NationStates

Communist Zombie Horde wrote:

Duhon wrote:
Nothing says patriotism like adopting the cause of literal traitors.

The south is not traitors we are the most patriotic people in the world.

The thing is, USA patriotism is not the only kind of patriotism in the world. Supporting southern secession might have been anti-USA, but those who succeeded saw themselves as patriots for the CSA. It is really a matter of two different nationalisms competing against each other. But those who supported succession were traitors to the USA, no doubt about it.

Rostavykhan wrote:

Asherahan wrote:Since when is secession patriotic?

Since we seceded and shot lobsterbacks in the American Revolution.

That was all Americans though and not just some slaveowners who were mad because someone who didn't like them owning people was elected to the office established by the Revolution in the first place.

Rostavykhan wrote:
> Implying patriotism means being patriotic to the US.

Lol, fuck the rest of America. South > West Coast/Midwest/New England any day.

As a proud Pennsylvanian, I must disagree.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Rostavykhan wrote:
> Implying patriotism means being patriotic to the US.

Lol, fuck the rest of America. South > West Coast/Midwest/New England any day.

As a proud Pennsylvanian, I must disagree.

And as a Pennsylvanian who is less proud of their birthplace than Bienenhalde, I must nevertheless concur with him that blatantly disregarding the rest of the Union is a rather impolite move, if I say so myself.

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:
As a proud Pennsylvanian, I must disagree.

And as a Pennsylvanian who is less proud of their birthplace than Bienenhalde, I must nevertheless concur with him that blatantly disregarding the rest of the Union is a rather impolite move, if I say so myself.

Well, whatever I might dislike about the south, I think the USA is overrated anyway and would probably be better off separated into different regional nations or annexed by Canada.

Bienenhalde wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
And as a Pennsylvanian who is less proud of their birthplace than Bienenhalde, I must nevertheless concur with him that blatantly disregarding the rest of the Union is a rather impolite move, if I say so myself.

Well, whatever I might dislike about the south, I think the USA is overrated anyway and would probably be better off separated into different regional nations or annexed by Canada.

I politely disagree; the US as currently exists has flaws (like a general culture that promotes a sort of egoistic libertine individualism), but these can (and should) be fixed before we undertake an unprecedented degree of e x p a n s i o n.

Hanafuridake wrote:

Rostavykhan wrote:
Since we seceded and shot lobsterbacks in the American Revolution.

That was all Americans though and not just some slaveowners who were mad because someone who didn't like them owning people was elected to the office established by the Revolution in the first place.

Plus the slaver traitors actually tried to get the British to attack the US.

Bienenhalde wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
And as a Pennsylvanian who is less proud of their birthplace than Bienenhalde, I must nevertheless concur with him that blatantly disregarding the rest of the Union is a rather impolite move, if I say so myself.

Well, whatever I might dislike about the south, I think the USA is overrated anyway and would probably be better off separated into different regional nations or annexed by Canada.

Which would be the end of the western world.
The US is the only one able to actually defend it.

The US definitely needs improvement and reform, but we are better than most places.

In a dog eat dog world little dogs are dog food.

Bienenhalde wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
And as a Pennsylvanian who is less proud of their birthplace than Bienenhalde, I must nevertheless concur with him that blatantly disregarding the rest of the Union is a rather impolite move, if I say so myself.

Well, whatever I might dislike about the south, I think the USA is overrated anyway and would probably be better off separated into different regional nations or annexed by Canada.

Let's go ahead and balkanize. Cantada ain't gettin it's hands on our guns, not down here.

OH MY GOSH CHESTERTON FINALLY GOT INCLUDED IN AN RWDT POLL!!! *Squees.*

Communist Zombie Horde wrote:

Duhon wrote:
Nothing says patriotism like adopting the cause of literal traitors.

The south is not traitors we are the most patriotic people in the world.

The south is laughably contradictory. Theres always talk about being Patriots but alot of times those same people love romanticizing the confederacy and its symbols.

Luminesa wrote:OH MY GOSH CHESTERTON FINALLY GOT INCLUDED IN AN RWDT POLL!!! *Squees.*

I see you are a person of culture.

Kirillov and Shatov are the best Dostoevsky characters. If you disagree, you need to read him again.

Tolkien is supreme.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Communist Zombie Horde wrote:The south is not traitors we are the most patriotic people in the world.

The thing is, USA patriotism is not the only kind of patriotism in the world. Supporting southern secession might have been anti-USA, but those who succeeded saw themselves as patriots for the CSA. It is really a matter of two different nationalisms competing against each other. But those who supported succession were traitors to the USA, no doubt about it.

That nationalism was predicated on people believing other people are not only inferior to them, but must suffer if they dare rise above their putative inferiority. They may give way on slavery, but not on hierarchy.

That was the alpha and omega of the confederacy.

Nova Cyberia wrote:The Union's mistake was assuming that it was only a minority of Southerners who wanted to secede when the opposite was true.

The second mistake the Union made after battering the Confederacy down to its knees was assuming the South would cotton down to racial egalitarianism.

The last one was in giving back political power to the former Confederacy instead of maintaining military government for as long as needed.

Duhon wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:The thing is, USA patriotism is not the only kind of patriotism in the world. Supporting southern secession might have been anti-USA, but those who succeeded saw themselves as patriots for the CSA. It is really a matter of two different nationalisms competing against each other. But those who supported succession were traitors to the USA, no doubt about it.

That nationalism was predicated on people believing other people are not only inferior to them, but must suffer if they dare rise above their putative inferiority. They may give way on slavery, but not on hierarchy.

That was the alpha and omega of the confederacy.

I do not disagree with that. I am just saying that the Confederates were a sort of patriot in a sense, not that I would approve of their ideology. And of course clashes between conflicting nationalist movements are not unique to the US. See for example Northern Ireland, the former Yugoslavia, and Taiwan.

Totally Not OEP wrote:

(Image)

And all of a sudden... just like that... people elected Hitler

Drongonia wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:

(Image)

And all of a sudden... just like that... people elected Hitler

If on the basis of such stupidity (and let me reiterate: that shit is stupid) people will elect an asshole they're pretty much looking for an excuse to kick someone upside the head.

Duhon wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:The Union's mistake was assuming that it was only a minority of Southerners who wanted to secede when the opposite was true.

The second mistake the Union made after battering the Confederacy down to its knees was assuming the South would cotton down to racial egalitarianism.

The last one was in giving back political power to the former Confederacy instead of maintaining military government for as long as needed.

By 1876 Reconstruction had already collapse and the political will to maintain troops in the South was gone; Northern voters had been exhausted by the low level guerrilla warfare combined with their own indifference to racial issues.

Hanafuridake wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:Events of late are increasingly making me reconsider whether to readopt Southern Nationalism or not.

Posts like this convince me that maybe CM has a point, at least in regard to the failure to take punitive measures so that secessionist ideas would never have arisen in the South again.

Asherahan wrote:Serious question why didn't the US annex Cuba and the Caribbean islands in the 1890s and 1900s?

Because by 1900 the Sugar trade, the only source of value for the Caribbean isles, was no longer as profitable as it once was. In the case of Cuba as well, a long running guerrilla war was being waged and had allowed for the development of Cuban nationalism, which meant annexing it would've put the U.S. in the exact same spot as Spain once was in.

Novus America wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:
No.

But as you said their fears were unfounded, it is obvious Lincoln has no intent or power to ban slavery in the South. So even if defended slavery justified the war (when obviously that is still a horrible justification) slavery was not even seriously threatened!

I said they were unfounded because I have the benefit of hindsight, the Southerners of 1860 did not. Even if they did, the South by 1860 had developed its own national identity and thus, in that spirit of self determination, I find them in the right; those men were my ancestors, and I don't begrudge them for doing what they had to do to enact their vision and defend their homes in the process.

Duhon wrote:

Drongonia wrote:And all of a sudden... just like that... people elected Hitler

If on the basis of such stupidity (and let me reiterate: that shit is stupid) people will elect an asshole they're pretty much looking for an excuse to kick someone upside the head.

That's exactly the point, people are feeling the same but in reverse to your opinions.

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:Events of late are increasingly making me reconsider whether to readopt Southern Nationalism or not.

What did he mean by this?

There's been a tone shift, at least in part of the Southern populace, that I find lacking in the nation as a whole anymore.