• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is The Citizenry Our Founders Feared Here?

Irwin Corey said:
Are you able to cite that claim? In Federalist 68 Hamilton voiced concern about a gullible electorate being taken in and voting for a totally unqualified con-man as justification for the Electoral College; we saw how that worked out. But I find no reference to a "non-virtuous citizenry anywhere.



Talk about non-virtuous; why not quote the WHOLE Clause

(bolding is mine)

instead of cherry picking the part that supports your view point
Click to expand...


Are you able to cite that claim? In Federalist 68 Hamilton voiced concern about a gullible electorate being taken in and voting for a totally unqualified con-man as justification for the Electoral College; we saw how that worked out. But I find no reference to a "non-virtuous citizenry anywhere.
Click to expand...

Virtuous has another meaning : POTENT, EFFICACIOUS This is what our Founders had during the American revolution. They lived it

Talk about non-virtuous; why not quote the WHOLE Clause
Click to expand...

I'll give you that(LOL)

BUT, they changed to(paraphrasing) We can now tax you any Damn way we please(wink)

instead of cherry picking the part that supports your view point
Click to expand...

See above(wink)
 
Luther said:
Sure you do, You love to distract and have a 'Hard on' for slavery(LOL)
Click to expand...

More like you have a hard on for mythologizing old dead racists. :shrug:
I'm not trying to distract you though, I'm merely making a simple point. You tried to point to the slave trade act as a way of excusing the actions of old dead racists and slavers but fail to address slavery's continued existence in America, the existence of a thriving domestic slave trade and the ownership of slaves by the President who signed that bill into law. Sorry not sorry if these facts make you uncomfortable. :shrug:

Luther said:
America was divided in Free states/territories and Slave states/territories(Rolling eyes)
Click to expand...

And the products those slaves produced were used in textile plants in New England and New York and shipped out through harbors in New York and Boston. By the time of the civil war nearly half of New Yorks exports were from cotton picked by slaves in the south.

Luther said:
Also no mention of the abolitionist- movement by you? Of course not(wink)?
Click to expand...

Oh I'd love to talk about abolitionists. Today you would of called them SJWs. The people who organized boycotts of products made from slave labor and who used newspapers to push for social change. Or people like Harriet Tubman who broke laws to help desperate people cross borders. I'm more than happy to have a conversation about that with you if you'd like. :thumbs:

Luther said:
America is EVIL to you and that is it!!!(LOL)
Click to expand...
I love America, we just happen to love different parts of it. You want to hold up statues of confederates and slavers as part of American history and I'd have them torn down and replaced by statues of Tubman and Douglas and King, American heroes who actually fulfilled the notion of liberty and justice for all.
 
Last edited:
Master Debator said:
More like you have a hard on for mythologizing old dead racists. :shrug:
I'm not trying to distract you though, I'm merely making a simple point. You tried to point to the slave trade act as a way of excusing the actions of old dead racists and slavers but fail to address slavery's continued existence in America, the existence of a thriving domestic slave trade and the ownership of slaves by the President who signed that bill into law. Sorry not sorry if these facts make you uncomfortable. :shrug:



And the products those slaves produced were used in textile plants in New England and New York and shipped out through harbors in New York and Boston. By the time of the civil war nearly half off New Yorks exports were from cotton picked by slaves in the south.



Oh I'd love to talk about abolitionists. Today you would of called them SJWs. The people who organized boycotts of products made from slave labor and who used newspapers to push to for social change. Or people like Harriet Tubman who broke laws to help desperate people cross borders. I'm more than happy to have a conversation about that with you if you'd like. :thumbs:


I love America, we just happen to love different parts of it. You want to hold up statues of confederates and slavers as part of American history and I'd have them torn down and replaced by statues of Tubman and Douglas and King, American heroes who actually fulfilled the notion of liberty and justice for all.
Click to expand...
More like you have a hard on for mythologizing old dead racists.
Click to expand...

Oh my God, Here's one of them now(LOL)!!!!!!!!!

Benjamin Franklin's Anti-Slavery Petitions to Congress | National Archives

And the products those slaves produced were used in textile plants in New England and New York and shipped out through harbors in New York and Boston. By the time of the civil war nearly half off New Yorks exports were from cotton picked by slaves in the south.
Click to expand...

So... Cant grow cotton in the north?
Oh I'd love to talk about abolitionists.
Click to expand...

No.... you don't(Rolling eyes)

I love America, we just happen to love different parts of it. You want to hold up statues of confederates and slavers as part of American history and I'd have them torn down and replaced by statues of Tubman and Douglas and King, American heroes who actually fulfilled the notion of liberty and justice for all.
Click to expand...


There's that Hard on a......gain(Forest Gump)
 
Master Debator said:
We have 100 years of terrorism, segregation and discrimination after the war and especially in the south to inform us on how deeply ingrained racism and white supremacy were in the south. Would slavery exist today? Probably. It still does in some respects. Provisions in the 13th amendment allowed slavery to continue for those in prison. After the war there was a large effort to round up and incarcerate newly freed blacks and to put them to work in chain gangs to rebuild the south. Fast forward to today and those prison are now private businesses where prisoners have to work a 12 hours a day to make 3 dollars so they can have a 1 min phone call that costs them 2. Slavery didn't completely end, it just adapted.
Click to expand...

There would not have been any trade partners for Southern cotton or tobacco. Britain and France would not have traded with the Confederacy due to human rights violations. They would have wanted to keep the peace with the United States. The only path out of economic collapse for the Confederacy would have been to free the slaves. Share cropping was a more lucrative way to go and most likely would have been the method which would have allowed slaves to buy their freedom. There is no way slavery would have continued unless the South managed to find a truly profitable way of maintaining an isolationist economy. Blockades and embargos would have strangled imports and exports. Just about every scholar agrees it would have ended. Some say as soon as 1890, others by WW II. Only a scant few believe it would have lasted longer. The point was if the South ended their own peculiar institution, treatment of blacks would most likely have been better in general. Prisoner of all races are working in prisons. Federal prisoners are demanding minimum wage and this should be an issue that is of great importance to Americans. The media doesn't create enough outrage for prison reform when American workers have to compete against American prison workers who manufacture everything from footballs to farmed tilapia.
 
Hondo said:
Just about every scholar agrees it would have ended. Some say as soon as 1890, others by WW II. Only a scant few believe it would have lasted longer. The point was if the South ended their own peculiar institution, treatment of blacks would most likely have been better in general.
Click to expand...

You have no basis for that assertion other than your wishful thinking. Again, I present to you 100 years of terrorism from white supremacists in the aftermath of the civil war as the counter and the continued disbelief by the American people that there is something wrong in the way we police black people.
 
The founding fathers feared oppressive government. I doubt even with their insight they couldnt have imagined a time where approx 50% of the population would be content to be crippled dependent pets, eager for oppressive governments to take over and care for them. The founding fathers would **** on a large number of 'Americans' these days. I dont think they would have feared what many have become because I dont believe they could have fathomed it.
 
Iron_Merc said:
The democrats have always been the party of slavery and racism. They claim that the parties "flipped" but this couldn't be farther from the truth
The first "conservative republican" also known as Abraham Lincoln, abolished slavery. A conservative, God fearing man. Conservative values and liberal values have never changed, there was never any "flip" - Its just another lie from the left.

View attachment 67263751
Click to expand...

We can really get into the weeds on this thread, can't we? Lincoln was no more conservative (as you postulated) than G.W. Bush was conservative (as GW postulated)...Which means neither were conservative, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Hondo said:
Many of the founding fathers opposed slavery and wanted all men freed. The nonsense you hear about blacks counting as 3/5 a person at our founding was not to dehumanize blacks, but was instituted by abolitionists to punish the slave states. You want more representation? Free your slaves and they'll count as whole persons. Free blacks were counted as whole persons. A concession on the importation of slaves was that Congress was barred from stopping the importation until 1808. On January 1, 1808 (first day of the year) Jefferson signed a national Prohibition into law. Federal law also didn't recognize slavery as legal deferring to the states.

It was no accident that Jefferson wrote that, "All men are created equal ..." Jefferson and Washington wanted the practice to end and willed that their slaves be freed. Georgia and South Carolina wouldn't relinquish on slavery. Our founders first battle was freedom from Britain and their second was laying the framework for freedom for all.

How to Understand Slavery and the American Founding | The Heritage Foundation
Click to expand...

FWIW, Jefferson's estate sold over 100 slaves after his death to pay his debts, so they were NOT freed by his will. He only freed 7 in his lifetime, a few of them were his own children.
 
Hondo said:
It makes perfect sense and returns us back to our founders. First, fight for the right to be free of Northern/British tyranny. Second, create a new country. Third, fight within that new country to abolish slavery.
Click to expand...

The leaders of that new country told us this: "Cornerstone" Speech - Teaching American History

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
Click to expand...
 
Hondo said:
It was a dying institution. Eventually pro-abolitionist states would have pressured SC and GA. The war was started by college kids.
Click to expand...

But it was not dying, not at the founding and not when the Civil War was fought. Look at any graph on the price of slaves - their value was going up, not down, in the late 1850s.
 
Luther said:
Virtuous has another meaning : POTENT, EFFICACIOUS This is what our Founders had during the American revolution. They lived it



I'll give you that(LOL)

BUT, they changed to(paraphrasing) We can now tax you any Damn way we please(wink)



See above(wink)
Click to expand...

What the hell is the matter with your eyes? And, apparently, you know nothing of the Revolution.
 
Irwin Corey said:
What the hell is the matter with your eyes? And, apparently, you know nothing of the Revolution.
Click to expand...

You sure?

I might just know more than you?(wink)

Especially because we're having this conversation(wink)
 
Hondo said:
Just because the South was wrong doesn't mean the Federal government was right. The fact is the Confederacy would have either had to crumble economically or eliminate slavery. There was a minute chance it could have built a sustainable economy.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but the point is you suggested working to eliminate slavery within a country founded explicitly on slavery and white supremacy. The latter is important, as we saw after slavery was ended. In the former CSA, we had a century of state sponsored segregation and second class citizenship for blacks. So the South was from inception through at least 1964 a region founded on and sustained on white supremacy at its core. That was its defining characteristic, and it took force of the Federal government both times to end first slavery then Jim Crow.
 
JasperL said:
But it was not dying, not at the founding and not when the Civil War was fought. Look at any graph on the price of slaves - their value was going up, not down, in the late 1850s.
Click to expand...

The law of supply and demand. My '78 firebird cost $2200 in 1986. Today, my cousin sells restored 60's and 70's cars for $25,000+. No further importation of slaves would see prices rise. Less births plus more freed slaves would see prices rise. Slaves would have become labor for only the wealthiest. Most economic historians agree it would not be sustainable.
 
I can't imagine the founding fathers being 100% happy with the current country no matter how you look at it.

OTOH, it is the most powerful country the world has ever scene in terms of economic and military might so there is that. I don't think they'd be happy with professional politicians, the influence of money on policy and the cause of both - a huge central government.
 
JasperL said:
Perhaps, but the point is you suggested working to eliminate slavery within a country founded explicitly on slavery and white supremacy. The latter is important, as we saw after slavery was ended. In the former CSA, we had a century of state sponsored segregation and second class citizenship for blacks. So the South was from inception through at least 1964 a region founded on and sustained on white supremacy at its core. That was its defining characteristic, and it took force of the Federal government both times to end first slavery then Jim Crow.
Click to expand...

Resentment over northern aggression played a part in poor treatment of blacks. I'm not saying it would have been all sunshine and rainbows. Just possibly less resentful.
 
Hondo said:
Resentment over northern aggression played a part in poor treatment of blacks. I'm not saying it would have been all sunshine and rainbows. Just possibly less resentful.
Click to expand...

So its norths fault why southerners spent a 100 years terrorizing blacks?
 
Master Debator said:
So its norths fault why southerners spent a 100 years terrorizing blacks?
Click to expand...

In part, yes. Not in total. I'm not a Confederate apologist. Regardless, of Southern evils, as an American I must hold MY government accountable for violating the Constitution. In 1861, I probably would have joined the wrong side of human rights to teach the US a lesson about not doing the right thing the wrong way. Sets a dangerous precedent.
 
Hondo said:
The law of supply and demand. My '78 firebird cost $2200 in 1986. Today, my cousin sells restored 60's and 70's cars for $25,000+. No further importation of slaves would see prices rise. Less births plus more freed slaves would see prices rise. Slaves would have become labor for only the wealthiest. Most economic historians agree it would not be sustainable.
Click to expand...

The population of slaves increased every year through the Civil War. It was self sustaining, like cattle or pigs....
 
Hondo said:
In part, yes. Not in total. I'm not a Confederate apologist. Regardless, of Southern evils, as an American I must hold MY government accountable for violating the Constitution. In 1861, I probably would have joined the wrong side of human rights to teach the US a lesson about not doing the right thing the wrong way. Sets a dangerous precedent.
Click to expand...

You sure sound like a Confederate apologist. Northerners attack the south. They spend the next 100 years brutalizing blacks but its northerners faults. That's pretty much apologists 101. Violating a piece of paper is enough for you to abandon America but violating the human rights of millions of slaves is an unfortunate circumstance you apparently can live with. :roll:
 
Hondo said:
Resentment over northern aggression played a part in poor treatment of blacks. I'm not saying it would have been all sunshine and rainbows. Just possibly less resentful.
Click to expand...

That's made up nonsense. Or if it's not, an incredibly damning indictment of the character of the southern population. We don't like how the north treated us, so let's institute a state-sponsored program of white supremacy, just out of spite and anger, against an entire population based on race!
 
Master Debator said:
You sure sound like a Confederate apologist. Northerners attack the south. They spend the next 100 years brutalizing blacks but its northerners faults. That's pretty much apologists 101. Violating a piece of paper is enough for you to abandon America but violating the human rights of millions of slaves is an unfortunate circumstance you apparently can live with. :roll:
Click to expand...

I make no apologies for the South. Basic human psychology, if you voluntarily give something up, you aren't as resentful. And, yes, that piece of paper is that important.
 
JasperL said:
That's made up nonsense. Or if it's not, an incredibly damning indictment of the character of the southern population. We don't like how the north treated us, so let's institute a state-sponsored program of white supremacy, just out of spite and anger, against an entire population based on race!
Click to expand...

I love you southern boys. I lived in FL, TX, and VA. There are history books that explore these subjects. There for sure would be racism. I'm just saying what some historians see as making matters worse.
 
Hondo said:
I make no apologies for the South. Basic human psychology, if you voluntarily give something up, you aren't as resentful. And, yes, that piece of paper is that important.
Click to expand...

We all saw you make apologies for the south. And at no point have you come close to convincing anyone that the South would ever have voluntarily given up slavery. Is that piece a paper worth more than millions of enslaved blacks? Are laws more important than righteousness? If the law makes it so helping slaves escape bondage is a crime who is in the right? Harriet Tubman or the slave owner looking to recover his property.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom