Tunisia 37 tourists murdered on beach near marina

[rognvald]

""reduce them under absolute Despotism" I cant see where the Despotism was absolute.." Tropicalescape

Tropic,
You cannot selectively excise a single word(despotism) in the above exerpt from the Declaration of Independence without putting it into the context of the whole. However, if you read my previous responses above, you can see that Lincoln certainly qualified as a "despot" in his excessive and unfair taxation of the South before the war and his brutal suspension of Civil liberties once the war began. How do you better describe a despot? Reading the words prior to the term despotism it says:

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government . . . "

I don't know how this can be anything other than "absolute despotism" and to most objective readers of History is quite clear. There is no question in my mind that the South had every right to secede from the Union based upon the unfair treatment and unconscionable taxation imposed upon them from the Union and the unrelenting campaign by Lincoln ,before the war, to cripple the South financially. I hope this answers your question. There is one last element that I believe creates confusion among many and that is the egregious and biased "History" that is taught in our public school system that is so distorted, whitewashed and sanitized in order to fit an educational agenda where most students never know the unbiased History of their country. An excellent example elsewhere is the rewriting of Russian History after the death of Czar Nicholas and the success of the Russian Revolution by confirmed Marxists/Communists that has no bearing to the reality of Russia's past. Good luck, good sailing and good reading.

P.S. By the way, did George Washington really cut down that cherry tree?

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by rognvald

""reduce them under absolute Despotism" I cant see where the Despotism was absolute.." Tropicalescape

Tropic,
You cannot selectively excise a single word(despotism) in the above exerpt from the Declaration of Independence without putting it into the context of the whole. However, if you read my previous responses above, you can see that Lincoln certainly qualified as a "despot" in his excessive and unfair taxation of the South before the war and his brutal suspension of Civil liberties once the war began. How do you better describe a despot? Reading the words prior to the term despotism it says:

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government . . . "

I don't know how this can be anything other than "absolute despotism" and to most objective readers of History is quite clear. There is no question in my mind that the South had every right to secede from the Union based upon the unfair treatment and unconscionable taxation imposed upon them from the Union and the unrelenting campaign by Lincoln ,before the war, to cripple the South financially. I hope this answers your question. There is one last element that I believe creates confusion among many and that is the egregious and biased "History" that is taught in our public school system that is so distorted, whitewashed and sanitized in order to fit an educational agenda where most students never know the unbiased History of their country. An excellent example elsewhere is the rewriting of Russian History after the death of Czar Nicholas and the success of the Russian Revolution by confirmed Marxists/Communists that has no bearing to the reality of Russia's past. Good luck, good sailing and good reading.

P.S. By the way, did George Washington really cut down that cherry tree?

Perhaps Lincoln thought that rather than war lets give them something to think about ie. "Tax the hell out of them" when that didnt work I guess he opened a can of whop ass on us!! Lincoln a despot? Maybe a pragmatist, but Despot? Are we better off now as a country than before 1865? I think so. I dont think I would want to be the one that lets the "whip come down" on my fellow man .

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by Group9

I think it's safe to say that England wasn't treating the colonies any worse in 1776 than the North was treating the South in 1860, or Louis XVI was treating the French citizens in 1789, or the Soviet Union was treating it's states and citizens in 1991.

But, wars are funny, especially civil wars, revolutions and insurrections, and it's not always easy to predict the spark that sets one off. Nobody likes change, but if there is one thing history has demonstrated over and over again, governments, nations, and countries come and go. And, I've never lived through a world upheaval to know (although my parents lived through one and grandparents lived through two) for sure what it feels like, but darn if what's going on these days around the world and in the USA, doesn't feel like some kind of change is coming in the air.

I guess we'll see.

Through my job I deal with more than a few a few immigrants, many from ex-USSR. And the recurrent theme from their point of view is the total unexpectedness of its collapse in 1991. Most are saying that just few years prior it felt as solidly entrenched as anytime and tomorrow looked more or less like yesterday. Yet in just 5 years, beginning with Chernobyl disaster, various ethnic conflicts which popped up quite unexpectedly (for all except those directly involved in these conflicts), etc. it ceased to exist, apparently the perfect storm of Soviet Afghanistan invasion, Chernobyl meltdown and several very deadly ethnic conflicts in the Caucuses was the fuse which lit the implosion.

Just today I noticed a post going around on FB where a guy is thanking some Southern states for requiring drug testing for welfare recipients. And pointing out (rather correctly) that we live in a topsy turvy Alice in Wonderland kind of world where hardworking people trying to fetch a job or obtain education are discouraged by drug tests most often totally unrelated to their job performance and pushed out from the job market and the layabouts are encouraged by the Federal gov't to stay on the dole, as it's mostly the Feds who are fighting the States on this issue. This cannot go on much longer as such upside down policies tend to implode the societies from within. Something IS in the air and IMO it's just waiting for the fuse to light it. I would not want to be around when it does catch fire.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

Through my job I deal with more than a few a few immigrants, many from ex-USSR. And the recurrent theme from their point of view is the total unexpectedness of its collapse in 1991. Most are saying that just few years prior it felt as solidly entrenched as anytime and tomorrow looked more or less like yesterday. Yet in just 5 years, beginning with Chernobyl disaster, various ethnic conflicts which popped up quite unexpectedly (for all except those directly involved in these conflicts), etc. it ceased to exist, apparently the perfect storm of Soviet Afghanistan invasion, Chernobyl meltdown and several very deadly ethnic conflicts in the Caucuses was the fuse which lit the implosion.

.

Anyone who lived through the cold war years as an adult was surprised to see how fast the Soviet Union dissolved. I was hired as an FBI agent in 1988 and we had considerable briefings and instruction on the Soviet Union in our classes, (as at the time, approximately a third of the Bureau was devoted to anti-Soviet activities) and nowhere, was there a hint from anyone that in three years there was even the remotest chance, that it might cease to exist as a country or break up. (I should also add that the prevalent doctrine considering terrorist acts was that the Atlantic Ocean, and the logistics problem it was thought it would present terrorists with, would protect us, as stupid as that sounds now).

Anyone who thinks they can predict the political winds, anywhere, at any time, is kidding themselves. And, after working through the Soviet Union's breakup, and the advent of global terrorism, I would never say never about anything regarding any country or any place in the world.