Strike will definitely happen

[21Savage]

 

[Zowert]

the North offered to help the South reform its economy multiple times, it was rejected on the pure principle of wanting to own slaves

the revisionist idea that slavery was a minor factor doesn't stand up when the Southern leaders themselves cite slavery as the primary cause.....

Slavery was definitely a factor, however it wasn’t the only one. Using slavery to cultivate cotton was slow and inefficient, many of the southerners knew this. Europe’s demand for the southern state‘s cotton ultimately lead to better farming technology, which eliminated the need for slavery. However you are right, there were still a lot of southerners that wanted to keep and own humans. It was disgusting.

 

[Zowert]

View attachment 438125

The federal government alone stands to lose around $100 million in revenue the first week when 340k Teamsters are not paying taxes.

 

[Thebrownblob]

The federal government alone stands to lose around $100 million in revenue the first week when 340k Teamsters are not paying taxes.

$100 million to the government……..

 

[Mr.Blonde]

$100 million to the government……..

View attachment 438162

I wish I had the steady hands to pull off a procedure like that…

 

[catstalking]

The federal government alone stands to lose around $100 million in revenue the first week when 340k Teamsters are not paying taxes.

who cares they can print as much as they need

under modern monetary systems, taxes are to control inflation and also keep the populace subdued

 

[BrownFlush]

Many of them were great men!

Men of renowned honor and dignity.
This was foreign to Yankees. Sherman's (a war criminal)March is all you need to know.
The South believed ( I agree) they were fighting the second American Revolution.
Lincoln makes Stalin look like a saint.

 

[BrownFlush]

Lincoln As He Really Was
By : Thomas DiLorenzo

 

[Pullman Brown]

Men of renowned honor and dignity.
This was foreign to Yankees. Sherman's (a war criminal)March is all you need to know.
The South believed ( I agree) they were fighting the second American Revolution.
Lincoln makes Stalin look like a saint.

Yes, it’s why I don’t like calling the American Revolutionary War that name. Revolution in those days meant something different. Just a changing of a government, but not anarchical like the French Revolution. War of Independence is better because of the connotation of the revolution word. But I agree 100 percent that our French Revolution was the war between the states, oh and by the way it hasn’t stopped!

 

[Pullman Brown]

Lincoln As He Really Was
By : Thomas DiLorenzo

Great book!

 

[Pullman Brown]

.

 

[PT 4 Life]

Men of renowned honor and dignity.
This was foreign to Yankees. Sherman's (a war criminal)March is all you need to know.
The South believed ( I agree) they were fighting the second American Revolution.
Lincoln makes Stalin look like a saint.

Lmao this such a terrible take. Jesus. So how do you feel about owning people?

 

[Pullman Brown]

Lmao this such a terrible take. Jesus. So how do you feel about owning people?

Look I don’t fault you for being stuck in government schools and all the propaganda but let me help you out.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7s6piXiFK-Q5PoPxMQ2maPPIwcBX7ssF

 

[BrownFlush]

Lmao this such a terrible take. Jesus. So how do you feel about owning people?

How do you feel about slave labor? Jesus? He had nothing to do with it.
The war was not about slaves.
Many think that the North were anti-slavery by conviction but they were anti-slavery because of the the Northwest Ordinance that prevented them from having slaves. This put the manufactures at a disadvantage and they wanted cheap labor and high profits like the farmers of the South. Their answer was immigrants
The war was about the sovereignty of States and of course, money.
Slavery would have taken care of itself.

 

[PT 4 Life]

How do you feel about slave labor? Jesus? He had nothing to do with it.
The war was not about slaves.
Many think that the North were anti-slavery by conviction but they were anti-slavery because of the the Northwest Ordinance that prevented them from having slaves. This put the manufactures at a disadvantage and they wanted cheap labor and high profits like the farmers of the South. Their answer was immigrants
The war was about the sovereignty of States and of course, money.
Slavery would have taken care of itself.

It was over state rights. What was that state right?

 

[PT 4 Life]

Look I don’t fault you for being stuck in government schools and all the propaganda but let me help you out.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7s6piXiFK-Q5PoPxMQ2maPPIwcBX7ssF

It was over slavery plain and simple. The was the major reason.

 

[BrownFlush]

It was over state rights. What was that state right?

In President Lincoln’s first inaugural address, he said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so.”
The South had every right to succeed.
I quote:
"The doctrine of states’ rights is composed of two elements: a belief that the U.S. Constitution is a compact formed by states that retained their sovereign status; and a belief that powers not specifically granted by the Constitution to the national government remain in state hands. The second principle derives from the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” State-reserved powers were designed to discourage undue concentrations of power in a distant national government."

Read up on the Morrill tariffs. That’s when the South seceded, setting up a new government. Their constitution was nearly identical to the U.S. Constitution except that it outlawed protectionist tariffs, business handouts and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures.
The great principle enunciated in the Declaration of Independence that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of-the governed” was overturned by force of arms. By destroying the states’ right to secession, Lincoln opened the door to the kind of unconstrained, despotic, arrogant government we have today, something the framers of the Constitution could not have possibly imagined.
Look at what the states are getting shoved up their arse by the Washington today.

 

[dudebro]

View attachment 438125

The US annual GDP is 23000 billion annually. 7 billion is a rounding error in the national scale of things. A weeks supply of 30-year-old missiles to Ukraine, maybe.

 

[BrownFlush]

It was over slavery plain and simple. The was the major reason.

You are brain washed in more ways than I thought.

 

[PT 4 Life]

In President Lincoln’s first inaugural address, he said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so.”
The South had every right to succeed.
I quote:
"The doctrine of states’ rights is composed of two elements: a belief that the U.S. Constitution is a compact formed by states that retained their sovereign status; and a belief that powers not specifically granted by the Constitution to the national government remain in state hands. The second principle derives from the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” State-reserved powers were designed to discourage undue concentrations of power in a distant national government."
Read up on the Morrill tariffs. That’s when the South seceded, setting up a new government. Their constitution was nearly identical to the U.S. Constitution except that it outlawed protectionist tariffs, business handouts and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures.
The great principle enunciated in the Declaration of Independence that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of-the governed” was overturned by force of arms. By destroying the states’ right to secession, Lincoln opened the door to the kind of unconstrained, despotic, arrogant government we have today, something the framers of the Constitution could not have possibly imagined.
Look at what the states are getting shoved up their arse by the Washington today.

With all that said do you think owning another human being is okay?