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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (713092)	5/3/2013 4:52:03 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579308

and it was the north invaded a country that didn't do a thing to them

To: tejek who wrote (713092)	5/3/2013 5:06:30 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1579308

The South had a very justifiable position for secession, the same argument the colonies had against the British which led to the American Revolution. The North had control of the vote and was instituting policies that went against the South such as tarifs that disproportionately hurt the South. The South saw that a successful system of plantation economy was being doomed by irresponsible policy imposition by the North. The South demanded changes that were in their best interests but could not get positive results through the political process so secession seemed the only practical method to achieve independent freedom from the increasingly tyranical North. Unfortunately they were also willing to deny that same to a whole race of people and were unable to see the inherent contradiction in their cause. Other nations were in the process of figuring out rational solutions to eliminating human slavery and given time (which they didn't have) the South would have done the same. Is General Sherman one of your heros?