-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.
Your foundering fathers were all traitors when they signed the Declaration of Independence. Traitors to Britain.
Even you should know that.
“Larry,
Traitor to America.”
If I’m a traitor, then so was all of our founding fathers.
Is that what youre saying Mike? ALL of our founders were traitors??
Larry
pbh: “I refer you to Federalist # 44.”
“I didnt ask for a reference. I asked you for quotes. The fact that you keep giving the runaround on this means you have NONE.”
You really don’t like to read do you? Federalist # 44 contains a full fledged argument in favor of centralized government including such topics as foreign treaties, international trade and tariffs, the monetary system and other items of note. The idea that you would try to pick apart Madison’s observations on this subject, without reading him in context, is absurd.
“AND you were wrong on inflation.”
pbh “No, I am not.”
“OOOOOhhhhh, nice refutation!!”
My refutation met the level of your empty argument.
pbh
Larry,
“2. pbh51 said inflation causes housing values to increase.”
No I didn’t. I said: “I buy a house in 1994 for $200k. In 2013 that same house is worth $1.5 mil. Meanwhile, my carrying costs are still what they were in 1994.” I did not say that inflation was the sole cause of the increase in monetary value. I will say that it contributes overall. What you fail to comprehend is the differential built into freezing my carrying costs in 1994. But, I doubt that you are a homeowner, so much of this must escape you.
“3. pbh51 said that Clement Vallandigham was from the South and Lincoln deporting him there was just putting him where he belonged.
“4. pbh51 said Vallandigham was LOYAL to the South. He actually was very loyal to the Union and to his state…OHIO, which was a UNION state.”
I never said he was a Southerner. I said that he was “Deported to the South that he actively supported.” I can’t quite figure out how you believe that a man who supported secession could be considered “loyal to the Union.”
“8. pbh51 said that Lincoln deporting a Congressman, arresting the Chief Justice of the United States and the Mayor of Baltimore was OK because others…like Sherman and Stonewall Jackson would have done worse.”
Taney was never arrested and the entire story of the warrant relies on one witness who has long since been discredited. As for the other two, they were active sympathizers and were given the opportunity to “love it or leave it.”
“Im sure I could find a list of at least 50 of these ridiculous statements if I had all day to do so.”
Are you speaking of #s 2., 3., 4., and 8. above? I can find many, many more of your “ridiculous statements”, but it is a daunting chore to catalogue them.
Meanwhile, you have neglected to respond to several specific challenges included in my response to your cut and paste of someone else’s 68 allegations. To wit:
“35. Illegally imprisoning thousands of Northern citizens.” That is a rather broad brush. Have you personally reviewed each of these cases? In any event, Ibid.
“41. Tolerating the arrest of ministers who refused to pray for Lincoln.” This one is really obscure. You would do well to provide some citations for these charges, but I already know you are just cutting and pasting crap you have not researched.
“44. Supporting a law that indemnified public officials for unlawful acts.” References needed Please.
“52. Executing those who refused to take a loyalty oath.” Now this is pure propaganda. I defy you to present a list of individuals so executed.
“65. Promoting a general because of his willingness to use his troops as cannon fodder.” Is this supposed to be a refernce to Grant? I actually don’t recall any reference or account of Grant or any other Union general stuffing his cannons with his own soldiers. Perhaps you can enlighten me.
By my count I have disposed of 63 of the 68 charges against Lincoln, saving only those that you have yet to provide sufficient citiation for actual refutation. At the same time, you have mischaracterized, misread or failed to comprehend what I have written. Your behavior in this regard, ignoring requests for evidence and falsifying statements on the record, is of a piece of your entire line of argument which is largely a fraud.
I doubt that you could even tell me where you found the 68 charges, much less who actually composed them in the first place. At least you could admit that they are not your originals.
pbh
Larry,
So good to see your back. Or is that your front?
Does your Mom know that you’re using her computer to disrespect your elders?
I was right. Immature and juvenile behavior. And that was the perfect illustration of what Mike was discussing in his blog story. The hateful name calling, with the purpose of trying to belittle and hurt. Destructiveness as a game.
Because the title of his article is “Call me queer”. So I did.
Larry,
Traitor to America.
People have a purpose in life Larry. What is yours? For what purpose did you come into this law blog? Do you have an agenda? And for what purpose did you hurl that “queer” slur at Mike in his story? You want to know how you are coming across? I had been trying to think of who you reminded me of, and it just came to me.
Im still waiting on the quotes from Lincoln in which he said HE was fighting the war because of slavery. Crickets…..crickets….
I proved one thing OS. That when confronted with facts, people will say the most RIDICULOUS things in place of just saying “IM wrong, you’re right”.
Want me to name just a few of the ridiculous things uttered here??
1. Nal said that “saving the Union” is a justification for slavery. He can wiggle out of this all he likes. It’s what he said.
2. pbh51 said inflation causes housing values to increase.
3. pbh51 said that Clement Vallandigham was from the South and Lincoln deporting him there was just putting him where he belonged.
4. pbh51 said Vallandigham was LOYAL to the South. He actually was very loyal to the Union and to his state…OHIO, which was a UNION state.
5. Mike Spindell said Lincoln supporting Corwin is “irrelevant” and “proved nothing”
6. Nal said Lincoln’s support for Corwin was an attempt to stop secession…despite the fact that 7 states had already seceded when Lincoln gave his inaugural in which he supported Corwin.
7. Bob, Esq. said the states didnt have the right to keep slaves, despite the fact that the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott decision ruled that the government could not interfere with slavery in the federal territories.
8. pbh51 said that Lincoln deporting a Congressman, arresting the Chief Justice of the United States and the Mayor of Baltimore was OK because others…like Sherman and Stonewall Jackson would have done worse.
Keep in mind people, these are just a FEW. Im sure I could find a list of at least 50 of these ridiculous statements if I had all day to do so.
So, what did I prove OS? It’s not an issue of wanting everyone to say “Larry’s right”. Not at all. Pride makes humans unable to do that. I have proven a much deeper human condition: That when people are wrong and in panic mode, they will say ANY ridiculous comment to avoid just admitting they’re wrong. And the above 8 comments prove just that. Like I said, this list is MUCH longer. I would just need more time to sit and pick them out. These 8 are the ones that stood out the most.
I am still waiting for an explanation of what it is you hope to accomplish here Larry. Your point is?
“He came here and wrote lots of stuff, much of it nothing more than personal insults”
LOL, really??? Most of my posts were telling you all that YOU issue insults and ad hominem attacks. Would you like me to re-post everyone’s attacks??
I can.
Inflation doesnt make housing value go up, moron.
“I refer you to Federalist # 44.”
I didnt ask for a reference. I asked you for quotes. The fact that you keep giving the runaround on this means you have NONE.
“AND you were wrong on inflation.”
“No, I am not.”
OOOOOhhhhh, nice refutation!!
I love the sound of crickets in the morning…it sounds like…sanity.
Mike A. & pbh51,
I am still waiting for an explanation from Larry on what it is he hoped to accomplish by all this effort. He came here and wrote lots of stuff, much of it nothing more than personal insults, but has yet to explain what the goal is. Of course, when a commenter has nothing more to offer than screaming screeds in all caps, calling people names, so many logical fallacies and almost total lack of substantive content, one has to assume lack of education, callow youth and immaturity, not to mention limited vocabulary and reading skills. I think it is amusing that anyone would keep saying, “I won” when we have yet to hear exactly what it is he thinks he has won.
pbh51:
I believe your initial description of this exercise as a “fool’s errand” was accurate. Herding cats might actually be easier, and more rewarding.
Larry
“the right to leave the union was included in each of the state constitutions.”
I must say that your cognitive dissonance is almost irresistable.
1. the above quote is factually incorrect in every degree.
2. it wouldn’t matter if you were actually correct, which you are not, because the Constitution itself, which was ratified by more than 75% of the states whose individual voters chose ratification, does not include any such provision.
3. The Constitution specifically overrides any State Constitution in matters that pertain to the Constitution. This does not merely apply to the issue of secession but to any matter that pertains to the National government.
“You didnt show me ONE quote from Madison about his supposed opposition to decentralization.”
I refer you to Federalist # 44.
“AND you were wrong on inflation.”
No, I am not.
Have you read the Cooper Union speech yet?
pbh
Waiting, waiting….
“They weren’t QUESTIONS you old, pathetic f–k.”
Three questions:
1. For what purpose was that remark allowed on this blog?
2. Why don’t they call them “asteroids” rather than “hemorrhoids”?
3. How much irritation should be tolerated from an asteroid, before you surgically remove it?
Perspiring minds want to know.
And your point is?