The Blue and the Red
Quick history lesson. Most people think that the reason for the Civil War was solely about slavery. Well, that was a big part of it but the heart of the war was about States’ Rights. The Confederacy believed in the idea of seperate governing intities (THESE United States) while the Union believed in the idea of the Federal Government (THE United States). Think of it like a wagon wheel - States’ Rights being the hub, secondary issues like tarriffs being the spokes, and slavery encompassing the whole thing as the outer wheel.
Fast forward to 2004 and look at the final map of the Presidential election. With the exception of a few states, the red and blue states divide on the Mason Dixon line. Could it be that, minus the issue of slavery (thank God), we as a nation are still feeling the original influences of the Civil War and are some how even continuing it through the political battle of “personal freedom” versus “big government”, Capitalism versus Socialism, Conservativism versus Liberalism? And not to mention the philosophical battle of tarriffs/taxing the American people - who can better spend the money you earn?
Just a thought.
Bonus Thought: What does government have to gain by teaching that the Civil War was only about slavery? What if they could just remove it from our history books all together under the guise of “it was just a bad time in our history, let’s move on”?
November 4th, 2004 at 10:32 am
the reason the civil war is taught as about slavery is because the victors get to write the history books.
don’t forget that it was the democratic south that was for states rights and not the republican north. so when i hear conservative republicans complian about the federal gov. violating states rights it makes me laugh cause we fought that war and their side won and the states lost.
November 4th, 2004 at 11:24 am
Notice I did not say Republican versus Democrat. That’s like saying Big Government versus Bigger Government - one is just leaning more toward socialism than the other. Also, the old party labels/dividing lines don’t hold up anymore because the parties have changed so much. That’s the funny thing.
Of course the Union won. We wouldn’t have made it through WWII if it hadn’t. I just find the similarities that still remain interesting - having the libertarian leanings that I have.
November 4th, 2004 at 6:39 pm
have you been reading my forums or what? sheesh
November 4th, 2004 at 10:46 pm
you would like my friend and freelance journalist paul sperry he has some really good stuff out there on the net and a book about how oil interests took over the war on terrorism. he is a libertarian.
i agree that the party switch is funny!
November 6th, 2004 at 9:59 am
on further thought “funny” isn’t the right word maybe “ironic” is
the battle of personal freedom vs. big government is one of the reasons i voted for kerry and not bush. since bush has been in office the federal government has grown faster and gotten bigger since clinton reduced it size in the 90’s. also the “patriot act” allows the federal government to intrud into my person life/information more than any law since the macarthy era. these guys scare me because they are so good at the retoric of freedom that it camoflauges their reduction of it.