Jocabia wrote:Tmutarakhan wrote:Sierra Systems wrote:Tmutarakhan wrote:the southern states had agreed to a democratic system; whenever they prevailed in elections, they expected the northerners to be bound by the results, but then, when they lose, all of a sudden "WE QUIT!" That's not how it works.
We thought we had a right to be represented in Parlaiment. When that didn't happen, "We Quit!" Funny how that works out eh?
We never took part in elections for Parliament; we could not "quit" doing so, because we never did so in the first place. This is nothing like the case in 1860:
When you participate in an election you are agreeing to be bound by the result. The south had taken advantage of the results of previous elections that came out their way; people who had voted for the other side respected the outcome.Sierra Systems wrote:I agree that it is morally wrong to own human beings as property, but I cannot agree that that is the only reason for secession.
The people who decided on secession proclaimed, loudly, that yes, indeed, that was the only reason for their decision.
There is a lot of evidence that southern white males (not all but certainly enough to make decisions) consider themselves the ruling class. They have repeatedly threatened to leave when they didn't get their way. There is a lot of evidence they don't trust Presidents who are not only white protestent males, but also southern. Or at least expressing certain southern values. And I don't mean values that are reasonable to expect from a leader. They want someone who kills things. They want someone who distrusts foreigners. They want someone who hates the French. They want someone who sides with them on issue of minorities. They want someone who sides with them on the issue of religion. They care about issues, sure, but mostly they care about "lifestyle" and keeping their place as the ruling class. Every time they see a chance that we might lift up the downtrodden in this country, they see it as a threat. They see it as "dirty communists" letting the rabble into the castle. "Sure, we've got plenty for everyone, but God put us here to rule on high over these pieces of crap. Don't worry, you can trust us to be loving."
That's why they're anti-regulation but they support making laws that enforce their morality on people. They aren't for freedom. They're just against anything that is a threat to what they view as their privelege as white males. They determine right and wrong and all laws should be designed not to rule over everyone, but rather to control the rabble.
Source please?
Allow me to translate what you actually wrote into english.
There is a lot of evidence thatsouthern white males (not all but certainly enough to make decisions)people I disagree with consider themselves the ruling class.They have repeatedly threatened to leave when they didn't get their way.Pointless accusation. There is a lot of evidence they don't trust Presidents whoare not only white protestent males, but also southernaren't like them.Or at least expressing certain southern valuesWho don't somewhat agree with them.And I don't mean values that are reasonable to expect from a leaderValues I don't agree with.They want someone who kills things. They want someone who distrusts foreigners. They want someone who hates the French. They want someone who sides with them on issue of minorities. They want someone who sides with them on the issue of religionMore pointless accusations. They care about issues, sure, but mostly they care about "lifestyle" andkeeping their place as the ruling classnot having it changed too terribly much, just like everyone else. Every time they see a chance that we might lift up thedowntroddencurrent popular minority cause or liberal cause celebre in this country, they see it as a threat. They see it as"dirty communists" letting the rabble into the castlea change in their way of life, which they would like to remain the same."Sure, we've got plenty for everyone, but God put us here to rule on high over these pieces of crap. Don't worry, you can trust us to be loving."Pointless accusation.
That looks more right to me... Of course, it also makes alot more sense when you say it this way.