Re: Do you really want to form a new Confederate Sates of America?

by **RebYell** Thu Jun 12, 2014 2:44 pm

Yeah I don't know. I figure Facebook, Instagram, etc. would be where the fears would be more strongly rooted (if any) just because it is such a social place. In other words, more people to retaliate.

Hopefully this website is secluded enough so nobody has to worry. Any Yankees or hateful people can be driven out by such a large group of Confederates.

by RebelDixie Sat Jun 14, 2014 4:45 pm

I think Facebook is a very safe place for Rebels. But I see what you mean.

by **Dixie Dog** Sat Jul 26, 2014 12:51 pm

I would only want it to come back for economic reasons, the Federal Gov't is taxing me to death. Oh wait, thats not the only reason, Each State having it's own personality would make it so one could actually relocate and live under the rules they like.
Our Federal Gov't has just become way too big, it's a monster. The City I live in is getting just as bad.
The rules to live here are hard to live by, and I am just talking about building a shed in my back yard.

by **RebYell** Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:51 pm

More the reason to secede, eh? Lord knows it's what we need. We need to gain more support for the Southern Cause.

by timpike1961 Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:29 pm

I would love nothing more than to see it happen....enough of the aggression of the current government.

by **RebYell** Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:25 pm

timpike1961 wrote:I would love nothing more than to see it happen....enough of the aggression of the current government.

Agreed! The Southern government would eradicate much of the modern Northern aggression we see today.

by Copperhead Sat Aug 23, 2014 4:14 am

I'd hope that a new Confederation of the United States would also keep in mind that many people in the north are highly sympathetic to the struggle of our fellow-citizens in the south.

by **RebYell** Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:32 pm

Yes, I think it would certainly be understood.

by graycaptain Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:39 pm

Today, under Republican governors and Republican-held state legislatures, southern states—in particular—and other states are in open rebellion against the intentions of the Voting Rights Act. Seven of the former Confederate states have passed legislation to limit voting rights, and protesters in North Carolina are fighting against those rollbacks. Those same seven states are refusing to participate in the extension of Medicaid coverage that would enable the Affordable Care Act to close the health insurance gap faced by African Americans. These states are also “right to work” for less, or "right to work," states, with anti-union laws designed to limit the effectiveness of unions to represent workers with their employers over safety and workplace issues.

So, while Black voting strength was the backbone of President Obama’s victory in 2012, it represents a minority vote in those states. And, as the framing fathers feared, a majority faction has laid claim to those states, infringing on the rights of a minority. But in our modern global world, there really cannot be such states. A map showing poverty in the United States shows that poverty is highly concentrated in these same states. And a map showing the extremes of inequality, by state, shows these are the same states where income inequality is at its worse.

Yet here we are today, an America deeply divided and fractured. If you are poor in America, you are not an American, but a Texan or a Tar Heel. Your access to health care, to quality education, to unemployment benefits all rests on the politics of your state. We are not simply divided in Washington. We are exactly where we were in 1860. We are divided in a vision of the meaning of government and of democracy.

We have a set of states where a majority faction has decided that the role of government is to serve the interest and needs of protecting the incomes of a few at the top. Those states foster little government for the people, but lots of protections for the wealthy. The Constitution was meant to limit the ability of such a faction in taking control of the federal government. But even Madison understood that such factions might control some states, or perhaps many states.

The issue is whether President Obama will respond as President Buchanan did. Buchanan claimed he was not truly indifferent to the extremes of the slave South, but felt he could not take on their intractable position. And while Buchanan appears to have felt that secession was not allowed by the Constitution, clearly he felt powerless to do anything about it. It took President Lincoln to understand that two competing notions of democracy could not stand in the Union. It was Lincoln who decided this could not be a house divided, and to redefine the United States as a “government of the people.”

What will President Obama do with the North Carolina Moral Monday and Witness Wednesday protesters? Will he be like President Lyndon B. Johnson, who took the clues of the civil rights movement to move America forward and insist the federal government must step in and defend the Constitution and democracy? Or will he be like Buchanan and be sympathetic but argue himself into a self-imposed lack of power?

In a global world, we cannot move forward with a nation of poor, starving, poorly educated children, whose parents lack the rights of workers or the power of the vote or the social protection needed in an unstable economy. We cannot be a nation in which government serves the interest of the few while we try to protect democracy in the world. Our government must again see itself as the beacon to the world in defending democracy. And our national leaders must unite us as a nation.

by **RebYell** Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:56 pm

That's a very interesting article....very thought provoking.

by Copperhead Fri Sep 26, 2014 2:08 am

RebYell wrote:Yes, I think it would certainly be understood.

There was a rather active secession movement in the mid-Atlantic States prior to the War Between the States for example- and even the New England States were threatening secession prior to the War of 1812 because the federal government was endangering the trade between New England and the mother-country of Great Britain. Shocked

The Duke of Wellington when he was fighting Napoleon in the Spains was getting alot of his grain, etc. from the ports of New England. Razz

Forgotten history. Suspect

by **RebYell** Sun Sep 28, 2014 5:40 pm

Yeah that's a piece of history people don't often hear.

Secession is ingrained within the American fabric.

by roydenoral Thu Oct 02, 2014 8:51 pm

These are all excellent posts. I am fairly new to this forum and as I have previously stated, I am not a southern, but a "recovering northerner." I did have the good fortune to marry a southern from Alabama many years ago. So, I may see things from a different perspective. However, I love southern history and strongly believe in their cause. What never ceases to amaze me, doesn't amaze my husband at all, is the amount of vitriol that comes from many northerners. There is a great deal of hatred toward the south. Fortunately I did not come of age with a northern family that believed this.
Some people have posted about discussions with northerners about causes of the war, ie. slavery, states rights, etc. Well, I have found it to be an exercise in futility to even engage northerners in any discussion about this. These northerners will not accept any credible researchers such as Thomas DiLorenzo.
I really liked the posts about moving forward, not just in looking back. As far as what states might agree to secede, this is a difficult question. I believe we are in a very similar situation as in 1860. That is taxation without representation. It infuriates me to think that my tax dollars might go to bail out California.
It seems a strong leader is necessary, plus education for the public about the meaning of the Constitution.. One issue I have not seen addressed is that the Federal government is most likely to cut off all benefits to the citizens of any state that does secede. This includes medicare, military retirements, etc. I would be willing to give mine up and live on a farm and be self sufficient in order to maintain freedom and the principles of the constitution. Not sure how many other people would be willing to do this.
Just one more thought. A prior poster mentioned concern about the government reading our posts and considering them to be sedition, etc. Well, as far as I know, sedition means advocating the overthrow of the government. I do not see this anywhere on this forum. As in 1860, the people just want to leave, not attempt to overthrow the federal government.

by **Dixie Dog** Mon Oct 27, 2014 12:26 pm

Well, If we stood up and said" We want a new government", this leaves a question.
If we say "We want the South to rise again, a Confederate government." This leaves much less question.
The whole thing as I see it we have two kinds of people, and skin color does NOT define them, but way of life.
Those who wish to live under a big government, ruler, a big brother.
Those who Know we need a government, but not one that controls people from a big one governmet level.
Why should we give all out money to Washington, and then ask for it back to build a road? A national law that says cars will have the steering wheel on the left, doesn.t mean we need to be taxed on a federal level. A Well Regulated Militia to defend our borders, sure but let each state pay that share
Each state is different, rules for Alaska sure as 7734 don't work in New York City, and vise versa.
The South was NEVER about Slavery, I agree it is morally wrong. So is Murder.
But this does not mean we need one big ruler over everybody. I suspect the ONLY reason the South was attacked was for money, it was robery.
You aint gona convince me all them folk, black and white, gave their lives for slavery.
So for me to have a dream, that is the same as others, I feel good about The South Rising AGAIN!
If that means I would have to move,,,I would pray I could find refuge. Exclamation

by roydenoral Fri Oct 31, 2014 4:04 pm

It is time. It seems that currently the inmates are running the asylum. I am referring to the current problem of Ebola and other infectious diseases entering the country. Obama will not enact quarentine. Will be a test of states rights because New York and New Jersey have enacted quarentine. I could go on and on about this, but quarentine is the only way we have to manage these viral diseases. Antibiotics are useless. Quarentine has been understood and used since the middle ages. I am more concerned about this than about the Islamic terrorists. Would need a strong leader and be prepared for the liberal cry of returning slavery. Of course, the 2nd revolution had nothing to do with slavery. It was about Lincoln's desire to collect massive taxes from the south to fund northern industrialists. See The Morrell Tarrif act of 1860.

by **Dixie Dog** Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:51 pm

roydenoral wrote:It is time. It seems that currently the inmates are running the asylum. I am referring to the current problem of Ebola and other infectious diseases entering the country. Obama will not enact quarentine. Will be a test of states rights because New York and New Jersey have enacted quarentine. I could go on and on about this, but quarentine is the only way we have to manage these viral diseases. Antibiotics are useless. Quarentine has been understood and used since the middle ages. I am more concerned about this than about the Islamic terrorists. Would need a strong leader and be prepared for the liberal cry of returning slavery. Of course, the 2nd revolution had nothing to do with slavery. It was about Lincoln's desire to collect massive taxes from the south to fund northern industrialists. See The Morrell Tarrif act of 1860.

Thanks for posting that. About the Morrell Tarrif Act of 1860....I been looking for that.

by roydenoral Fri Oct 31, 2014 9:38 pm

You are most welcome. Watch Thomas DiLorenzo on youtube "Lincoln's Tariff War" for an excellent lecture on the Morrell Tariff and why Lincoln wanted a war. DiLorenzo does a great job.

by **Dixie Dog** Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:37 am

Yesterday, I was at lunch with a couple customers. They go on and on about how Federal Government is just out of contol, and of all things they made this one statement, "This nation started down the tubes about the time of the Civil War." They act like they are the first to ever see this.
I asked if others they knew felt this way. They did.
So I informed them that this "Idea" they have is not new at all,
These things you all think we need, are the very things the Confederacy was about.
And I made one last little point. If we all run around as individuals yelling a different thing, nothing can ever happen. But if, we all of these mind sets can come together under one hat, we just might make a difference.

by **RebYell** Thu Dec 04, 2014 12:35 pm

Dixie Dog wrote:Yesterday, I was at lunch with a couple customers. They go on and on about how Federal Government is just out of contol, and of all things they made this one statement, "This nation started down the tubes about the time of the Civil War." They act like they are the first to ever see this.
I asked if others they knew felt this way. They did.
So I informed them that this "Idea" they have is not new at all,
These things you all think we need, are the very things the Confederacy was about.
And I made one last little point. If we all run around as individuals yelling a different thing, nothing can ever happen. But if, we all of these mind sets can come together under one hat, we just might make a difference.

I agree completely. The division that the country sees now in politics have been drawn since the 1700's, and split the nation in the 1860's. Today, I fear that the lines will be drawn not by North and South, but rather by the Blue and Red Lines of political parties.

by **Dixie Dog** Sun Apr 05, 2015 3:00 pm

Thanks for posting that Reb, Sometimes I feel like I am all alone in my thoughts. I almost typed that what you just did "Blue and Red Lines" but I feared I may be alone on this.

by confederateson1342 Wed Apr 08, 2015 7:08 pm

The Blue and Red line split is exactly what is going on but in all opinion I do not agree with either of the political parties. Yes they both claim to have values but take the money that the members of congress and the president make away from them and see who runs for elections on those values they claim then. I am a die hard Confederate, like they said during the Revolutionary war, Give me Liberty or give me Death!!

by Sponsored content