Ron Paul: Confederate Soldier

[Evrviglnt]

John Hawkins of Right Wing News has interviewed Dr. Ron Paul, congressman from Texas. The questions asked are great, and one answer in particular is interesting:

Getting down to the last two questions here…. Most people consider Abe Lincoln to be one of our greatest presidents, if not the greatest president we’ve ever had. Would you agree with that sentiment and why or why not?

No, I don’t think he was one of our greatest presidents. I mean, he was determined to fight a bloody civil war, which many have argued could have been avoided. For 1/100 the cost of the war, plus 600 thousand lives, enough money would have been available to buy up all the slaves and free them. So, I don’t see that is a good part of our history. Besides, the Civil War was to prove that we had a very, very strong centralized federal government and that’s what it did. It rejected the notion that states were a sovereign nation.

The people who disagree want to turn around and say, “Oh, yes, those guys just wanted to protect slavery.” But that’s just a cop-out if you look at this whole idea of what happened in our country because Lincoln really believed in the centralized state. He was a Hamiltonian type and objected to everything Jefferson wanted.

“For 1/100 the cost of the war, plus 600 thousand lives, enough money would have been available to buy up all the slaves and free them. So, I don’t see that is a good part of our history.” I think Congressman Paul’s answer is a great example of what can happen when political ideology becomes myopic dogma. It’s an answer inspired by visceral dislike for government. He’s suggesting that America could have solved an ancient moral question by taxing the North to pay off the South. That’s an asinine suggestion considering the South had an economy critically dependent on slavery – the cotton trade made the Southern economy larger than those of nations like France or Germany. In 1800 the cotton trade brought in 5 million dollars, making up only 7% of the nation’s trade. By 1860 King Cotton was pulling in 191 million dollars and commanded 57% of America’s trade. There were 4 million slaves in the South, property estimated to be valued at 2 billion dollars. Economically, ending slavery was bound to cripple the national economy and cause the collapse of the South. So why did we do it?

In 1835 anti-slavery forces in congress began a long push to ban it in the nation’s capital, Washington D.C., continuing a debate over a divisive issue that had been simmering since before the creation of our revered Constitution; what was changing now was moral sentiment. That happened because you had many preachers, like William Lloyd Garrison, crusading around declaring slavery as an abomination in the eyes of the Lord, and slave owners as sinners destined for hell. The publication of best seller Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe shocked Northerners and outraged Southerners, who called it a book of lies. Whatever the truth, more Americans rose to decry slavery, declaring it a crime against God. The South had used that same bible to justify slavery, and so grew increasingly angry about being demeaned by Northerners who profited vicariously from the institution. They began to build a state’s rights argument designed to defend them from the meddling, moralizing power of the federal government. Naturally opposition to government became a Southern value, and the preservation of slavery akin to the preservation of the rights to life, liberty and property. To believe the hated Lincoln administration could buy off the honor of a southern culture that prized it so dearly is to know nothing about the South.

Ron Paul goes on to say that the war was an excuse used by the federal government to flex its muscles, but that totally ignores the explosive issue slavery had become by that time. The institution made a mockery of what many Americans had come to understand was the essence of America - the self-evident truth that all men were equal. Were blacks ‘human beings’ deserving of the unalienable rights endowed by our creator? The Dred Scott Supreme Court decision in 1857 stated that they weren’t, being “so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” The legal opinion made a political solution to slavery practically impossible. The government didn’t have to concoct a war over slavery, the nation was inexorably led in that direction by forces that had been brewing since long before our founding.

The implication that states ought to be separate, “sovereign nations” is also absurd. It makes congressman Paul the last, lonely defender of the Articles of Confederation, a system that proved unworkable and potentially fatal to the nation as a whole. I won’t go into why the A of C didn’t work, you ought to know why by you’re age, but certainly Ron Paul knows why, yet he still says such foolish things. There are plenty of good arguments we can have over Abraham Lincoln’s presidency, unfortunately Ron Paul hasn’t made any yet.

[TheCatholic]

Ron Paul's fiscal policies are great. Its his foreign policies that are wrong-headed.

[AnthonyR]

Paul belongs in a rubber room... If I'm not mistaken, secession was actually the root cause of the war, not abolishing slavery.

[lightnin']

...I've put Paul in the same "goofball" category with Dennis "Kook"-cinich, Jesse Ventura, Al Franken, and Ross Perot.

For all you Kentuckians, you now have the chance to vote for (or against) Paul's son, Rand Paul-who's on track to be a permanent candidate for office; just like his father...

[UB_S]

The mention of Ron Paul makes me wonder if he will decide to "run" again in 2012 - sigh - his only contribution was the "comic relief" factor in the debates...

[Warhawk1982]

Originally Posted by lightnin'

For all you Kentuckians, you now have the chance to vote for (or against) Paul's son, Rand Paul-who's on track to be a permanent candidate for office; just like his father...

I'm listening...

[SHOWGAIT]

I, too, come from a long of Kentuckians. My hometown is Lexington and our family first settled there in1779. You raise many good points on the civil war, and yes, slavery was a hottly contest issue. But the gist of wor was the over stepping of the government in thier attempt tax the south into submission. The articles of the confederacy were only one failure, not withstanding the lunacy of their president, Jefferson Davis.
I do not condon succession by the states, but where are we heading now?
One last thought; one of the greatest American's came from that war....Robert E. Lee

[Northstar]

Secession is not the answer, even though I can see why people would want to disassociate themselves from the idiots in DC ...

However, states should definitely throw down with the feds ... deny feds the right to go beyond their constitutionally conferred limits. States created the fed, not the other way around... the feds can only run us if we let them ... states have the right to tell the feds "no"... you will not confiscate our monies or our freedoms ... cut off their water and they will die...

[X1776kRumor]

Originally Posted by Northstar

Secession is not the answer, ...

I respectfully disagree. The Feds have overstepped their authority and violated the Constitution. States should say Good-bye to the Unconstitutional "Feds" government, and create a new United States Government that follows the Constitution.

The quickest way to kill off the current Unconstitutional "Feds" government is to cut-off its funding via We Taxpayers.

[Northstar]

Originally Posted by X1776kRumor

I respectfully disagree. The Feds have overstepped their authority and violated the Constitution. States should say Good-bye to the Unconstitutional "Feds" government, and create a new United States Government that follows the Constitution.

The quickest way to kill off the current Unconstitutional "Feds" government is to cut-off its funding via We Taxpayers.

I feel your sentiments, but it isn't going to happen .. too big a project, the country is too divided.. we would be sitting ducks for those who hate us .. I agree the states should throw down the gauntlet, in fact that's what they are doing .... but, nice as it would be to just sweep the field, that's not realistic..

I say let's fight them, in the courts, at the polls, and in the streets if necessary .. give me liberty or give me death ..

If it comes down to a fight in the streets, then we can dismantle and make a new government based upon the constitution..

I would like to disenfranchise these idiots too, but we have to work within the system until we have exhausted every means possible... then it's a different ballgame.