Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (51675)	8/16/1999 5:09:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

There is no over- riding authority, by the nature of the act of secession. At that point, there is no choice but the resort to arms to decide the issue....

To: The Philosopher who wrote (51675)	8/16/1999 5:13:00 PM
From: Constant Reader	Respond to of 108807

They are probably busy rewriting history. <<Where are the historians on this thread when we need them??>>

To: The Philosopher who wrote (51675)	8/16/1999 9:34:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

The Southern secession was a brilliant withdrawal from an unbeatable position. They snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. You must read about the Crittenden Compromise. The proposed 13th Amendment (not the one that was adoped in 1865) would have made slavery legal everywhere in the United States, enforced the fugitive slave acts, and forbidden any attack on slavery. The Constitution could not be amended to outlaw slavery. I believe it represented majority opinion in the North. I believe that had the South displayed any wisdom at all, they would have stayed and adopted the 13th Amendment. I cannot imagine anything worse happening in human history.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (51675)	8/17/1999 12:17:00 AM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 108807

...the power grab by the federalists who even then were dominating over the states rights advocates... What pre-Civil War power grab and domination of federalism over states rights are you talking about? All I can think of at the moment is the use of federal power to protect slave property within non-slave states. Not a federal power the south would object to, I think. Re. the abolitionists trying to destroy slavery, they hadn't been very effective. The pro-slavery side had been winning that contest. Bruce