The Confederacy was a group of rebels fighting for their freedom who ultimately just wanted The North to stay the fuck out of their business. The Nazis were a genocidal regime who set out to conquer the world.
No, it's not. Especially considering you're claiming the South just wanted the north to stay out of their business.
Weird how a group that was so interested in state rights didn't seem to respect the rights of northern states and literally wanted to enforce federal law on them:
But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.
For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.
She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?
The controlling majority of the Federal Government, under various pretences and disguises, has so administered the same as to exclude the citizens of the Southern States, unless under odious and unconstitutional restrictions, from all the immense territory owned in common by all the States on the Pacific Ocean, for the avowed purpose of acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions of Texas and her sister slaveholding States.
Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. [Applause.] This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
Again, you're just digging yourself deeper, you absolute retard. They wanted to leave so The North couldn't fuck with their business, as you've literally just stated twice.
Don't worry Pizza, I know all about your nonsense and know that you're a smooth brain. I've been posting here a long time. But just think about it for a second. Think about what point B represents - The North wants to abolish slavery. The South does not. The South tries to leave so that they're not forced to abolish it by The North. Plain and simple. When you get through middle school, maybe your highschool teacher can explain it to you.
A) You claimed the south just wanted the North to stay out of their business.
My proof your argument isn't up to snuff:
But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
If, as you say, they just wanted the north to leave them alone, why are they citing northern states ignoring federal law as their reasoning for leaving the union?
B) The Confederacy was founded and based on racial supremacy and the right to own other human beings as property.
If you support the Confederacy, if you take pride in anything they did, anything they believed, you are outright endorsing that worldview. The Confederate flag is no better than a Nazi flag.
When you get through middle school, maybe your highschool teacher can explain it to you.
Why do you idiots constantly try to say shit like this as if academics or historians support your side of this argument? They don't, they never have. do I have to run down the list of formal, academic sources saying you are wrong, is that something you'd like?
So The North forcing The South to do something they didn't want to, and The South deciding to try and leave, isn't The South fighting for their freedom? Because it sure as shit sounds like it to me. Every history professor I've ever had, one of which was highly respected and actually published in Harvard, agrees with the fact that The South left because they wanted to keep slaves and The North would not allow it. It's one of the most basic facts of the Civil War. If you can't get it through your head, I feel sorry for you.
So The North forcing The South to do something they didn't want to, and The South deciding to try and leave, isn't The South fighting for their freedom?
How was the North forcing the south to do anything? By forcing the south, do you mean passing laws in their own states that conflicted with the slave trade?
Let me copy paste this to you again:
But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
This is them literally citing Northern states ignoring federal laws as their reasoning. This is not them saying they were forced to do anything, it's them saying "hey, you guys, in your own states, are no longer condoning slavery, so we're going to leave and start a war."
That's them literally invoking the nullification of federal law, in other states as their reasoning.
Every history professor I've ever had, one of which was highly respected and actually published in Harvard, agrees with the fact that The South left because they wanted to keep slaves and The North would not allow it. It's one of the most basic facts of the Civil War. If you can't get it through your head, I feel sorry for you.
You're being absurdly fucking misleading you ape. Nice try though, you're trying to flip the argument into something it never was. I don't know who the fuck you think you're fooling, I don't know who the fuck you think is buying this drivel, but it isn't me. The general consensus is that the south left because they wanted to own slaves and the north was increasingly becoming hostile to slavery in their own states.
Either way, if you want to own other human beings as property, if you want to found your country on racial superiority, you are no better than nazis. You aren't freedom fighters. you're tyrannical morons interested in oppressing others.
God you're easy to egg on. I'm sure I could get you to write a book on the subject if I kept this going long enough. I state a simple fact about the Civil War and you sperg out for paragraphs and paragraphs, it's almost like you're a bigot or something. 🤔
let's say he wasn't pretending and is actually retarded. This boy just wrote 3000 words in a sourced essay arguing what could legitimately, unironically be considered a retard.
Next time you encounter a retard in the wild, I want you to begin arguing politics with him like you're fucking noam chomsky. You will then understand what you just witnessed.
So The North forcing The South to do something they didn't want to, and The South deciding to try and leave, isn't The South fighting for their freedom?
The Mississippi declaration of secession cited the North's "[nullifying] the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union" and "[advocating] negro equality, socially and politically" as reasons for seceding from the union.
The declaration of secession cited northern states refusing to enforce a federal law, the very things that the southern states thought they had a right not to follow.
Yeah, and instead of being hypocritical about it and just choosing not to enforce the law they were opposed to, they decided to try and leave the nation and create their own.
They said that the federal government was violating their rights by (hypothetically at a future date) forcing them to follow a law that they did not support. They did not think that they had violated the rights of the northern states by forcing them to follow a law that they disagreed with, and in fact thought that the northern states had been violating the constitution by refusing to enforce the law.
The federal laws that the southern states were complaining about did not apply in any southern states. They applied only in federal territories, which the federal government has sole sovereignty over. There is no evidence that the northern states would have outlawed slavery in the southern states in any way other than a constitutional amendment.
The point is that the southern and northern states weren't even equally hypocritical with regard to following federal law. The northern states ignored federal law in their own states, while the southern states demanded to be able to ignore federal law outside of their own states. Even if they had been equally hypocritical, the North would've still been morally justified.
I'm sure everyone who flies it today wants to keep slaves and secede from The Union, they're definitely not just proud of their Southern heritage. Also everyone who flies the Mexican flag is secretly an Aztec waiting for the right time to build a pyramid to sacrifice hearts to the sun god.
Lol minding aside the "Confederate Flag" is a bastard version of the naval jack of the CSA that only came roaring back in popular culture to protest integration... let us remember the final CSA flag was nice, crisp, and white.
ww2 wasn't about securing german living room so they didn't end up starving, and deporting or exterminating all jews, slavs, and degenerates. it was about the right of the aryan race to take your land by force so they could farm it and the freedom to gas the heebs and degenerates and vodka niggers. if you think otherwise your public education has been cucked by the jews
69 comments
1 AutoModerator 2019-07-03
do not comment or vote in linked threads
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1 SnapshillBot 2019-07-03
The people involved here probably don't even respect bussy all that much.
Snapshots:
I am just a simple bot, *not** a moderator of this subreddit* | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
What makes the Confederate flag non-analogous to the Nazi flag?
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
The Confederacy was a group of rebels fighting for their freedom who ultimately just wanted The North to stay the fuck out of their business. The Nazis were a genocidal regime who set out to conquer the world.
1 yangpede 2019-07-03
I hope to god this is satire.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
It's actually history, you'd know if you went to school.
1 yangpede 2019-07-03
No, it's not. Especially considering you're claiming the South just wanted the north to stay out of their business.
Weird how a group that was so interested in state rights didn't seem to respect the rights of northern states and literally wanted to enforce federal law on them:
1 LongPostBot 2019-07-03
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/038/094/0a1.jpg
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
The south's primary goal was becoming their own nation so that they could tell The North to fuck off.
1 yangpede 2019-07-03
No, their primary goal was to protect and maintain the insulation of slavery. Their right to own other human beings as property.
And I'll hammer the final few nails in the coffin you historically illiterate rightoid:
1
And one more:
Maybe go to school.
1 LongPostBot 2019-07-03
You can type 10,000 characters and you decided that these were the one's that you wanted.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
Again, you're just digging yourself deeper, you absolute retard. They wanted to leave so The North couldn't fuck with their business, as you've literally just stated twice.
1 yangpede 2019-07-03
No, what I've provided to you is as follows:
A) the south citing northern states violating federal law as their reasoning for leaving. This outright refutes anything you've said here.
B) The southern states blatantly citing slavery and their right to own other human beings as property as their reasoning for leaving the union.
You've been put down. Don't come here to /r/drama spewing your historically illiterate bullshit as if you're in the company of fellow travelers.
You aren't.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
Don't worry Pizza, I know all about your nonsense and know that you're a smooth brain. I've been posting here a long time. But just think about it for a second. Think about what point B represents - The North wants to abolish slavery. The South does not. The South tries to leave so that they're not forced to abolish it by The North. Plain and simple. When you get through middle school, maybe your highschool teacher can explain it to you.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
So you've changed your mind and no longer think the South was fighting for freedom?
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
I'm not sure what you morons are missing. They absolutely were fighting for their freedom. That's literally what I just said.
1 yangpede 2019-07-03
Again, what has been said here.
A) You claimed the south just wanted the North to stay out of their business.
My proof your argument isn't up to snuff:
If, as you say, they just wanted the north to leave them alone, why are they citing northern states ignoring federal law as their reasoning for leaving the union?
B) The Confederacy was founded and based on racial supremacy and the right to own other human beings as property.
If you support the Confederacy, if you take pride in anything they did, anything they believed, you are outright endorsing that worldview. The Confederate flag is no better than a Nazi flag.
Why do you idiots constantly try to say shit like this as if academics or historians support your side of this argument? They don't, they never have. do I have to run down the list of formal, academic sources saying you are wrong, is that something you'd like?
1 LongPostBot 2019-07-03
If only you could put that energy into your relationships
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
So The North forcing The South to do something they didn't want to, and The South deciding to try and leave, isn't The South fighting for their freedom? Because it sure as shit sounds like it to me. Every history professor I've ever had, one of which was highly respected and actually published in Harvard, agrees with the fact that The South left because they wanted to keep slaves and The North would not allow it. It's one of the most basic facts of the Civil War. If you can't get it through your head, I feel sorry for you.
1 yangpede 2019-07-03
How was the North forcing the south to do anything? By forcing the south, do you mean passing laws in their own states that conflicted with the slave trade?
Let me copy paste this to you again:
This is them literally citing Northern states ignoring federal laws as their reasoning. This is not them saying they were forced to do anything, it's them saying "hey, you guys, in your own states, are no longer condoning slavery, so we're going to leave and start a war."
That's them literally invoking the nullification of federal law, in other states as their reasoning.
You're being absurdly fucking misleading you ape. Nice try though, you're trying to flip the argument into something it never was. I don't know who the fuck you think you're fooling, I don't know who the fuck you think is buying this drivel, but it isn't me. The general consensus is that the south left because they wanted to own slaves and the north was increasingly becoming hostile to slavery in their own states.
Either way, if you want to own other human beings as property, if you want to found your country on racial superiority, you are no better than nazis. You aren't freedom fighters. you're tyrannical morons interested in oppressing others.
1 LongPostBot 2019-07-03
K
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
God you're easy to egg on. I'm sure I could get you to write a book on the subject if I kept this going long enough. I state a simple fact about the Civil War and you sperg out for paragraphs and paragraphs, it's almost like you're a bigot or something. 🤔
1 yangpede 2019-07-03
Yeah, no.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
I bet you hate North Koreans too, you bigoted piece of shit.
1 MiltonFriedmanisbae1 2019-07-03
Please don’t stop. See how long you can keep him going
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
I think he caught on.
1 MiltonFriedmanisbae1 2019-07-03
Not before you baited 3000 words out of him.
Think of how long it took him to write all that
1 AlecOzzyHillPitas 2019-07-03
Serious cope.
1 MiltonFriedmanisbae1 2019-07-03
my boy do you know where you are.
let's say he wasn't pretending and is actually retarded. This boy just wrote 3000 words in a sourced essay arguing what could legitimately, unironically be considered a retard.
Next time you encounter a retard in the wild, I want you to begin arguing politics with him like you're fucking noam chomsky. You will then understand what you just witnessed.
1 Quietus42 2019-07-03
I'm really glad I followed this comment chain all the way to the end
1 Anti-GallowBoob 2019-07-03
More cope with being wrong.
You hate to see it
1 Matues49 2019-07-03
Imagine being this retarded
1 MiltonFriedmanisbae1 2019-07-03
Imagine thinking this dude isn’t baiting pizzashill
1 Matues49 2019-07-03
1 MiltonFriedmanisbae1 2019-07-03
i wasn't involved.
1 Momruepari 2019-07-03
The south will rise again ✊✊✊✊
1 Anti-GallowBoob 2019-07-03
Ive never heard the word "business" being used as a synonym for slavery before.
What an interesting dialect you have!
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
The Mississippi declaration of secession cited the North's "[nullifying] the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union" and "[advocating] negro equality, socially and politically" as reasons for seceding from the union.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
Exactly, The South wanted The North to fuck out of their business.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
But apparently the South thought they had a right to interfere with the North.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
How so? All you quoted is a declaration of secession, AKA "fuck this shit, we're out", not "fuck you guys we're coming for you."
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
The declaration of secession cited northern states refusing to enforce a federal law, the very things that the southern states thought they had a right not to follow.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
Yeah, and instead of being hypocritical about it and just choosing not to enforce the law they were opposed to, they decided to try and leave the nation and create their own.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
They said that the federal government was violating their rights by (hypothetically at a future date) forcing them to follow a law that they did not support. They did not think that they had violated the rights of the northern states by forcing them to follow a law that they disagreed with, and in fact thought that the northern states had been violating the constitution by refusing to enforce the law.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
So in other words, as you've said, it went down like this:
South: Follow this federal law please
North: No
North: Follow this federal law
South: No, fuck you, we're leaving
North: Oh no you don't, we're going to fucking invade you and force you to follow our laws
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
The federal laws that the southern states were complaining about did not apply in any southern states. They applied only in federal territories, which the federal government has sole sovereignty over. There is no evidence that the northern states would have outlawed slavery in the southern states in any way other than a constitutional amendment.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
Yeah sure, and South Korea wouldn't force North Korea to follow their ways if the valiant North Koreans didn't have a sufficient deterrent.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2019-07-03
The point is that the southern and northern states weren't even equally hypocritical with regard to following federal law. The northern states ignored federal law in their own states, while the southern states demanded to be able to ignore federal law outside of their own states. Even if they had been equally hypocritical, the North would've still been morally justified.
1 McFluff_TheCrimeCat 2019-07-03
Thanks for letting us all know you’re a complete idiot.
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
Found the over-sensitive prick who can't separate symbols from their origins. The swastika isn't racist, it's a Buddhist symbol!
1 McFluff_TheCrimeCat 2019-07-03
The confederate flag never left it’s racist origins...
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
I'm sure everyone who flies it today wants to keep slaves and secede from The Union, they're definitely not just proud of their Southern heritage. Also everyone who flies the Mexican flag is secretly an Aztec waiting for the right time to build a pyramid to sacrifice hearts to the sun god.
1 Quietus42 2019-07-03
This but unironically
1 KyWy99 2019-07-03
why would anyone be proud of the south its just fent and racism down here
1 Whaddaulookinat 2019-07-03
Lol minding aside the "Confederate Flag" is a bastard version of the naval jack of the CSA that only came roaring back in popular culture to protest integration... let us remember the final CSA flag was nice, crisp, and white.
#Shermanshould'vefinishedthejob
1 respaaaaaj 2019-07-03
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-jtYT5COvU
Marcher Sherman Do It Again!
1 forseti911 2019-07-03
This is your brain on fent.
1 Void-Malign 2019-07-03
Send the clownworldtard back
1 SpacePanther17 2019-07-03
The freedom to enslave people
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
Yes. Smh my head.
1 theboywhocriedcuck 2019-07-03
If the confederate flag still equates to slavery then so does the democratic party..
Imagine being upset that a shoe has a slave era flag on it but still voting for the party that enslaved you. lol.
1 FreeDirlewanger 2019-07-03
white people think they're smart when they say this shit, opioid addiction rots your brain
1 Zero777g 2019-07-03
Oh god, the boomers are invading, Out Out OUT!
1 ChezRoxwel2 2019-07-03
Rightoid mayo seething
1 Alicesnakebae 2019-07-03
mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad mayos mad
1 FreeDirlewanger 2019-07-03
ww2 wasn't about securing german living room so they didn't end up starving, and deporting or exterminating all jews, slavs, and degenerates. it was about the right of the aryan race to take your land by force so they could farm it and the freedom to gas the heebs and degenerates and vodka niggers. if you think otherwise your public education has been cucked by the jews
1 ScroblertMoblert 2019-07-03
See, this guy gets it.
1 ajiibrubf 2019-07-03
MAGACELS OUT OUT OUT OUT