Ya huh coward, like I said.

If it’s so braindead then just answer the question my cowardly friend.

No you are. I gave you an actual yes or no. You tried to weasel your way out with bigoted bullshit. Btw I own my home but sure, project away bud.

Ok is it a fact or not if that is a better format. They mean the same thing since facts can generally be substantiated with yes/no correct/incorrect.

No what you did was from a question that’s disparaging to me with either answer. It isn’t accurate either but clearly accuracy is not something you care about and we’ll just ignore the bigoted bullshit included with it.

Or it’s a time for you to answer a yes no or ask a less bigoted question.

I’m not going to say I’m a racist because I’m not. You however proved yourself a coward so there’s that.

So you ask a question that implies I’m a racist one way or the other. You’re a shitheel. I gave you a yes or no question you simply choose not to answer because doing so proves your endeavor worthless and misguided.

Sure what question is that.

See. When pushed into a yes or no you simply refuse to answer.

Yes or no genius. Should be easy to answer.

Well anyway, we’ve already established previously that you tacitly admitted to being a disingenuous troll,

And when did we do that exactly?

It’s not rewriting anything.

Let’s go fact by fact.

Did the with use a framework of states rights to attempt to legalize seceding? Yes or no. No bullshit editorializing, yes or fucking no.

I know you have two separate names, sure. You’re both still making the same idiotic argument blissfully unaware of nuance.

No one is minimizing it. No one said it is right either, you’re being obtuse.

I find it interesting that you are so eagerly anticipating being called racist in this thread.

I find it interesting that you are so eagerly anticipating being called racist in this thread.

You already have and just did again.

What things would those be exactly?

I think you’ve lost track of the contention hence your bullshit about minimizing things.

Yes their main complaint is that a slave in one state is a Freeman crossing the border to another. They complain about it at length and it was indeed the framework they attempted to use to legalize their secession. That’s fairly common knowledge so I’m not sure why you would take issue with that nor do I see how you taste it as denial of slavery.

which was in reference to me saying "states rights is a bullshit excuse?

To which I replied

That does not change it from being the framework for succession and their main complaint

Which is accurate, something being idiotic does not make it unfactual. “They’re stealing our jobs, they’re all criminals” is a shitty excuse to attempt to deport millions does that at all change the fact that is the excuse they’re trying to use? I say no but I’d love to know your opinion on it.

Edit: Fuck it, went back to your original comment that prompted all of this. You sole position in there was that states rights was the founding principle of the Confederacy, and you even recognize there that it was complete bullshit excuse, but also claim that it was the sole cause for secession (and thus the civil war).

All this time and you didn’t bother to find out what the actual contention was? Educators can’t say it wasn’t about states rights because it was, it’s rooted in slavery sure but that’s not the cause of the civil war both Jefferson Davis and Lincoln agree on this and notably slavery was never abolished in this country.

That’s me quoting the person person above me hence the quote shift.

And that person was you. So unless you’re saying you were stating a support for slavery you might want to rethink that genius attempt to discredit me.

Then you should be able to quote one directly that says “no one cared about states rights”.

Jefferson Davis to Congress feb2 1860, almost exactly 1 year before seceding. You’ll notice it’s all about states rights because that’s the legal framework they chose to use since owning people was legal at the federal level.

https://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/archives/documents/jefferson-davis-resolutions-relations-states

3. Resolved, That the union of these States rests on the equality of rights and privileges among its members, and that it is especially the duty of the Senate, which represents the States in their sovereign capacity, to resist all attempts to discriminate either in relation to person or property, so as, in the Territories–which are the common possession of the United States–to give advantages to the citizens of one State which are not equally secured to those of every other State.

Point to where I said or implied slavery was not the primary cause of the civil war. I won’t hold my breath because that isn’t something I’ve said nor would say. What I have said is that you’re wrong to say started rights weren’t involved or weren’t the primary reason the federal government got involved. Hell, Lincoln specifically campaigned on not getting involved in slavery.

Yes Jefferson Davis was a slave owner and a racist, that isn’t news. It’s also something I’ve not argued against but you simply won’t stop reading into my words things that simply do not exist in them.

You’ve quite literally said I’m stuck in lost cause theory which would make me an apologist and likely racist. Save the bullshit.

No one is saying slavery wasn’t involved, it clearly was.

No one is saying racism is a good thing.

What I am saying is that the federal government but it’s own explanation did not get involved because of racism or slavery but rather state sovereignity and succession.

Slavery may have been their reason for seceding, it isn’t however the framework of their disagreement with the federal government not the reason the federal government got involved. So to say it wasn’t about states rights is straight up, flat out wrong.

I can’t help not notice you didn’t provide any evidence for your claim that “no one cared about states rights” or that it states rights were solely a post war conjuring.

You’re wrong, call me a racist I don’t care since I know you’re wrong and simply attacking me on a personal level says you’re emotionally involved to the point you’re willing to ignore actual facts in favor of feelings.

it was about states not recognizing property? you fucking clown lmao it was about (southern) states not recognizing people

No it wasn’t. Emancipation is the outcome not the cause, even after Sumter was attacked Lincoln refused to act on slavery. The feds got involved to preserve state sovereignity and reenforce Lincoln’s position that states did not have the right to secede. Slavery was certainly involved it wasn’t however the cause of federal intervention.

You’re pushing American mythology and ignoring the factual basis for federal involvement. Did you never wonder why Lincoln went with essentially an executive order (that by the way lost him 30+ Republican seats in Congress) rather than passing an amendment rather then passing an amendment first? It’s because he didn’t have the support needed to pass it because the North was also racist and also wanted to keep slaves they just wanted a different mechanism for gaining and keeping slaves ie. Lawful imprisonment.

I would love to see your evidence about that one. I’m quite sure free states cared very very much about state sovereignity hence their objections to shave owning states attempting to exert their authority in free states what with the war about it and all.

They used the states right excuse to uphold the practice of slavery, and completely ignored these rights when they were used against slavery.

No shit? I wonder if we went over this already? Oh yes, we did in fact already talk about this and simply disagreeing with the framework they chose to make their argument does not make it any less of a fact.

That was myth invented after the war was lost to whitewash the people who fought for the “right” to own and abuse human beings.

I already provided pre war evidence that directly refutes your feelings on the matter.

This isn’t lost cause theory, it’s stating a series of facts you simply don’t agree with.

I’m not promoting anything you buffoon, you’re simply trying to call me a racist because you can’t win the argument because the facts simply aren’t on your side.

That’s one states articles of succession and I’m fairly sure the president of the Confederacy is probably a more definitive source as to the Confederacy and btw Lincoln agreed.

Here’s a fun question you’ve yet to address, why is slavery still legal in the United States if the war was to abolish slavery? Why were people still treated as property well into the 1900s?

Yes because that’s the property right they were trying to protect in interstate travel. I’m sorry two things can be true but learn to deal with it I guess.

No I’m not, you’ve apparently not read what I’ve wrote or you’re intensely confused.

I know that, you know that. It however was not tested until the civil war. I think it was Davis himself that said they found out first hand there is no right secede.

Yes a kindergartner could but you’ve apparently missed the point entirely so you’re where in that scale? Preschool? Somewhere in the neighborhood of lacking object permanence?

What you call gobbledygook (racist term btw) are actual facts, you may not like it but they are indisputable facts.

The rest is just weak attempts at personal attacks because you can’t find evidence against my position.

Graffiti it with a dick, it legit seems to get things done.

For Congress it means good insurance for life.

And I quoted him before in the legislature and after the war both specifically referring to states rights.

Racism and slavery was the foundation of the Confederacy, as stated by the people that started it.

No shit?

States rights is a bullshit excuse.

That does not change it from being the framework for succession and their main complaint.

The confederate states wanted to force non-slave states to return escaped slaves, despite them have the rights (specifically a state right) not to return human beings to slavers.

Ah you mean they challenged state sovereignity which is… A state right!

Fuck off with this fake ass daughter of the Confederacy propaganda.

You just admitted it was fact, when I was taught in school they would specifically tell you it was not about states rights when in fact it was. The federal government did not intercede because of slavery they interceded because of state sovereignity.

You fuckoff, as I recall you chose to interject yourself. Did you not?

It’s not an echo chamber if there’s differing opinion.

Can’t help but notice you gave up without providing evidence against my argument. Want to try that again or simply cry about a disagreement you willingly took part in?