Texas, the Demos and Repubs believe in individual rights as well, the problem is simply that they don't necessarily believe in States' Rights.
States' Rights better insure that an individual's rights will not be threatened. A "citizen's" rights to be more accurate.
The major parties don't respect that on the national level, State governments obviously do more than Federal elected officials do.
As for Astral:
I dunno about this one, I don't considder myself fully American, but I am still eternally greatful that the Yanks won the war.
The Yanks had to win the war, secession was not the answer, if only the Southerners were fighting for States' Rights and not secession, then they
would have won what they wanted, freedom everlasting.
I would completely hate to live in a world where states rights still had the power that the south wanted them to. America never would have
become a world power without a strong federal government, and the country would be a weak and internally divided nation.
This is not true. In 1844 the United States virtually doubled its land mass, which already was about the size of the major European nations on the
European Continent and British Isles. They accomplished this in a "state-centered" federal system.
This is because the Federal Government does have certain enumerated powers that allow for it to make the Union a strong Union and not a dissolving
Confederacy of different "nations".
[quoteThe Civil War truly united the United States, no longer were people New Yorkers, Alabamans, Wisconsinites or Virginians, but Americans.
The Civil War destroyed the United States and created a nation that would be more appropriately named "The Federal Districts of the District of
There is also the cultural issue, the south had a much more defined culture before the war than today. Southerners had a very rigid class
system with less social mobility than there was in even England at the time. This system included the plantation owners and other large landholders
which acted like a form of noblility and ruled through economics over lower classes of common people. This would be an absolutely horrible system to
live under, unless you were in the ruling class. Also much of the south's fighting force came from the lower classes, and they were duped into
fighting for the economic rights of the upper class in my oppinion.
The Southerners fought to remove the Northerners from their lands, plain as that.
Finally, Lincoln never wanted the radical reconstruction to take place, had he not be murdered, the rebuilding of the south would have been
very different and the states would be welcomed back into the union. Lincoln did fight the war for the slaves as well, and was greatly pained by the
south's rebelion, missing sleep and feeling that he failed the nation. Quite a tragic way for such a great man to live his final years, but he did
save the nation and free thousands of people from one of the US's worst abuses, slavery.
May Peace Travel With You
I don't believe there is any hard evidence Lincoln did not want this. The Democrats were pro-States' Rights, the Republicans wanted to construct
their own ideology into the system, whether they truly believed it would centralize the nation as it did is also indeterminable, but that is the
effect it had.
Andrew Johnson (Lincoln's Successor) was a Jacksonian Democrat who firmly believed in States' Rights. He was impeached by the Republicans.
To think Lincoln would not have done what his entire party did, is I think being blindly faithful.