Comment on [deleted]
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That’s an interesting question of Federalism, that I would argue, even the courts can’t answer. The violence of the civil war effectively answered that question: No. However, it was purely the force of violence that made that assertion. And it will be again.
kartonrealista@lemmy.world 1 month ago
The American Civil War was fought over slavery, not independence in terms of foreign policy.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Yes, and a counter to the argument that the Union was inviolable versus states joining voluntarily. It might be convenient to only look at one aspect of a matter, but that only holds so long as the view agrees with the outcome you would like to happen.
The arguments around states, federalism, The Union (it wasn’t called the union for no reason): they matter. And it might be that you might find a limited interpretation around what actually happened during that time inconvenient in the future.
kartonrealista@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Why were the slave-owning states the only ones “rising concerns” around “federalism”? A curious coincidence indeed
False@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Because they wanted to leave the union so they could carry on being saving assholes.
Your point is dumb