preserve political clout. Hamilton had argued the General Welfare Clause allows the Central Congress to allocate monies to any endeavor they believe is worth the money. For a politician, especially the professionals, that’s Nirvana.
1.8.1 CSA: “… no bounties … shall be granted from the Treasury…”
US: Does Not Exist
No subsidies to special interests, commercial or private.
1.8.1 CSA: No duties or taxes on importations from foreign nations to “promote or foster any branch of industry”.
US: Does Not Exist
Low tariffs are mandatory. No commercial or private protectionism. When the CSA Constitution was broadcast in mid-March, 1861, this was the flare that a Tariff War would begin affecting ports and markets from Boston to New Orleans. Northern newspapers with half an economic brain saw clearly the depressive financial impact this would bring to the North. Once friendly newspapers urging the Republican Party not to wage war, now began to demand invasion.
1.8.3 CSA: “To regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States …; but neither this, nor any other clause contained in the Constitution shall ever be construed to delegate the power to Congress to appropriate money for any internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce” except along waterways and harbors. Taxes will be laid on businesses using these improvements “to pay costs and expenses”.
1.8 US: Granted Congress power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States. It did not grant Congress power to finance internal improvements.
A Constitutional command that the CSA Congress and Courts refrain from expansive commercial interpretations. No Corporate welfare. No Internal Improvements except for waterways and harbors but these to be re-paid through taxation on the businesses using the facilities and improvements.
The US Constitutional command is only that the US Congress set regulations for foreign or domestic commerce. There is no command forbidding “internal improvements”. The absence of such a command, left to reside in the memory of the 1787 participants, provided the field for severe contention between North and South from our onset in 1789.
1.8.4 CSA: “To establish … uniform laws of … bankruptcies … but no law of Congress shall discharge any debt contracted before the passage of the same.”
1.8 US: Required uniform laws of bankruptcy but no prohibition against discharge centered on the time a debt is incurred.
The CSA command that discharge of bankruptcies will apply only to debts incurred after passage of the applicable Congressional statutes is new. This makes commercial and governmental contracts more honest: they could depend less on the shield of political favor because no debt can be forgiven retroactively.
1.8.7 USA: “… the expenses of the Post Office Department, after” March 1, 1863 shall be paid out of its own revenues.”
US: Does Not Exist.
Today we may only understand this as a measure to control postal spending. The CSA Founders meant much more. They wanted to be done with the endless funnel of money into the US Post Office to cradle the cost of political and corporate advertisements. It was and is still today common to use Post Office subsidies to lessen the postal cost of business and political activity. As example, in the Georgia Declaration of Secession, January 29, 1861: “These interests, in connection with the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their business from the payment of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury under the name of postal deficiency.”
1.9.6 CSA: A tax or duty may be laid on exports if two-thirds of both Houses approve.
1.9 US: Explicitly denies power to tax or place a duty on exports.
The CSA adopts Madison’s supermajority proposal on Export Taxation refused by the US Founders in 1787.
1.9.9 CSA: All monies appropriated by Congress shall be by a vote of two-thirds in each House EXCEPT a) if the monies have been requested by the President, b) the Congress is paying its own expenses, or c) the government is paying claims adjudicated against the Confederacy.
US: Does Not Exist. Appropriation bills begin only in Congress and their approval are assumed to be by majority.
While the CSA allowed passage of appropriation bills by majority if offered by the President, it upped the approval barrier for appropriations begun in Congress, a severe restraint on Congress using public monies for private or political gains. This CSA preference for Presidential proposals looks to more effective administration and governmental accountability.
1.9.10 CSA: Appropriation bills must specify its exact amount and purpose. “… no extra compensation to any public contractor, officer, agent or servant after such contract shall have been made or service rendered”.
US: Does Not Exist
The CSA’s continued concern for fiscal responsibility: a constitutional prohibition voiding all Overruns on any Central government contract, whether only just signed, still in progress or the work already completed.
1.9.12 -1.9.19 are the first 8 US amendments, unchanged
1.9.20 CSA: “Every law, or resolution having the force of law, shall relate to but one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title”.
US: Does Not Exist.
Forbids Omnibus bills. Forbids logrolling. Forbids pork barreling.
Article II – The Executive
2.1.1 CSA: A President shall hold office for one (1) six (6) year term. Not eligible for a 2nd term – ever.
2.1 US: Allows a 4-year term with no prohibition for succeeding terms anytime into the future. For example, Grover Cleveland had two terms but they were not in succession (1885 – 1889 and 1893 – 1897).
Like the US Founders, the CSA loathed party politics. Here the CSA Founders attempted to piecemeal political power so it cannot aggrandize perennially but conform to the changing tide of political opinion. While the term of office was extended, no further term is allowed – ever. The CSA meant to diminish the impact of a President’s political machinery. It is a constitutional move against political parties.
2.1.4 CSA: Someone ineligible to be President is ineligible to be Vice President.
US: Does Not Exist.
The CSA Founders understood that one way to discipline Presidents is to forbid their presence near that office again.
2.2.3 CSA: The President may remove executive department heads and diplomats at will. Other civil officers only when their services are “unnecessary, or for dishonesty, incapacity, inefficiency, misconduct or neglect of duty.” These must be reported to the Senate with explanations.
US: Does Not Exist
A constitutional step toward a Civil Service. Civil Service would not begin in the US until 1883 under President Arthur.
2.2.4 CSA: The President may not appoint anyone to a national position during the Senate’s recess if already rejected by the Senate for that same office.
2.2 US: The President may grant a recess appointment even though the Senate while in session had rejected the appointee.
The CSA change strengthens the control of Congress over Presidential appointments requiring legislative approval.
Article III – The Judiciary
3.1.1 The CSA and the US set up identical constitutional mandates for a Supreme Court and lower Central government courts. But the politics played out differently.
Despite the power to establish a Supreme Court, the CSA never established a Supreme Court. CSA District courts were established within the same geographic boundaries as the US courts had been.. A distrust of courts as undemocratic institutions, rooted in Jefferson’s belief that courts too often were “sappers” usurping power from the people, was too great.
The sticking point was CSA review of State courts, in particular, CSA appellate review of State Supreme Courts. A CSA Supreme Court could easily violate State sovereignty as the US Supreme Court had already.
3.2.1 CSA: The judicial power does not extend to cases in Equity.
3.2.1 US: The judicial power extended to both law and equity.
Equity originated in Church law (Chancery courts) to counter the harshness of civil law. Equity today is most often written into the law statutes themselves and in rules of procedure as extraordinary remedies in particular cases. This merging had begun before 1860.
The CSA Founders understood equity was a way for courts to expand law statutes beyond the intent of a legislature and beyond the wishes of the people. “The Court of Chancery was traditionally a court of conscience, applying principles which were regarded as having an ultimate origin in the law of nature – … In giving wider scope to equitable principles, they were also applying principles of public utility or social policy, founded upon the protection of natural rights”. George W. Keeton in English Law, The Judicial Contribution, David & Charles, Newton Abbot, Great Britain,1974, p. 113. By refusing equity law in the Central government’s courts, the CSA was restricting the already evident power in US courts to do as they thought best for society.
It’s important to realize this CSA mandate did not terminate equity in State courts. Rather the “conscience of the people of a State” was preserved to them. The people of Georgia might not wish what the people of Texas might. The people of a State would decide their conscience before the world and their decision becomes inviolate.
3.2.1 CSA: The CSA judicial power does not extend to a lawsuit between a State and citizens of another State unless a State is the plaintiff …
US: The US judicial power does not extend in any suit in law or equity begun by citizens of another State or subject of a foreign State.
CSA 3.2.1 is an amalgam of US 3.2.1 and the US 11th Amendment. It adds that the CSA courts can hear cases where a State is a plaintiff against an out-of-State defendant. It’s a recognition that States can be prejudiced against outsiders. It was a move to enhance judicial fairness.
Article IV – The States
4.3.1 CSA: “Other States may be admitted into this Confederacy by a vote of 2/3 of the whole House of Representatives and 2/3 of the Senate, the Senate voting by States …”
4.3 US: Does not specify a numerical vote.
The CSA was protecting cultural and economic harmony. It recognized times change and social orders can fluctuate. But it also understood that there must be a protected common ground of culture and centering personal and public courtesies. So the vote to bring a new State into the CSA requires a higher threshold than a mere majority as the US allowed.
Article V – Amendments
5.1.1 CSA: The General Congress on the demand of any three (3) States must summon a Constitutional Convention. The Congress cannot call a Convention on itsown. The Constitutional Convention must vote, one vote for each State, on only the amendments the demanding States sent to Congress. A majority vote sends the amendments to the peoples of the States. Two thirds (2/3) of the States must approve by a majority vote in their legislatures or by their People in Convention, whichever method is required by the Constitutional Convention.
5.0 US: The General Congress must call a Constitutional Convention when two thirds (2/3) of both Houses deem it necessary, or if two-thirds (2/3) of the States call for a Convention. Proposed amendments are made for the first time in the Convention. Amendments are ratified by either a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the legislatures of theStates in the Convention or three-fourths (3/4) vote of States using the People in Convention procedure, whichever mode is approved by the General Legislature.
The CSA requires only 3 States (less than 1/2), not two-thirds of the States, to begin a Constitutional Convention on already specified amendments. The CSA Congress must call for a Convention and the Convention cannot itself bring forth additional amendments. At the Convention a majority vote sends the proposed amendments to the States. Two-thirds of the States must approve for an amendment to become law. Their approval must be by a majority vote in the State legislatures or by the People in Convention whichever procedure the Constitutional Convention calls for.
The CSA Amendment process is far more responsive to the States and is run by the States. It is conducive to relieving problems before they bloom into unbearable and unmanageable crises. It provides a constitutional platform to discuss, argue and solve societal pressures long before they’ve become political monsters.
This is one of two essential changes; the other is the locus of sovereignty.
Article VI – The Confederacy
6.5 CSA: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people of the several States.”
6.6 CSA: “The powers not delegated to the Confederate States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people thereof.”
These are the US 9th and 10th Amendments with additions shown in emphasis. The additions make explicit, again, that sovereignty resides in the people of each State exclusively – not in an amorphous “We, the People”.
|
|
