I hate slavery like any moral person but even I gotta admit that the confederate states had the right to secede.

I hate slavery like any moral person but even I gotta admit that the confederate states had the right to secede. When they joined the United States, there was an assumption that states could secede if they wanted to.

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >When they joined the United States, there was an assumption that states could secede if they wanted to.
    There's no secession clause in the Constitution

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What's the 9th ammendment?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >What about a state's right to enslave others?!
        Fuck off

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What's the Supremacy Clause?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          What's the 9th ammendment?

          >When they joined the United States, there was an assumption that states could secede if they wanted to.
          There's no secession clause in the Constitution

          wrong, wrong, and wrong. the Constitution is silent on the issue of secession and this was known back then. the war happened because they attacked Ft. Sumter. prior to that there was no clear constitutional answer on what to do about state secession and both Buchanan and Lincoln were aware of it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Georgia, Virginia, and the Carolinas joined before there was a constitution doe

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        So what? If they ratified it they're subjected to it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      10th Amendment
      Also read the ratification documents of each state. Several of them declare their right to leave the union if it turns into a bad deal.

      https://www.usconstitution.net/rat_va.html

      >WE the Delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected in pursuance of a recommendation from the General Assembly, and now met in Convention, having fully and freely investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal Convention, and being prepared as well as the most mature deliberation hath enabled us, to decide thereon, DO in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will: that therefore no right of any denomination, can be cancelled, abridged, restrained or modified, by the Congress, by the Senate or House of Representatives acting in any capacity, by the President or any department or officer of the United States, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for those purposes: and that among other essential rights, the liberty of conscience and of the press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained or modified by any authority of the United States.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      So what? Americans do not serve the constitution.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Lincoln was not tyrannical enough. He could have been the Caesar to America's burgeoning empire.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >When they joined the United States, there was an assumption that states could secede if they wanted to.

    >The articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Cuck mentality.
    "I hate cheating like any moral person, but even I gotta admit that my wife has the right to blow Chad."

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the confederacy would have ended slavery eventually they were just more dependent on it than the north at the time, their largest trading partner was great Britain who was staunchly anti-slavery. Lincolnites.are just terrorists who killed more Americans than any other war. The south would have ended slavery at the latest in 1880s. The war wasn't about slavery but federal power.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The south would have ended slavery at the latest in 1880s
      Confederate Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Line 4
      >(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed

      That's pretty definite

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You can't seriously believe Alabama would have slaves in 2015.
        Once public and elite opinion changes enough any piece of document can be reinterpreted no matter how seemingly important

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >You can't seriously believe Alabama would have slaves in 2015.
          Saudi Arabia only banned slavery in 1962, and it's probably being practiced in secret there today. The idea that it'd disappear in a few decades after secession is ludicrous given the fact that they decide to secede because of it in the first place. Now we're just arguing based over whatifs.

          >[...]
          >>The south would have ended slavery at the latest in 1880s
          >Confederate Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Line 4
          >>(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed
          >That's pretty definite

          LOL=-
          2nd Amendment Says NO weapons of War shall be denied to the people.

          Auto Machine Guns, Silencers, Shoulder braces are Illegal, (without a Very expensive Federal Fee & if you pass)

          Not saying it is right for the Feds to Break and Subvert their OWN LAWS, but it happends

          Slavery would, in all practicality, Be gone by 1900ad

          >Section 10: Powers Denied to the States
          No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation

          Directly from the constitution. And the 2nd amendment talks about the right of the people to bear arms, you yourself mentioned exceptions in which we can obtain those types of weapons. The confederacy sperged out and killed their own population at the whims of their rich masters

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Saudi Arabia isn't American state

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I bring it up as an example of slavery surviving into the present day.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I don't deny it exists in various shitholes I say it wouldn't exist in 21st century America

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Then what would the CSA veterans have fought for?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Alabama wishes it were Saudi Arabia

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >you yourself mentioned exceptions in which we can obtain those types of weapons.

            these 'Exceptions' Are by definition Illegal Infringement to the Constitutionally protected RIGHT of the People.

            They are ILLEGAL Laws.
            Enforcing them is a Crime under 19USC242/ 241

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >

        the confederacy would have ended slavery eventually they were just more dependent on it than the north at the time, their largest trading partner was great Britain who was staunchly anti-slavery. Lincolnites.are just terrorists who killed more Americans than any other war. The south would have ended slavery at the latest in 1880s. The war wasn't about slavery but federal power.


        >>The south would have ended slavery at the latest in 1880s
        >Confederate Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Line 4
        >>(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed
        >That's pretty definite

        LOL=-
        2nd Amendment Says NO weapons of War shall be denied to the people.

        Auto Machine Guns, Silencers, Shoulder braces are Illegal, (without a Very expensive Federal Fee & if you pass)

        Not saying it is right for the Feds to Break and Subvert their OWN LAWS, but it happends

        Slavery would, in all practicality, Be gone by 1900ad

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >I hate slavery
    Man, you really hate black success, huh?

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >lose an election
    >wtf this isnt what i wanted !!1!
    >secede
    You cannot have a functioning government when states think that they can just secede when things go against them. It wasn't right for the South to secede but it's a good thing they did, it showed us all how retarded it was.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >actively fuck over one part of the country
      >they want out
      >NOOOOO YOU MUST BOW TO OUR WHIMS EVEN WHEN THERE'S ZERO ADVANTAGE TO IT

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >actively fuck over
        Mate, I live in Georgia and this is a massive cope. The North and Midwest bent over backwards to appease the South, which had a vastly disproportionate representation in government. The South seceded because they lost an election. They seceded before Lincoln and the Republicans could even do anything. And then to make prove that they were even bigger idiots, they attacked Ft. Sumter

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Mate, I live in Georgia
          so you're black?
          >They seceded before Lincoln and the Republicans could even do anything
          The issues with the South and talks of states' rights/secession had been ongoing 50 years by then.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The issues with the South and talks of states' rights/secession had been ongoing 50 years by then
            And the North and Midwest had bent over to appease the South in practically every decision.
            >so you're black?
            Yes. Nigerian

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >And the North and Midwest had bent over to appease the South in practically every decision.
              They did not. lol
              The South had very clear conditions for remaining in the Union, none of which were unreasonable from any practical perspective. The didn't meet these conditions because, 1.) they felt the cost of 1 million lives was a preferable sacrifice to just removing tariffs and letting the South keep slaves, 2.) the point was never to meet in the middle, they wanted complete and total submission to the federal government's whims.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes they did. The Mexican-American war, Missouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, just to name a few. The fact of the matter is that from 1850s onward, the fire-eaters pushed "Slavery or secession".

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >fire-eaters pushed "Slavery or secession".
                And that was their right

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Evidently not

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Oh you're an idiot
                So if I came to your house and shot you in the face then that means you didn't have the right to live using your groid logic

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Boo hoo wahhh
                You will never have a white majority south nagger lover

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Now if I report you for saying the n word what are the odds the mods don't ban you because you're a commie

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Buddy I guarantee I’m farther right than you and getting banned for saying nagger has happened to me dozens of times at this point
                Go worship your failed nagger plantations somewhere else

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Your false flagging is very low tier commie

                Where are you from, twitter or something? Shouldn't you be praising jihad or something

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Keep coping

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Shouldn't you be spamming schizo graphs about how blacks aren't actually pathetic instead of pretending to be able to hold a conversation

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Been here longer than you dumb fuck

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You are like baby, not only that you're retarded

                sit

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Shouldn’t you be making impotent reports against actual good posters because you don’t like your homosexualry being shat on? You will never be right wing nor will you ever get out of the factory boomer

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                This is the most pathetic false flag I've ever seen, either that or you're the dumbest motherfucker on this board

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Go hit that report button donaldfag boomer

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You're a schizoid

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >They seceded before Lincoln and the Republicans could even do anything. And then to make prove that they were even bigger idiots, they attacked Ft. Sumter

          Yeah, they were pretty Prideful, and Pissy, weren't they?

          Attacking Ft. Sumter was STUPID!

          That is the Kind of thing you negotiate, unless you just want an excuse to start a war.

          The South wanted war.
          Kind of unfortunate, two Americas may have been Nice, and I think the Southern Nation -OR- the South/southern people -without the WAR- would kept US as a people more free than we ARE today.

          since the 1980's -- I can't believe how much freedom has been taken away,
          Legislated against,
          Or given to Corporations.

          Mostly starting with that BS scam -Prohibition- biggest lie BS Scam ever.

          Everything was a LIE

          Tea Totelers
          old ladies bitching about alcohol

          ALL Propaganda
          ---Just to get Anti-Gun Legislation passed---

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The south seceded because northern states had majority in congress and were about to ratify California as a state to make the gap even larger. Lincoln didn't campaign in a single city in the south and still won the vote, which proved the point. He said going in to the presidency that he wasn't going to end slavery, but southern politicians knew that remaining in the US would only be negative for their states as more tariffs would be enacted

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >no advantage

        yea, the European powers definitely wouldn't have taken advantage of the split and eventually made proxies of both.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >you don't like this group?
      >you must love THAT group
      That's it. That's as far as any argument you will ever make goes. Just a circular GOTCHA. embarrassing

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      this is funny because i dislike the CFA but also dislike those other things

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the Confederate constitution actually denied the states numerous rights. they could not secede or outlaw slavery and no new state or territory could be admitted to the Confederacy unless it allowed slavery.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >no new state or territory could be admitted to the Confederacy unless it allowed slavery.
      It really just seems like this entire war was fought over slavery

  10. 1 month ago
    Radiochan

    Based on what?

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There was no assumption.
    The constitution simply does not answer that question.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They fired first. Honestly the North was EXTREMELY patient with their stupid fucking tantrums for decades, constantly bribing and placating them to keep them happy. Seceding is one thing, declaring war on your host is another entirely

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine being south carolina, the most taxed state in the country that just seceded and being told you no longer had access to the fort guarding your own waters arbitrarily

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It wasn’t arbitrary, they sold the fort years before
        No take backs

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Seems pretty arbitrary to send soldiers to take over a fort of a now separate country and then say they aren't allowed to garrison their own fort and instead allow a hostile force to occupy it and then claim to be the victim when they ask you to leave (with no casualties)

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      A country has the right to kick a foreign army off its soil

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *