RE: I'm Voting For Romney
October 29, 2012 at 8:20 pm
(This post was last modified: October 29, 2012 at 8:22 pm by Autumnlicious.)
(October 29, 2012 at 7:34 pm)Rhythm Wrote: A decision driven in part by the disproportionate allocation of power (votes) based upon the number of slaves owned (something slaveholders didn't like the idea of giving up- which would be completely eradicated if slavery were eradicated, the three-fifths compromise being an earlier version of the same argument). Power, control, and wealth.They had too good a deal. All the power, wealth and control concentrated to the slave holders, little left for the poor whites, and none for the slaves who were bred like dogs.
Yeah, I can see why any criminal would fight to keep it, and fight to keep their right to enslave, murder and abuse another human being.
Just because every shitstain, white trash and corrupt statesman was invested heavily in it didn't change the fact they tried to have their cake and eat it too, so to speak.
If anything, the above justifies Sherman's March to the Sea. He wasn't vicious enough, in my opinion.
If he was, perhaps the South wouldn't be so cavalier about trying to romance the confederate flag.
(October 29, 2012 at 7:34 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Then of course, the north could not allow the south to leave the union, and lets not imagine that their reasons were pure as the driven snow.
Self preservation comes to mind -- letting states secede sets a dangerous precedent. It may even allow a foreign power to bribe away the loyalties of an individual state from their neighbors to divide and conquer.
Slave to the Patriarchy no more