This article is interesting. Ron Paul supports secession and claimed that slavery could end by buying up slaves. I don't agree with that since injustice ought to end immediately by fighting or strong intervention. Bribing away crimes is still bribery. Some of the supporters of Ron Paul agree with small, private businesses discriminating people on race. They believe private instruments can do it, because they aren't created by the federal government. I disagree with this assumption, because private businesses can't do fraud, they can't murder, and they can't do perjury. Therefore, private businesses are limited in their conduct by many laws including the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ron Paul supporters mention that Jim Crow and slavery were state functions. They were, but private groups like the Klan harmed black people's rights. Private groups have done slavery before. The White Citizens Council is a private group. The neo-Nazis is a private group too. Also, private corporations today have promote GMOs, torture, forced slavery, and other evils now in 2012. Therefore, the state and private groups can't be nihilistic and do whatever it wants to. Human rights trump property rights. These laws were created to protect human rights and to allow people to live in whatever location they desire (not to force people to give up their liberties from the Bill of Rights). Also, if you live in every square inch of America (whether in private or public locations), you are bounded under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Just because you are in a private restaurant, doesn't mean that your human rights are negated period.
By Timothy
_____________
3 hours ago"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. "-Alexander Stephens, Vice President of The Confederacy
____________
3 hours agoHow can the poster think Paul is not a racist? The SOUTH started the war, they clearly initiated hostilities because they were angry at the Northern States not honoring the Dred Scott decision, which made it a crime to not return fleeing slaves. Just read S.Car. articles of war, and you will see that Slavery was FRONT AND CENTER of the Southern reason for INITIATING hostilities. No matter what sort of hokey-poo Dr. Paul has to offer, the SOUTH started the war, the SOUTH attacked Washington, the SOUTH attacked Ft. Sumter.
___________
3 hours agoMaybe you should join with Paul and the other Texas traitors and start referring to Slavery as the "Atlantic Triangular Trade," and stop calling them "slaves," but instead, like in the new text books created by Paul's constituents, call them "Atlantic Triangular Trade workers." Also, your history is a little screwed up...the SOUTH attacked the NORTH, not the other way around, and they laid waste to northern Virginia and attacked Washington. In fact, the North wasn't even AWARE it was at war for almost two years. Talk about REVISIONIST HISTORY.
_______
3 hours agoIt's not pandering...it's CODE. Code that only racists hear, and others can blithely ignore. How do you figure that voting against the Civil Rights Act, being against anti-discrimination enforcement and being against unions doesn't make Paul a racist?
__________
3 comments:
As far as I understand Ron Paul's 'buy slaves' statement, is that you buy the slaves freedom. It was much cheaper to purchase the slave, and then set them free; than it was to go to war over slavery. That is why he believes the war was not about slavery, because there was a very easy and cheaper way to set all the slaves free. Buy their freedom, by buying the slaves and then setting htem free.
I see your argument, but
The South wasn't willing to voluntarily free slaves at all. They didn't want to do it. The Civil War existed because of numerous factors. Slavery was one of them regardless of Ron Paul says. The reason is that the Southern leaders of the Confederacy admitted by their own words that slavery was one big factor in their supposed justification for seccession. Buying slaves for freedom wouldn't of happened since the leaders of the Confederacy possessed a hardline position. The Civil War occured and the slaves were freed. The war occured because of cultural differences, political issues, trade, and of course slavery.
He spoke in front of a Confederate flag. The Confederate Constitution supported racism and slavery, so how can the Civil War have nothing to do with slavery when slavery was the key reason on why Lincoln was hated by white racists. He was shot by a racist who wanted slavery.
Post a Comment