Unable to load image
Reported by:

Why are foreign rightoids that post about American politics so dumb on average?

Don't get me wrong, American rightoids are dumb too, but there's like a special kind of r-sluration with foreign rightoids.

Why is a bong here trying to argue to me the civil war wasn't over slavery?

64
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's the same guys that make those sigma male videos

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Anybody that gets involved in another countries politics in any capacity is a humongous r-slur that should be laughed at :marseynails: :marseynails: :marseynails:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I hope russia invades europe and cuts their internet

!slots25

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:marseysipping:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's alien to them, europoor leftoids are just as r-slurred. When any europoor speaks it's like they weren't even paying attention to the converstatoin.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Probably because you think lead paint chips are a delicious snack.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Here is your daily dose of fluffiness courtesy of AmerifatLumberFanatic! To unsubscribe please send 1750 dramacoin to @OwO.

![](/images/164321213868.webp)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Wonderwall? Wonderwall?!? WONDERWALL

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This thread got RATIO'D

:marseylongpost:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don’t know, why are you so dumb?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

most of the world are rightoids.

and no, liking bussy does not make you a leftoid.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Unless you've set foot outside of North America for a period longer than two weeks your opinion doesn't matter.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm not a rightoid pizza, I just hate it when people spew reyerded bs

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The civil war, like all wars, was over money.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Money.... in relation to?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

bussy lmao

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

They often out themselves with commonwealth English spellings. Call them out on why they care so much.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why is a bong here trying to argue to me the civil war wasn't over slavery?

Because they know youll sneed and post a goddammed essay of mad

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why is a bong here trying to argue to me the civil war wasn't over slavery?

Because he is based and redpilled

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It was about the states' rights though! Mostly their rights to have slaves, but still.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah, it was probably state rights, that's why one of their central screech points was the federal government not enforcing the fugitive slave act on northern states.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The War of Northern Aggression was not about slavery and I'm sick of pretending that it was :marseysociety:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

lol he's literally talking about me. glad i got pizza to cope so hard he makes a different thread to complain to a wider audience

here's what i said: https://rdrama.net/post/38855/a-queer-mommys-9-year-old/1241716?context=9#context

all you speak in is handwringing over an imaginary enemy that hates black people and democracy. get real

I can link that Time article about how Democrated candidates were literally texting rioters to stop when it became politically inconveniant, among other things that dumb article said to secure the 2020 election. i literally dont care about what your candidates do to "win" a "democratic" "election". your entire political system is based around voting for one of two choices. not really a democracy when you can only ever elect millionaires

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Lmao that's not all you said, you tried to fricking cite the Simpsons to claim the civil war wasn't over slavery.

The lying about an article you've never read was the cherry on top.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The lying about an article you've never read was the cherry on top.

you literally cite r/badhistory and the 1619 project. yet you complain about how much you hate CRT like a mongoloid. pick a side, r-slur

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

My side is "being right."

Maybe go learn some basic history before you argue shit you have not a basic understanding of.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

My side is "being right."

you're an excellent parody

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:marseyyawn: !slots100

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

rightoids

Answered your own question king, anyone to bases their identity off politics is an utter fricking idiot.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Isn't that a common thing people say about the civil war. "It was about states rights". But it was the states right to keep slavery. Mississippi's announcement literally says "only blacks can work in the sun" lol.

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. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Bro the state rights argument doesn't even make sense. One of the primary things the south was angry over was the federal government not enforcing the fugitive slave act on northern states.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeh I doubt the average non-American could understand the nuances of the civil war or how it's taught.

It's surprising seeing the civil war referred to as "the war of northern aggression" from people who grew up in the south. You'd think facts like the war announcements would make it clear slavery was the reason.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Pizzashill what do you like to do outside of the internet. I want to get to know you better as a person

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseycthulhu:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots5

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots5

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots10

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots5

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots10

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots15

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots30

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots5

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

It’s bc your buzzfeed explainer way of looking at nuanced issues isn’t something europoors are used to imo

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why is a bong here trying to argue to me the civil war wasn't over slavery?

Erm, because the only state that signed onto the Confederacy explicitly because they wanted to own people was Texas. Racism was a tool to explain how denying people their rights was acceptable but the causes of the war were economic, the southern states could not afford to pay their workforce and paying the slaves would and did mean lasting economic depression forcing them to rely on handouts from the rich northern states, a fact that probably did not slip the mind of the oh so noble northerners. Originally North and South were both as prosperous as each other but the engine of the souths prosperity was slave labour, all the other states that weren't Texas signed onto the Confederacy to avoid Northern economic domination and they lost and have been the poor states ever since. Racism was a convenient way to justify the state of affairs but it didn't cause anything, if the south had been in a position to shift their economy from agriculture to speculative stock trading or something hardly anyone would of given a shit about the slaves.

Its not our fault you don't know your own history and have let a bunch of historical revisionists tell you the only reason things happen is racism or sexism.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is genuinely insane, you are historically illiterate, full stop, irrefutably the war was over slavery.

Every single state that left the union cited slavery, the confederacy as a whole cited slavery.

You're essentially repeating lost cause mythology:

https://essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/tariffs-and-the-american-civil-war.html

The most annoying part about you guys is your attempts to mask your own historically illiterate drivel by declaring everyone with a basic understanding of the topic "ignorant of history."

Like, I can not stress this enough, if you do not believe the civil war was over slavery you need to go re-take 8th grade history.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah sure, tariffs, that's what I was talking about, not the forcibly restructure of a whole nations economy that left half of it at a disadvantage, only one specific issue that you can handily declare has nothing to do with anything. You know no one buys this shit when you libs do it, re-interpret what people are saying to mean something unrelated, disprove your own strawman then declare yourself the victor.

Stay r-slurred Pizzashill, not that you have a choice otherwise.

8th grade history

No thanks, as shit as the education system is in my country at least it't not the burgastani one.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah sure, tariffs, that's what I was talking about, not the forcibly restructure of a whole nations economy that left half of it at a disadvantage, only one specific issue that you can handily declare has nothing to do with anything. You know no one buys this shit when you libs do it, re-interpret what people are saying to mean something unrelated, disprove your own strawman then declare yourself the victor.

Slavery was the only issue in America capable of causing a civil war. Like, what I am saying to you is basic history, I don't know where you've learned otherwise but it certainly wasn't from historical scholarship.

No thanks, as shit as the education system is in my country at least it't not the burgastani one.

I mean you're throwing out lost cause talking points, so I think it is.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

lost cause talking points,

I'm still waiting for you to actually disprove my first point. You may continue to flail about trying to avoid the question if you like.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't even know what you're trying to say. Like, if you're saying what I think you are, that'd still be slavery.

Here, let's try this.

because the only state that signed onto the Confederacy explicitly because they wanted to own people was Texas.

This isn't even true, every state that left the union and joined the confederacy cited slavery. The confederacy as a whole cited slavery. The famous cornerstone speech for example:

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon itβ€”when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."

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.

So I'm baffled as to how you think it was only Texas.

Racism was a tool to explain how denying people their rights was acceptable but the causes of the war were economic, the southern states could not afford to pay their workforce and paying the slaves would and did mean lasting economic depression forcing them to rely on handouts from the rich northern states

I mean obviously, slavery was economic in many ways, but that doesn't mean the confederacy didn't also subscribe to racial supremacy as a framework as well. They straight-up called it the natural order and a moral truth, that's well beyond economics.

Racism was a convenient way to justify the state of affairs but it didn't cause anything, if the south had been in a position to shift their economy from agriculture to speculative stock trading or something hardly anyone would of given a shit about the slaves.

This right here? I don't even know what you're trying to argue with. Nobody is arguing the civil war was over morality and "racism."

But the civil war was over slavery. The confederacy was deeply racist and believed they had a moral and natural right to own black people. The reason I was confused by your comment is it wasn't making a real point.

The reason I said you're engaging in lost cause mythology is because you're seemingly trying to decouple slavery from racism.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

IT WAS ABOUT STATES RIGHTS!
:fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

confederate flag pfp

admitted to being a republican

claims the civil war was about states rights

Why am I not surprised?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I’m only registered as a Republican because the Democrat Party is largely ineffectual, so I’d rather at least vote in Republican primaries.

I haven’t voted for a Republican since McCain though.

I went Gary Johnson over Killary/Trump, and didn’t vote in the most recent election, like a true centrist.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

HIDE BONG THREADS

IGNORE BONG POSTS

DO NOT REPLY TO BONGPOSTERS

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

K

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

*Why are people that post about politics so dumb on average?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That’s actually wuite baffling. Usually rightoids outside the only country that matters make leftists here seem reasonable. Good for that neighbor.

:#marseydetective:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Are you still going to Alaska? I have a few nice coats that I'm trying to sell. You can have your choice of a Mountain Hardware, Orvis or Woolrich.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The civil war was about states rights, not about slavery.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

They really sperg out when you prove slavery was a failing business venture that the β€œβ€β€banks””” at the time wanted out of. Nooooo they stopped slavery bc they were the good guys :soymad:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The state of American education.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think the nuance people miss is that it was totally about slavery but only because the north used banning slavery as a cudgel through which to potentially decimate the southern economy and subject the confederate states to a more near total northern control than they were already under.

Had they decided to ban anything else on which the economy was dependent the reception would probably have been just as violent. But thats not the way the chips fell because their econony happened to be based on something morally abhorrent.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Exactly this. It's what Thatcher did in the UK in the 1980s. The working classes in the northern parts of the UK were getting a bit too big for their boots, demanding things such as living standards, so Thatcher shut down all the mines, closed all of Britain's industry and fricked the working classes out of their existence.

It's easy when you're a comfortable middle-class armchair intellectual to dismiss all these, very real, people as racist caveman scum, but when the elite can just whip away an entire economy and devastate entire demographics all while not hurting their own pockets, it's hardly possible to get a real understanding of the true motives.

It'd be like like codecels today being outsourced entirely to India and future armchair historians dismissing them as racist for opposing it. No, they're fighting for their living.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I mean it's less "outsourcing the jobs" and more just shutting down the mine since none of the voters are going unemployed for it.

But its the same history repeating itself last year, a majority of people unaffected by an issue voting for restrictions to be imposed on the little guy from a moral soapbox that they can afford because they work from home. I wouldn't dare compare the moral atrocities of slavery to the spread of disease, it's just simply the complete lack of empathy to the reprecussions of those actions

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't know, the cornerstone speech seems to be going well beyond economics:

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon itβ€”when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."

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.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I like to entertain the idea that the general will of the voters is not represented by one speaker. I have no quotes or speeches to back it up but it seems to me the threat of removing the entire labor force of thr agriculture industry in one fell swoop is a much bigger motivator than "i hate black people lol" but both can absolutely be true at the same time.

I like to talk about the nuance of it because reddit leftists like to wield "it was about slavery" in a way that paints a broad brush over hundreds of thousands of people with no hope of ever owning a single slave who would apparently rather die than see one on the street.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is a common misconception, Lincoln wasn't going to end slavery in one swoop, Slavery was already dying because the expansion of slavery was banned and no new slaves could be imported.

I like to talk about the nuance of it because reddit leftists like to wield "it was about slavery" in a way that paints a broad brush over hundreds of thousands of people with no hope of ever owning a single slave who would apparently rather die than see one on the street.

This is conflating micro causes with macro causes. When we say the civil war was over slavery we mean slavery was the macro cause, whatever the individual soldiers thought isn't all that relevant.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

99% of people saying it's about slavery absolutely don't know about the other causes, and genuinely think they went to war solely over darkey hate. You're giving the average r-slur giving their opinion on poltics way too much credit. Simplifying it down to slavery on a marco level is still a disservice to the paradigm shift that that era was for the federal government, and the idea of what a state is.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

All of the other causes are linked explicitly too slavery, there was no issue in the country capable of causing the civil war other than Slavery.

Like, this is literally basic history.

The bigger issue is the historically illiterate don't understand the secondary causes or how they also tie into slavery.

Any competent historian will tell you this, the only people that keep trying too harp on "secondary causes of the civil war" are idiots trying too over-complicate something too make themselves seem smarter than they are.

Trans lives matter.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Thanks for putting it better than any of my :marseylongpost: drafts would have ended up being.

There is no singular cause for conflicts, each has a long laundry list of grievances that culminate over years until they spill over into the streets. Everyone wants to fight but it just so happens that whatever r-slur was lucky enough to get elected just beforehand gets to write the history books according to their personal priorities.

Yes the leadership and populace was filled to the brim with racist ideology, absolutely. That fact however, has been constantly used consistently since that time period to preach to and belittle an entire portion of the country as lessers. Banning slavery was a moral, just cause, but was also a growing more educated urbanized northern population flexing an ever strengthening voting power to assert moral superiority over what was an already weakening south. It was clear to them that this trend would continue for other things as well.

Look at the Tariff of Abominations for starters

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

😴😴😴

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm not American.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The state of whatever you are education.

You better be trolling.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:marseytroublemaker:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.


Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.