So you’re saying it wasn’t in the Constitution. It was in the Tenth Amendment.
You might want to work on that one.
Or - all states being equal and all - the fact that ten states didn’t have any explicit right to secede meant that no state had a right to secede.
Or if you want to argue that there are unwritten laws floating in the ether, then the seceding states were breaking the unwritten law of the Constitution that says no state can secede.
The South DIDN’T have the power, and and it couldn’t shake hard enough. You do realize this is a reference to a human right to revolt against their government, not about the right of a state to secede against the Federal government?
Let me be the first to mention Harry Turtledove’s “Southern Victory” series. He wrote a series of books about the South winning its independence and what happened from there.
One part of his alternate history was the southern states developing farm machinery in the thirties which made black labor unnecessary. Unfortunately, the Confederate government did not let the blacks walk away in peace.
A ridiculous thing to quote while defending people who practiced slavery.
And regardless of what argument you make about whether South Carolina had the right to declare independence, Fort Sumter was an American military base. At worst, it was the equivalent of Guantanamo Bay in Cuba or Ramstein Airbase in Germany or Camp Red Cloud in Korea. And you can be sure that if any of those countries decided to start firing artillery at the American bases located in their countries it would be regarded as an act of war against the United States.
Having grown up in Dixie, I’m fairly confident in saying that wasn’t quite likely to ever happen. There is still a non-negligible portion of the population there that is not accepting of Civil Rights for Blacks.
Shame on me for questioning the legality and necessity of the deadliest conflict in U.S. history. The self-righteousness of those who SUPPORT such a war is Bullshit.
Slavery was abolished in Brazil, which was home to many many more slaves than the U.S., without a war. Many countries abolished slavery without warfare.
On secession. The abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison advocated secession because he thought it would undermine slavery by providing a refuge to runaway slaves. The North would have no constitutional obligation to return slaves to the South.
A ridiculous thing to say to someone who isn’t defending any person who practiced slavery, only pointing out the hypocrisy of someone who initiated the deadliest conflict in US history.
I’m saying it wasn’t explicitly spelled out in the Constitution because it’s a state right. It’s in the tenth amendment. I know it’s tough to understand.
You do realize it says “any people anywhere” right?
Did ya read what I said friend. Three states explicitly reserved the right to secede as a condition of their ratification of the Constitution.
Even if you ignore that, the “ether” is the tenth amendment. Any right not explicitly granted to the fed govt goes to the states.
So a man’s opinions cannot change through the course of his life? A person cannot reason about two different cases and come to different conclusions? That’s quite removed in time from (our) Civil War; may a person’s life not be partitioned if he comes across an issue that is difficult enough to live in peace with?
Another quote from Lincoln, this one in 1861
Sounds like a guy fighting a slavery war to me…
Now quote the Cornerstone Speech at me. I like it when you reach deep to prove a point.
Pleas copped.
You’re saying the right to secede is in the Tenth Amendment even though the guy who wrote the Tenth Amendment said there was no right to secede in the Tenth Amendment?
Yes, it is tough to understand your argument.
I would say that a principle that is able to be held tight or released with such ease is not a serious principle, at all. Secession remains an illegal act under our Constitution since there is no provision for it and the Constitution was explicitly formed to bring about a more rigorous federal government, replacing the confederacy that preceded it between 1776 and 1788.
And since the several Southern states that chose to sever ties with the United States insisted on stealing property from that nation during their secession, they placed themselves further outside of law.
I realize that it is fun to promote the “Northern Aggression” nonsense, but it has no bearing on reality and it is actually a hijack in regards to this thread which addresses the origins of the war, not its legality. Slavery remains the primary cause for that war.
It was precisely the prospect of abolition without war that frightened the Deep South into…starting the war.
The Deep South really made no attempt to avoid war. In April 1861, they could easily have gone about the business of organizing their government–which was in complete control of all of seven states except for the one U.S.-controlled fort–setting up new government institutions, raising military forces, seeking foreign recognition from Britain and France–all the while loudly protesting about those arrogant Yankees refusing to evacuate their illegally-held fortification right smack-dab in the middle of the harbor of one of the new nation’s most important port cities. Of course, by opening fire and starting a shooting war, they did manage to persuade Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, and North Carolina to come in on the Confederate side. But think how much more Lincoln’s hands would have been tied if he’d had all those slave states (in addition to Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland–the U.S. national capital was completely surrounded by slave states–and [technically] Delaware) still in the Union and wringing their hands about any action against the secessionists. If the Deep South had waited it out, either they are independent by default, or they force the Lincoln Administration into firing the first shot and being clearly the aggressor, which maybe wins them even more states, and leaves even more of the free states with the attitude “Those slave owning wannabe aristocrats want to leave? Good! Don’t let the door hit you on the way out!” and “Sure, I don’t like slavery, but those darkies aren’t worth the life of a single good Massachusetts/Ohio/Iowa boy”.
But instead, the hot-headed Southerners opened fire and started a shooting war. Of course the Deep South didn’t think it was going to be the bloodiest war in American history. To be fair, they thought it would be quick and glorious and the boys would be home by Christmas. Nearly everyone thought that, North and South. Really bloody wars often start out that way.
It’s not all that deep. It’s just politics. people will bend the law to their will.
.
It’s not a hijack because I contend the war was fought over the legality of secession. The Union didn’t believe in it, while the South tried to do it.