States - which the colonies chose to be called/designated as, (recognized under international law/The Law of Nations as sovereign nations) declared their individual independence from England and the tyrannical monarchy of George III in the Declaration of Independence (DoI) and assume[d] among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Natures God entitle[d] them, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. In other words, the right to secede from any confederation, group, or union is derived from the Natural Law of freedom to associate or disassociate. The People/States which acceded to the Union ordained and established through the construction of the Articles of Confederation (AoC): Article III: The said States hereby severally enter into a FIRM LEAGUE OF FRIENDSHIP with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever. Article IV AoC: The better to secure and perpetuate MUTUAL FRIENDSHIP AND INTERCOURSE among the people of the different States in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these States, upon which the Constitutions more perfect Union foundation was laid, did so voluntarily, building on the principles espoused in the DoI and mirrored in the AoC: Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled. and had every power/right afforded to them (by virtue of being duly delegated representation of the sovereign will and character of the People embodying/constituting said States) to rescind/revoke their ascension to the voluntary Union which had become and was attempting to become more tyrannical, and secede from the voluntary Union. Let us not forget: The same generation of people acceded to the DoI, AoC and the Constitution. It is illogical to think they fought a bloody revolution to secure their independence, freedom and liberties, only to attempt to bind an entire country into an insoluble and inescapable Union- preposterous! During the Constitution Convention, a provision was proposed that would have permitted the federal government to use force against a State that did not comply with congressional mandates. Edmund Randolph - a delegate to the Constitution Convention from Virginia - presented his Virginia Plan, which provided that the government could use force against States of the Union that neglected to fulfill their obligations. Much of the Virginia Plan was adopted into the Constitution, but the provision allowing for the use of force by the government States was conspicuously omitted. If States continued to recognize the right to secede, which they clearly did, one is left to wonder why it was so ardently and violently opposed by Lincoln and his troops. The Northern federal legislatures roles being more robust than that of the Southern States, owing to the disparity in populations, had long used that advantage to overwhelm by superior numbers the Southern States when voting to appropriate monies taken in from the import Tariffs (by-and-large in-large-part taken from the less industrially advanced South) to divert that money for Northern interests, which was largely responsible for the South lagging behind in industrial advancement. Lincoln knew full well the South wasnt industrially prepared to take such an economic hit of loss of investment and workforce, and would still be dependent on imports for much of their non-agricultural needs. He (Lincoln) had many other options available to him besides military occupation (which resulted in war), but instead chose to send troops into Virginia and South Carolina, fortifying forts at Pickett, Va; Sumter, SC etc. He couldve easily purchased the release of the slaves and cooperated with the slave States to bring them into the industrial age, (the steam-powered tractor had just been invented for crissakes) and as a result wouldve saved the People of this country of the loss of life, liberty, treasure, and spared them the degradation and destruction of war. Lincoln had long advocated freeing the slaves (who he did not see as equals to whites. For much of his career, Lincoln believed that colonization—or the idea that a majority of the African-American population should leave the United States and settle in Africa or Central America—was the best way to confront the problem of slavery.), but he did /not/ wage the war to free the slaves, he waged the war to subjectively save the Union and centralize more power for the federal government. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races- that I am not nor ever been in favor of making voter or jurors of Negroes.- Abraham Lincoln, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Sept. 18, 1858 His evolution on the issue seems to be one more prompted by political expedience than from enlightenment- disingenuous. The South saw the writing on the wall. They werent trying to preserve slavery as much as they were trying to keep from being financially ruined. If he (Lincoln) was such a champion of freedom and liberty, then why did he so vehemently assault those principles held so dear by Americans? The most egregious violations of civil liberties that Lincoln committed were murdering civilians (See: Shermans March to the sea etc), declaring martial law, suspending habeas corpus (a power solely of the Congress), seizing vast amounts of private property without compensation (including railroads and telegraphs), concluding a war without the consent of Congress, imprisoning nearly 30,000 /Northern/ citizens without trial, shutting down several newspapers, and even deporting a congressman (Clement L. Vallandigham from Ohio) because he objected to the imposition of an (unconstitutional) income tax. Members of the Republican party tampered with the Electoral College by creating the new States of Nevada, Kansas and West Virginia in order to secure Lincolns victory in the 1864 election. To this day, the Civil War (War of Northern Aggression; War for Southern Independence) has the distinction of having the highest death toll of American citizens of any conflict of which the United States has been a part. There were more than 640,000 deaths, many thousands of people were left crippled, families on both sides torn apart by contention and death, and nearly 40% of the countrys economy had been destroyed. In hindsight (and sentiment of those days), most Americans in both the North and South would probably have supported a peaceful method of freeing the slaves rather than a long, deadly, costly Pyrrhic war. All Lincolns actions have managed to do is destroy federalism and subject the entire country to slavery to the federal government through the 14th Amendment. Old masters were traded on for new masters with the monopoly power of the force of the state. Wed all been better off had the South been allowed to peacefully secede, or had won the Contest. archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html usconstitution.net/articles.html#Article3 history/news/5-things-you-may-not-know-about-lincoln-slavery-and-emancipation
Posted on: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:27:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015