It was easy to foresee that Fauci would instantly seize on the Clinton strategy in front of the Senate Committee currently investigating him for his many crimes over the last 40 years and he did. It comes as no surprise that, acting with the connivance advice of his 6 lawyers, he declined to answer any questions and will never answer for his crime. So, no surprise. The Constitutional scholarclass of nitwits will now hold forth on whether the blanket pardon he accepted deny him his rights against self-incrimination. He'll be dead 80 years before that gets resolved.
The other observation comes from attempting to look into some of the pre-war actions of the Senate and the House in bringing about the greatest effusion of American blood and finding that all questions are immediately dumped into the "slavery did it" category of utter complete and total failure to answer the damned question. I cannot get the google architects of failure to get beyond my total indifference to the issues of slavery as presented by really knowledgeable poseurs on Facebook and give me the source materials from the era. It may come as a surprise but the other really compelling reasons for the War had nothing to do with slavery.
As I recall from my high school studies in Huntsville, AL back in the 70s the War Between the States had a lot to do with the Southern belief that the Northern industrialists owned the Senate lock stock and barrel and were dooming the South to be nothing but a latifundia furnishing tariff revenue to support northern industrial interests like interstate canals and railroads. I'll be damned if I can find any reference to that because all such querries devolve into the ne plus ultra of the damned liberal religion that blames everything on slaves. You know, at some point I thought they would give up but they're just like those people that have spent millennia on blaming the Jews for everything. They will not stop.
I was drawn to look at the latter issue because of the first. When it becomes clear to everyone that there is simply no justice to be found in the law, in the courts, in the government, what naturally happens in any system of government that tolerates that kind of thing? Well, historically it means revolution, secession and war or in the worst cases, it means endless anarchy under an inescapable tyranny.
5 comments:
Or you get another instance of the Mangione effect.
Even Charles Dickens wrote, at the time, that the War for Southern Independence was mainly for financial reasons. The North was strangling the Southern economy.
--Tennessee Budd
Look up The Corwin Amendment. Basically, if ratified, it would have made chattel slavery permanent.
A bit odd that those knuckledragging, brain dead hicks from the Confederacy essentially said "Hell, no. We won't accept an amendment to make slavery permanent. We'll got to war to preserve slavery ...". Or maybe not.
Any book about the War of Northern Aggression will spend the first 100 odd pages discussing the tariffs that priced imported British manufactured goods and others more expensive than manufactured goods originating in the North Eastern states and the taxation that funded the factories and wages of the workers.
Besides, thanks to Eli Whitney's cotton gin and other inventions, slavery was essentially becoming economically obsolete.
Add in the evidence from other sources such as:
The yankees called the Confederates "Rebels", not slave owning bar stewards
Seven slave owning states sided with the North, which if the war was solely about slavery was against their economic interests
Emancipation of the slaves only in the Confederacy in 1863 was introduced because the war needed a cause - it was going badly for the North. Carefully read the Gettysberg address which says nothing about slavery but does state "one nation"
Slavery was only abolished in December 1865, a full 8 months AFTER Lee's surrender at Appomattox. If slavery was the sole cause, why did the North not abolish slavery before or at the start of the war?
After Appomattox, Lincoln said "Now we are one nation" not "All the slaves are free". A bit odd if the war was solely about slavery.
But ... but ... it was only and all about slavery ... Yeah, right.
Phil B
Defiant, there were several well researched books on southern goods being shipped north and the regulations requiring tariffs on the initial leg from the south to transshipping at the first northern port along the route. That was the first northern route, not the destination. This regulation required two tariff payments on each southern shipment.
Unfortunately, I don't remember the titles or the publishers and I did not purchase personal copies. They were published about twenty years ago. Google doesn't want to search for such items well.
Try looking at Brave browser. Unlike the majority of other browsers it doesn't skim g00gle results and present them as their own.
Give it a try, ask the same thing to a g00gle related browser (Bing, FireFox, Duckduckgo...) and Brave ans see the results.
I use FF because I like it better, but have Brave on the desktop for *more* nonebiased results.
Post a Comment