IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Current version
That's like saying the TEA party can't be about tax breaks because the vast majority of them will never personally meet (seeing The Donald on a podium in the distance or on a big screen don't count) anyone in a bracket to benefit (a $200 advance on next year's refund don't count neither) from the proposed freedoms.

It's about supporting the system, not about personal benefit. Your Solomon may well have been all about the system, the way of life, without ever actually meeting a slave owner, just as a TEA partyer might be all about "not punishing success" or "what if Joe The Plumber (OK, unlicensed Plumber's Helper) makes $250K" even though they will probably never meet anyone (damned few flesh-and-blood persons qualify) who will benefit from Republican tax "reforms".

The irony is that the war, from the Northern perspective, was explicitly NOT about ending slavery, while all from the Southern perspective, all the arguments boiled down to preserving slavery. The Southern view was all about State's Rights, but the only right they cared about was the right to own slaves. The Northern perspective was about the idea that the United States is a nation, not a collection of little nations. Neither side was really about the idea that human dignity does not derive from the ability to sunburn easily.

So yeah, the North wasn't really right, but the South was really, really wrong.

Which is not to say that Solomon was a bad guy.

I just found my dead daughter's letters to her unborn (as of 9/11/2001) child. Kid is a healthy little boy now, with a new Daddy and a new Mommy and a Grandpa Mike who misses him so much he's almost crying right now. But the letters refer to Daddy (AKA "sperm donor" AKA "rapist" AKA Adam) who went to fight Al-Qaeda in order to pay for college and make a better life for the little guy.

Adam was not a bad guy for going to war against Al-Qaeda. He was a bad guy for raping my little girl and abandoning my grandson. But he didn't go to war for Christianity or democracy or America. He went to war to pay for college.

My guess is that Solomon went to war mostly to avoid getting shot by a recruiter. Maybe he colored that with defending the rights of the States, or the Southern Way Of Life (of which slavery is an integral part even if he ain't the owner). But it was probably about not getting shot right now, and impressing the girls with a uniform, and making a few Confederate dollars, and being a patriot and a Man.
---------------------------------------
I think it's perfectly clear we're in the wrong band.
(Tori Amos)
New You and I are very close in our assessments.
The Southern view was all about State's Rights, but the only right they cared about was the right to own slaves.

I agree with that in this sense: the South's economic power was entirely wrapped up in free labor. Lose that, they reasoned, and they lost their economic edge. The roughly 1 in 5 Southerners who owned slaves doubtless found plenty of useful idiots, like my ancestor, who may have been sympathetic to a call to defend his state's sovereignty that they could use to preserve their economic power.

I am truly sorry for bringing to mind painful things for you. Clearly Adam's motivation for enlisting had nothing to do with democracy or Christianity. But neither did Pat Tillman's. There are, no doubt, true believers in our military that are there fighting for motivations that don't have anything to do with the reasons the elite want the war fought. In other words, ascribing to all of them a single motivation for fighting - let alone the powerful's reasons - is overly simplistic. That's the point I was trying to make when I said that claiming the war was fought over slavery was overly simplistic.

[Edit: tpyo]
Expand Edited by mmoffitt May 10, 2011, 09:45:08 AM EDT
New In that vein,
wasn't it mainly a tribal thing all around? (..the biped equivalent of herd instinct.)
Or, in keeping with Smiley (Smiley's People, with Alec Guinness) -- in trying to figure out why certain people became traitors (or traitor-sleuths??)
He said.. ... "There are reasons, and then there are ... Reasons."
Same, I guess re. ever signing-up to kill Other homo-saps for whole basketsfull of 'reasons' and always Damn Few Reasons
-- the former readily parsed into non-sense by anyone not smoking dope/waving flags at the time.

Wanna get an edja-Kay'shun in Murica / get that MBA corner office ticket?
Spin that AK-47 Wheel-of-Fortune, if you're not in the top 10% (where all the plundered Net Worth has gone.)
(You also get Free Meds for a while -- something a 20 yo. couldn't afford elsewhere -- except by not needing any white-coated ones for a few decades, if lucky/lucky.)


(Guess that's one r/Reason for my preference for cats over many homo-saps, but-not-all:
felines are the pukka Symbol for the concept, oxymoron: herding cats. Not herdable == Reason enough.)

New Don't worry about my painful things
There is no way to predict what will set me off.

And in this case it wasn't what you wrote, it was finding Alice's diary she was keeping for her child. The 9/11 page was particularly rough.

---------------------------------------
I think it's perfectly clear we're in the wrong band.
(Tori Amos)
     'The foolishness of Civil War reenactors' - (Ashton) - (29)
         The Victors always get to write the history books. - (mmoffitt) - (26)
             So you've finally decided to smoke dope, huh? - (rcareaga) - (21)
                 naw, he gets it - (boxley)
                 What Mississippi Said - (lincoln) - (2)
                     so why did the valiant yankees wait - (boxley) - (1)
                         It was only about slavery on one side - (mhuber)
                 What Georgia Said - (lincoln)
                 Constitution of the Confederate States of America - (lincoln)
                 What North Carolina and the Constitution said. - (mmoffitt) - (14)
                     So if North Carolina didn't mention slavery - (lincoln) - (13)
                         what was your grade? - (boxley) - (12)
                             Hmmm... - (Another Scott) - (11)
                                 emancipation proclaimation was in what year? - (boxley) - (10)
                                     It's in the linky. - (Another Scott) - (9)
                                         if its all about the slaves - (boxley) - (8)
                                             Um, for the Conferderates it was all about Slavery. HTH. -NT - (Another Scott) - (7)
                                                 so it wasnt about slavery for the north, thank you -NT - (boxley) - (6)
                                                     The important word is "all". HTH. -NT - (Another Scott) - (3)
                                                         You misunderstand boxley, A S - (rcareaga) - (2)
                                                             :-) Ja, he's one of a kind. ;-) -NT - (Another Scott)
                                                             cow or bull? -NT - (boxley)
                                                     Who ever said it wasn't? - (lincoln) - (1)
                                                         Swing and a miss. - (mmoffitt)
             Current version - (mhuber) - (3)
                 You and I are very close in our assessments. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                     In that vein, - (Ashton)
                     Don't worry about my painful things - (mhuber)
         one economic viewpoint - (lincoln) - (1)
             Besides which ... - (drook)

Damn them, and their hatstand minions!
57 ms