-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger
The resignation of Jack Hunter, the social-media director of Sen. Rand Paul (R, Kentucky), also known by the moniker “Southern Avenger,” has brought to the surface a not insignificant minority who identify themselves as libertarians. This minority defends the Old South, the Southern cause, and the Confederacy. These Neo-Confederate libertarians claim to be anti-slavery and their arguments are a case study in cognitive dissonance.
Timothy Sandefur (pdf) gives lie to any notion that states have a “right” to unilateral secession:
Since the Constitution is a law binding the People, and not a league of states, states have no authority to intervene between the people and the national government. If the people of a state wish to leave the union, they may not do so unilaterally, but must obtain the agreement of their fellow citizens—or they must rebel in a legitimate act of revolution.
Sandefur also notes that the Declaration of Independence imposes harsh restrictions on those seeking a legitimate act of rebellion. The right to throw off a government can only be exercised after “a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce [the people] under absolute Despotism.” The Confederacy was formed to violate rights, especially the right to self-ownership, not secure them.
The Confederate states were motivated to secede by the desire to maintain slavery. In their Declarations of Causes, four southern states, South Carolina, Georgia, Texas, and Mississippi, make clear that abolition of slavery was their primary reason for secession. The Confederate Constitution stated: “No law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.” One cannot rationally justify Confederate secession on morals grounds while ignoring the great evil that such a secession intended to preserve.
In the postbellum South racial dominance was practiced unashamedly. “State’s Rights” became the rallying cry whenever the Federal Government insisted on adherence to the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. The right of association and property owner’s rights were a common smokescreen used to defend Jim Crow, southern apartheid, laws. Today, “voter fraud” allows politicians cover when African-American voters are disenfranchised. The perversion of these concepts to scam voters into supporting the elite white power structure should not be tolerated.
The right to have your children attend a neighbor school was invented when the Supreme Court found segregated schools unconstitutional and busing was the solution. Today, taxpayer funding of private academies through voucher programs seeks to circumvent the 14th Amendment restrictions.
One cannot rationally support the Confederacy while condemning slavery. The raison d’être for the Confederacy was slavery. If one condemns slavery, then one condemns those who practiced it and sought to preserve it. One cannot simultaneously support the Southern state’s right to secede from the Union while supporting the denial that right to the individuals in those states. One cannot endorse the claim that secession was supported by a majority of the population when 40% of that population is not allowed to participate in the decision.
H/T: Ilya Somin, Jacob Levy, Jonathan Blanks, Jason Kuznicki, Randy Barnett, Conor Friedersdorf, Corey Robin, Massimo Pigliucci.
Gene, you’re not just a fan of Lincoln, you’re the president of his fan club.
Gene: “Also, Libertarians do support slavery albeit in the preferred modern form of economic slavery as their economic policies inevitably lead to economic tyranny.”
Hilarious, thats why most libertarians oppose the Federal reserve and any central bank, the thing that has wreaked the most havoc on the economy in the past 100 years. We also oppose unconstitutional WARS, which has caused us to go nearly bankrupt. No wars would boost the economy. We also oppose jobs being outsourced. Name ONE example of a libertarian stance on an economic policy that would destroy the economy. I bet you cant even name ONE. Also funny is that Nal’s article wasnt about ECONOMIC slavery.
“However, you missed the point of Nal’s article: that the LP plays to a fractured base in part built upon Confederate apologists and supporters, a contention that your inane revisionist rantings about Lincoln only illustrates.”
What the hell is LP?
“inane revisionist rantings”??? You mean the ones where I provide DIRECT QUOTES, that NONE of you have refuted or even addressed???
Give me ONE “inane revisionist rant” that I made and that you refuted. Im all ears. And you are not allowed to say “It’s in the thread, look it up”. BULL SHIT……I want you to POST it so we ALL can see the example of the claim you’re making. So, please provide the “inane rant” I made and your refutation. I guarantee you, you will either IGNORE this, or you will post something that does not even apply to the claim you made.
Larry,
I’ve expressly said that I’m not a fan of Lincoln.
Also, Libertarians do support slavery albeit in the preferred modern form of economic slavery as their economic policies inevitably lead to economic tyranny. However, you missed the point of Nal’s article: that the LP plays to a fractured base in part built upon Confederate apologists and supporters, a contention that your inane revisionist rantings about Lincoln only illustrates.
Refute David’s column? On the contrary, Larry. Your every word bolsters it.
Good job.
Bron: “Well said, should be a note of caution to more than just Larry.”
Good rule Bron, but look who you’re talking about. They have never applied the same rules to themselves as they issue to me.
Mike Appleton didn’t like when I used Nal’s guilt-by-association writing technique when I said that because Hitler was inspired by Lincoln and everyone here admires Lincoln, that they should admire Hitler. But it was perfectly OK to them that Nal used the guilt-by-association fallacy of saying that because libertarians support secession, they also support slavery.
The same rules do not apply to these people. So when you give great advice to them, keep in mind, it might make sense to THINKING people like you and me, but it will just go ignored by them, like most of my posts were.
Larry:
Learn how to not be emotionally tied to your arguments.
“To declare oneself the “winner” of anything is the height of hubris and egotistical grandiosity.”
Well said, should be a note of caution to more than just Larry.
Meh.
Bob K: “I didn’t think that your items associated with the Civil War were displayed with childish sarcasm.
I thought that they were displayed with mind-numbing, robotic hatefulness.”
I was talking about YOU ALL displaying the childish sarcasm, you MORON!!
OS: “What you have shown yourself to be is an immature person who holds on to long dead and irrelevant issues as though they were important.”
Then why did you not tell Nal his article was irrelevant and about dead issues???
Here is one your posts from awhile back i forgot to comment on. Not sure how I missed it since it was so mind-numbingly FALSE.
“Lincoln’s election and first inaugural speech probably triggered secession. He said he was not going to interfere with slavery in slave states, because he had no legal authority to do so. However, he also made it clear that secession from the Union was illegal.”
“His inaugural TRIGGERED secession???? Odd, since SEVEN states seceded BEFORE Lincoln’s inaugural!!
See what I mean???? You all cant even get basic facts right—-things that you could research in under 10 seconds. How are you to believed on anything else???
And of course Lincoln would say secession is treason. Tyrants usually do call not obeying them treason! LOL.
Let me guess, next you’re going to say that Hitler said the people who fought back in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising were committing treason too??? Of course he would!! He’s was a tyrant!!
OK, Larry:
“No one can (or will) refute me on anything associated with the Civil War (as displayed with the childish sarcasm above).”
I didn’t think that your items associated with the Civil War were displayed with childish sarcasm.
I thought that they were displayed with mind-numbing, robotic hatefulness.
Larry,
You don’t “win.” In a discussion or debate, there is no winning and losing unless it is an academic forensic competition where debates are judged by a panel of expert judges. To declare oneself the “winner” of anything is the height of hubris and egotistical grandiosity. What you have shown yourself to be is an immature person who holds on to long dead and irrelevant issues as though they were important. At least you are aware that you are being mocked, but you fail to see the significance of that.
Bless your heart.
All I see is ignoring, ignoring, ignoring of my posts. Ironically, this is EXACTLY how the Lincoln MYTH has been carried on so long…..blindness, sarcasm, jokes and just plain ignoring of facts.
We have established 3 things as a result of Nal’s CRAP article:
1. No one can (or will) refute me on anything associated with the Civil War (as displayed with the childish sarcasm above)
2. Lincoln worshipers are perfectly A-OK with the list of atrocities of Lincoln I posted
3. No one could find ONE quote where Lincoln said he was fighting the war for slavery.
I win.
I have always admired Turley for his Constitutional stance, but I am VERY ashamed of him now. Not only did he discredit himself by allowing a doofus to post a guilt-by-association article that is pure trash and FALSE, but he is perfectly OK with Lincoln worship…..something a Constitutional professor wouldn’t be OK with.
Regardless of what Turley thinks of me personally for my posts and my stance…there is NO WAY he can tolerate anything Lincoln did and still consider himself a champion of the Constitution. He should be very ashamed of not only this article and articles like this by the people he has approved to write on this blog, but he should be ashamed of the VERY poor debating skills (the plethora of sarcasm and ad hominem attacks, of which I would expect from 2nd graders) and lame responses given by his cast of idiots he calls regulars of this blog.
This makes you look very very bad Turley. Think of me what you want, but the facts ALONE do not coincide with what the majority of this blog believes about the Civil War. The quotes I cited do not coincide with the beliefs held by this thread. This is not about what anyone thinks of me personally. It’s about the truth. You all lost. Face it.
Oh please OS, Bob, Mike Spindell, Gene, rafflaw——please, please, by all means……post another sarcastic joke and ad hominem attack…please???
What Mark A. said…again!
OS,
That is one tough exam!
I almost forgot. Larry, would you please explain the metaphysical meaning of this phrase: “The eye of the newt is not reflected in the moon.”
By the way, I have been wondering about your belief that automobiles have their own religion. Do they use rubber and gasoline rather than bread and wine?
Do the aliens hiding under your chair annoy you when they demand cheeseburgers?
Be careful how you answer these, Larry.
It’s a trick.
Larry,
I have a few equally important questions for you:
Answer true or false.
1. I salivate at the sight of mittens.
2. If I go into the street, I’m apt to be bitten by a horse.
3. Some people never look at me.
4. Spinach makes me feel alone.
5. My sex life is A-okay.
6. When I look down from a high spot, I want to spit.
7. I like to kill mosquitoes.
8. Cousins are not to be trusted.
9. It makes me embarrassed to fall down.
10. I get nauseous from too much roller skating.
11. I think most people would cry to gain a point.
12. I cannot read or write.
13. I am bored by thoughts of death.
14. I become homicidal when people try to reason with me.
15. I would enjoy the work of a chicken flicker.
16. I am never startled by a fish.
17. My mother’s uncle was a good man.
18. I don’t like it when somebody is rotten.
19. People who break the law are wise guys.
20. I think beavers work too hard.
21. I use shoe polish to excess.
22. I like mannish children.
23. I have always been disturbed by the size of Lincoln’s ears.
24. I always let people get ahead of me at swimming pools.
25. Most of the time I go to sleep without saying goodbye.
26. I am not afraid of picking up doorknobs.
27. I believe I smell as good as most people.
28. Frantic screams make me nervous.
29. It’s hard for me to say the right thing when I find myself in a room full of mice.
30. I would never tell my nickname in a crisis.
31. A wide necktie is a sign of disease.
32. As a child I was deprived of licorice.
33. I would never shake hands with a gardener.
34. My eyes are always cold.
35. I often wet the ceiling.
Mike Spindell: “I don’t think so because the only talents that you seem to have is voting for yourself and being stupidly annoying.”
I will assume from that answer that the 68 things about Lincoln will continue to go ignored? That’s how I know Im right…being ignored. If you posted 68 bad things about a libertarian I agreed with, I sure as hell would refute them or at least TRY. I sure as hell wouldnt continually IGNORE it.
Appleton: “Your list of 68 questions to which you hopelessly demand answers adds nothing to the discussion because it tests nothing. If I didn’t know better, I would swear that you lifted it from some perverse history exam given at the League of the South Institute for the Study of the War of Northern Aggression and School of Cosmetology.”
They are not QUESTIONS. They are facts about Lincoln—-and if you claim they are all bull shit, why is NO ONE REFUTING THEM????
“And finally, my favorite argument. You admire Lincoln. Hitler admired Lincoln. Therefore, you admire Hitler. And you express surprise that there have been no comments from the “peanut gallery” on that :”FACT”? Seriously?”
Why not??? That’s what Nal’s article is doing—guilt by association. It says “libertarians support secession, therefore they support slavery”. Ahhhhhh, you hate it when the tables are turned, don’t you???
Larry, I have some further, and final, observations:
1. You objected that when I made reference to Lincoln’s proposal for compensated emancipation in his Second Annual Message to Congress I did not quote it for you. I did not do so because I assume every poster on this site capable of reading and independent research. But I will meet you halfway. Since I do not have the book with me, I located the address on the web through an arduous 3.5 second google search: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29503
The address also includes what I believe to be a rather thorough and well-reasoned demolition of the notion of secession. And I particularly direct your attention to the following statement: “Without slavery the rebellion could never have existed; without slavery it could not continue.” If that does not put to rest the fantasy that Lincoln desired to retain the institution of slavery in perpetuity, nothing short of strong medication will.
2. When you say “I’m glad the south seceded,” it brings to mind a teenager saying “I’m glad I flunked algebra.” Surely you can’t be pleased about the horrors that occasioned secession any more than the teenager will be pleased once he recovers from his tantrum and realizes that he will have to repeat the ninth grade. The comment is not a rational endorsement of a principle, but an acknowledgment of unresolved, because undefined, anger.
3. As Otteray Scribe correctly observed, your obsession with popular vote totals in 1860 is a silly game. But I can match you delusion for delusion. If you have actually studied history, as opposed to selected websites devoted to reconstructing history, you will recall that citizens in South Carolina didn’t get to cast a single ballot for president since that state’s electors were selected by the legislature. However, assuming they were permitted to vote and that every eligible voter turned out and that John Breckinridge garnered 100% of the votes, his overwhelming victory would still have represented only a fraction of the state’s residents because women did not have suffrage and slaves comprised over 50% of that state’s population.
4. That a number of people argued for several decades that secession was a right retained by the states is of historical interest, but nothing more. Had the notion received widespread acceptance, an article could have been included in the Constitution setting forth the grounds for secession and the procedure to be followed. And it would have been a dumb idea. Everyone at the time was well aware of the frailties inherent in the Articles of Confederation. I find the lyrics to “Hotel California” particularly instructive here. “You can check out any time you like,” represents the idea that we will tolerate state legislators venting through the adoption of unenforceable nullification statutes, mandating the arrest of ATF agent’s enforcing federal firearms restrictions within a state’s borders, for example. It is puerile, but we can live with it. “But you can never leave” represents the nation’s position on secession.
5. Your list of 68 questions to which you hopelessly demand answers adds nothing to the discussion because it tests nothing. If I didn’t know better, I would swear that you lifted it from some perverse history exam given at the League of the South Institute for the Study of the War of Northern Aggression and School of Cosmetology.
6. And finally, my favorite argument. You admire Lincoln. Hitler admired Lincoln. Therefore, you admire Hitler. And you express surprise that there have been no comments from the “peanut gallery” on that :”FACT”? Seriously?
After a great deal of intense reflection, I have come to the conclusion that you do not care for Abraham Lincoln. Hey, you don’t have to hit me over the head with a sledgehammer. I get it. Now that that message has sunk in, I think I’ll go find something more constructive to do, like driving screws into my thumbs.
Larry,
I forgot your 68 points about Lincoln. Could you list them again?
Larry:
Historians are notorious for altering facts and putting their spin on it.
To get an idea of what happened you need to read several books on a subject from several historians with different ideologies.
And journalists too. And historians rely on them for first hand accounts so it is very hard to know what actually happened.