This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Cindy
Pages: 1 ... 444546 4748 ... 60
1351
« on: July 02, 2015, 01:33:08 PM »
As a quite rare event, I find myself agreeing with Furrby
1352
« on: June 30, 2015, 03:40:35 PM »
I mean
They kinda were
Once again, pretty much every Declaration of Secession mentions slavery in some form or fashion and how it was necessary to the southern economy. Some go as far to mention how absurd it is that blacks and whites should be considered equal.
1353
« on: June 30, 2015, 01:36:13 PM »
The civil war was fought primarily over political and economic reasons, it's just that these reasons happened to revolve around slaves because that's what the southern economy was reliant on
Thus why the reconstruction period sucked so much dicks for everyone in the south
1354
« on: June 30, 2015, 11:51:17 AM »
^
Pretty much
You guys should learn that both parties are similar in the end due to the horseshoe theory anyway, and both are obstructionist, loud mouthed idiots.
No one party is guilty than the other.
Horseshoe theory only applies to radical groups of two opposing parties Don't S T E A L the things I talk about
1355
« on: June 30, 2015, 11:39:25 AM »
So explain to me why the only books that WE have ever read are all revisionist history, but that you yourself - in your enlightened state - have managed to get to the truth of it all.
1356
« on: June 30, 2015, 01:29:27 AM »
History
So much history
That and more design
1357
« on: June 29, 2015, 10:06:09 PM »
Lmao
I'm done
1358
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:53:59 PM »
Yeah, man. Nobody knows why the civil war started. Can't imagine why, myself. Why don't we check the Declarations of Secession for... Mississippi In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
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. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.
The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory. Texas Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility [sic] and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. 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 slave-holding States[/b]. South Carolina In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."
This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. 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. Georgia In 1820 the North demanded that the State of Missouri should not be admitted into the Union unless she first prohibited slavery within her limits by her constitution. After a bitter and protracted struggle the North was defeated in her special object, but her policy and position led to the adoption of a section in the law for the admission of Missouri, prohibiting slavery in all that portion of the territory acquired from France lying North of 36 [degrees] 30 [minutes] north latitude and outside of Missouri. The venerable Madison at the time of its adoption declared it unconstitutional. Mr. Jefferson condemned the restriction and foresaw its consequences and predicted that it would result in the dissolution of the Union. His prediction is now history. The North demanded the application of the principle of prohibition of slavery to all of the territory acquired from Mexico and all other parts of the public domain then and in all future time. It was the announcement of her purpose to appropriate to herself all the public domain then owned and thereafter to be acquired by the United States. The claim itself was less arrogant and insulting than the reason with which she supported it. That reason was her fixed purpose to limit, restrain, and finally abolish slavery in the States where it exists. The South with great unanimity declared her purpose to resist the principle of prohibition to the last extremity. This particular question, in connection with a series of questions affecting the same subject, was finally disposed of by the defeat of prohibitory legislation.
The Presidential election of 1852 resulted in the total overthrow of the advocates of restriction and their party friends. Immediately after this result the anti-slavery portion of the defeated party resolved to unite all the elements in the North opposed to slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their hostility to slavery everywhere. This is the party two whom the people of the North have committed the Government. They raised their standard in 1856 and were barely defeated. They entered the Presidential contest again in 1860 and succeeded.
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers. Florida By the agency of a large proportion of the members from the non slaveholding States books have been published and circulated amongst us the direct tendency and avowed purpose of which is to excite insurrection and servile war with all their attendant horrors. A President has recently been elected, an obscure and illiterate man without experience in public affairs or any general reputation mainly if not exclusively on account of a settled and often proclaimed hostility to our institutions and a fixed purpose to abolish them. It is denied that it is the purpose of the party soon to enter into the possession of the powers of the Federal Government to abolish slavery by any direct legislative act. This has never been charged by any one. But it has been announced by all the leading men and presses of the party that the ultimate accomplishment of this result is its settled purpose and great central principle. That no more slave States shall be admitted into the confederacy and that the slaves from their rapid increase (the highest evidence of the humanity of their owners will become value less. Nothing is more certain than this and at no distant day. What must be the condition of the slaves themselves when their number becomes so large that their labor will be of no value to their owners. Their natural tendency every where shown where the race has existed to idleness vagrancy and crime increased by an inability to procure subsistence. Can any thing be more impudently false than the pretense that this state of things is to be brought about from considerations of humanity to the slaves. And Alabama And as it is the desire and purpose of the people of Alabama to meet the slaveholding States of the South, who may approve such purpose, in order to frame a provisional as well as a permanent Government upon the principles of the Constitution of the United States, Now, I swear, it's right on the tip of my tongue but it's just not coming to me. What could the Southern states have possibly founded their secessions on?
1359
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:41:10 PM »
To be fair, I like Bill
He's the fun kind of sleezy.
1360
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:36:31 PM »
You know, I COULD pretend to know what this means.
1361
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:34:58 PM »
And technically, Rome made the dictator the dictator for life.
Caesar literally coined the term "dictator" as a negative.
1362
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:34:30 PM »
Sanders pls
1363
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:31:35 PM »
hurr durr post a useless video.
I didn't say shouting "liar" was racist. In fact, I never said any of this was racist. But the only major difference is Obama's race. If it's not because he's black, I'm curious as to the cause of the lack of respect for the office of the President. I'm also curious if it will continue in 2016.
I never said any of this was racist guys! I only said that's the only possible difference / explanation.
Money definitely couldn't be playing a role here. Or the fact that Bush single-handedly lowered reverence for the office. Or the fact we are now in the information age and the govt isn't some mysterious far away idea. Can't be that repulicans have recently been taken over by the far right and have shoved out all the moderates. Encouraging behavior so clownish that Donald Trump is running for office.
No clearly Obama is experiencing previously unheard of disrespect, and the only possible explanation is his skin color. Its not money or stupid political pandering. Just can't be. Has to be skin color. Its the only thing that's changed afterall. But I'm not saying its racist or anything.
Yes it'll continue in 2016. Except then it'll be Hilary and you'll say its cuz she's a woman. Because muh identity politics.
God, I fuckin' hope it's not Hillary
1364
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:26:35 PM »
The North wasn't some crystal clear shining beacon of moral light sure, I agree, but the state rights the South wanted to cling on to was the right to own slaves and traffic humans. You are a shining fuckin' beacon of swallowing whatever you're told.
Abolition WAS NOT going to happen by the end of the 1860s in the united states.
There was nowhere near enough support for the movement.
The only reason it did is because Lincoln used the war that the Union started and the deaths of people's sons that were his fault as a way to demonise the south, and he wanted to cripple them economically and made the emancipation proclimation. He basically made people put five and three together like they were two and two and people still buy into it to this day.
Is slavery an evil thing that still goes on?
Yes.
Was it the MAJOR FUCKING PROBLEM that was causing our national government not to function AT ALL in the 1850s?
No.
That was an abhorrent and sudden increase in federal power that most states weren't ready for, and Lincoln was literally a dictator, and only made matters worse. The country was always before that, a much looser gathering of states than it is today, and I'm not saying that the current system is a bad one, I'm saying that the country was just not ready for it, and it was going to cause the ultimate failure of the nation.
Read a god damned book.
Oh my god the irony in this post Like, I really hope you're doing this with the purpose of being ironic, because if so you're fucking great at it.
1365
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:24:42 PM »
also the best decade for rap and alternative rock genres
Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
EHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
the hip hop thing isnt arguable.
So I'm guessing you're one of those "Kanye is an idiot who is only famous because he acts out and Lil Wayne only rhymes 'nigga' with 'nigga'" types of people?
1366
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:18:38 PM »
also the best decade for rap and alternative rock genres
Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh EHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
1367
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:12:06 PM »
dae le 90's kids amirite?!?! XD
To be honest, I don't even think I regularly listen to any songs made before the year 2001.
1368
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:10:38 PM »
>Huge heritage
Ah yes, the huge heritage of a single battle flag of a single state less than 300 years ago.
1369
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:02:07 PM »
Also, no, slavery was a huge issue. As I linked earlier in the thread, the Declarations of Secession were MOSTLY due to slavery.
So yes, it was about state's rights, but the state's rights they were discussing were the rights to own slaves.
Which, yes, was detrimental to their economy and not just because "fuck niggers," but denying that slavery was pretty much the focal point of the civil war is just stupid.
1370
« on: June 29, 2015, 08:56:46 PM »
>tfw you support both
Also I'd like to point out to all of the people hating on rednecks and "muh confederacy" people ITT, that it was mentioned in the annotations of the video that they're burning gays, as a rhetorical technique to discredit ISIS, meaning that the creator of this video is most likely tolerant of homosexuals, and therefore presuably not some thick headed anti-everything neo nazi klansmen type like everyone stereotypes them to be.
Of course, he could just literally only be tolerant of the gays, but I find that unlikely.
Its a point that stands for a lot of these kinds of people who get called bigots just because they see something different in those stars and stripes than you do, might not really be bigoted at all.
You're not a bigot if you support the Confederate flag
You're just an idiot if you don't understand that it doesn't matter what the flag originally stood for. The swastika is a symbol of the sun and the god Surya in Hinduism, but I'm not gonna fuckin' carry a flag with that around on it either, now am I?
The flag never stood for racism or hatred though, racism was just a popular social construct of the time. The government didn't endorse racism any more heavily than the Union government did a few years before.
Its not quite like where Hitler took a relatively neutral country and turned it into a racially oriented regime.
The south was so socioeconomically different from the north that making it its own country was probably a sound move, considering that millions of people suffered miserably in "reconstruction" or really the indoctrination of northern political and economic structures in the south, which would have had to happen anyway if there had been no war if the nation wanted to prevent collapse.
Those states wanted to have more power over their own governance without leaving the union, because the policies that were being produced by the majority North were harmful to the economy of the south.
Slavery didn't even become a major issue until after the war had already begun, sure there was an abolitionist moevment before that, but it certainly did not see the support it saw during or after the war.
In fact, dirty politics, blackmail, and bribery had to be used to pass the thirteenth amendment, without the southern states in the legislature.
So no, the Confederacy was not formed in order to cling on to racist hatred, and the flag was never a symbol of hate until the union government demonised it.
Yes, good job on missing the entire point of my post. Like, seriously, I could hear an audible woosh. It DOES NOT MATTER EVEN A LITTLE what the flag stood for originally. Nope, not one little bit. What DOES matter is that it's only in the public light due to the KKK's usage in the 1940's and the continual usage for racist means by the organization, followers, and others thereafter. Thus, the Nazi example. It doesn't MATTER that the swastika originally stood for Surya, it matters that it was used as the figurehead for a genocide. Symbols evolve.
1371
« on: June 29, 2015, 08:39:17 PM »
If we're talking books, then probably Gregor Clegane. If we're talking show, then easily Ramsay Bolton. If both, then still Ramsay Bolton.
Joffrey was a terrible person, sure, but he was a manchild. He liked causing pain because it made him feel good but he didn't really know or care why. Tormeny Sansa, butcher a nun, shoot a prostitute, eh, whatever. Ramsay's worse because he knows exactly what he's doing and he revels in the emotional torment he gives more than the physical torment.
He's way better at what he does.
1372
« on: June 29, 2015, 08:36:10 PM »
>tfw you support both
Also I'd like to point out to all of the people hating on rednecks and "muh confederacy" people ITT, that it was mentioned in the annotations of the video that they're burning gays, as a rhetorical technique to discredit ISIS, meaning that the creator of this video is most likely tolerant of homosexuals, and therefore presuably not some thick headed anti-everything neo nazi klansmen type like everyone stereotypes them to be.
Of course, he could just literally only be tolerant of the gays, but I find that unlikely.
Its a point that stands for a lot of these kinds of people who get called bigots just because they see something different in those stars and stripes than you do, might not really be bigoted at all.
You're not a bigot if you support the Confederate flag You're just an idiot if you don't understand that it doesn't matter what the flag originally stood for. The swastika is a symbol of the sun and the god Surya in Hinduism, but I'm not gonna fuckin' carry a flag with that around on it either, now am I?
1373
« on: June 29, 2015, 06:11:25 PM »
You gonna whine every time a business removes a product that's hateful to a minority group?
1374
« on: June 29, 2015, 01:39:43 PM »
Sure. Wanna give me some actual sources that aren't just some clickbait article.
Because I've sourced, y'know, the Declaration of Secession. That shit's about as accurate as one can get.
1375
« on: June 29, 2015, 10:51:16 AM »
>That flag stands for more than racism
Yeah, it stands for the wartime era of a state which was fighting for the right to own slaves.
And was then brought into the public spotlight in the 1940's when used by the KKK
So yeah, it's pretty much "Fuck Niggers; The Flag"
I read that the confederate states of America's constitution outlawed the owning of slaves. So...
Lmao what the fuck? Mississippi In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
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. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.
The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory. Texas Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility [sic] and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. 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 slave-holding States. South Carolina In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." [editor's note: this is the Fugitive Slave Clause in the original Constitution whereby the North promised to return escaped slaves to their "owners" in the South]
This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. 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. Florida . . . In 1820 the North demanded that the State of Missouri should not be admitted into the Union unless she first prohibited slavery within her limits by her constitution. After a bitter and protracted struggle the North was defeated in her special object, but her policy and position led to the adoption of a section in the law for the admission of Missouri, prohibiting slavery in all that portion of the territory acquired from France lying North of 36 [degrees] 30 [minutes] north latitude and outside of Missouri. The venerable Madison at the time of its adoption declared it unconstitutional. Mr. Jefferson condemned the restriction and foresaw its consequences and predicted that it would result in the dissolution of the Union. His prediction is now history. The North demanded the application of the principle of prohibition of slavery to all of the territory acquired from Mexico and all other parts of the public domain then and in all future time. It was the announcement of her purpose to appropriate to herself all the public domain then owned and thereafter to be acquired by the United States. The claim itself was less arrogant and insulting than the reason with which she supported it. That reason was her fixed purpose to limit, restrain, and finally abolish slavery in the States where it exists. The South with great unanimity declared her purpose to resist the principle of prohibition to the last extremity. This particular question, in connection with a series of questions affecting the same subject, was finally disposed of by the defeat of prohibitory legislation.
The Presidential election of 1852 resulted in the total overthrow of the advocates of restriction and their party friends. Immediately after this result the anti-slavery portion of the defeated party resolved to unite all the elements in the North opposed to slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their hostility to slavery everywhere. This is the party two whom the people of the North have committed the Government. They raised their standard in 1856 and were barely defeated. They entered the Presidential contest again in 1860 and succeeded.
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers. Alabama And as it is the desire and purpose of the people of Alabama to meet the slaveholding States of the South, who may approve such purpose, in order to frame a provisional as well as a permanent Government upon the principles of the Constitution of the United States,
1376
« on: June 29, 2015, 10:43:57 AM »
Seriously, I love how many issues there are regarding women and gay people whereas if you just replaced "women" or "gays" with "niggers" or "the coloreds" then suddenly it sounds archaic and barbaric. "Oh, but that's totally different!"
Funny how that works out, eh?
1377
« on: June 29, 2015, 10:42:34 AM »
"Waaaah they're forcing christian businesses to serve gays that's controlling and oppressive to the open market" - People from 2015, apparently
"Waaaah, they're forcing white businesses to serve niggers that's controlling and oppressive to the open market" - Some dude from the 1950's, probably.
1378
« on: June 29, 2015, 10:36:49 AM »
I love people on this thread saying, "Nah, I'm not depressed. I have a pretty decent life so there's nothing to be depressed about!" as if depression was a logical thing that only happens to homeless people and failing college students.
1379
« on: June 29, 2015, 10:08:55 AM »
Going to college when I wasn't ready.
So much this
Fun stuff, right guys?
1380
« on: June 29, 2015, 09:49:26 AM »
Maybe all the Turks can go to Syria instead of Germany, now
Pages: 1 ... 444546 4748 ... 60
|
Show Posts