It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the confederacy trying to return in the US?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by beezzer
 


What the OP is saying is that some people are obviously attempting to return us to the days of open discrimination and oppression without recourse. The only difference is that the determining factor between the oppressed and the oppressors is no longer the amount of black pigment contained in one's skin, but rather it's the amount of green pigment contained in one's wallet.

Hope that was simple enough for you.


Class warfare. Got it. Thanks.




posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by deadeyedick

Originally posted by Flatfish

I never said that the new confederacy was focused on the re-emergance of black slavery. In case you hadn't noticed, they no longer limit their discrimination to the color of someone's skin.

Yea thats pretty much what i got outta your post though.A whole bunch of racial bs.Then you go off on a money rant that is lacking substance and facts and heavy on the left right paradigm.

Its pretty simple if one can just let go of the hate and study the constitution.The real problem will be overcoming the world banking system.


Like I told Beezer, the new basis for discrimination is the amount of "green" someone has as opposed to the amount of "black" which was the basis at the time of the confederacy. Today, the world banking system is nothing more than the instrument they utilize to insure the indebtedness of the working class, regardless of the color of their skin. Not that it matters but I happen to be a white, native born american. All I can say is that we should have nationalized the banks when we bought and paid for them during the TARP bail-out.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by davidgrouchy
 


I'd have to choose B. My wife has a collection of Confederate flags, clothing with the colors on them, and a few busts of confederate generals. As, a Japanese, she has no idea what any of it really means at the core, but she's interested in the Civil War era. The south in particular.

As for the Confederacy rising. No one has sent me a memo. It's not the Confederates trying to enslave the working class. It something larger and far more sinister.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by beezzer
 


What the OP is saying is that some people are obviously attempting to return us to the days of open discrimination and oppression without recourse. The only difference is that the determining factor between the oppressed and the oppressors is no longer the amount of black pigment contained in one's skin, but rather it's the amount of green pigment contained in one's wallet.

Hope that was simple enough for you.


Class warfare. Got it. Thanks.


I knew you'd eventually get it and yes, I guess you can call it class warfare, hell I've called it that myself on many an occasion but in reality it's more of a "greed" warfare situation. Not everyone in the uber rich community is against paying their fair share you know, some of them are even proponents of the idea. i.e. Warren Buffet



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flatfish

Originally posted by deadeyedick

Originally posted by Flatfish

I never said that the new confederacy was focused on the re-emergance of black slavery. In case you hadn't noticed, they no longer limit their discrimination to the color of someone's skin.

Yea thats pretty much what i got outta your post though.A whole bunch of racial bs.Then you go off on a money rant that is lacking substance and facts and heavy on the left right paradigm.

Its pretty simple if one can just let go of the hate and study the constitution.The real problem will be overcoming the world banking system.


Like I told Beezer, the new basis for discrimination is the amount of "green" someone has as opposed to the amount of "black" which was the basis at the time of the confederacy. Today, the world banking system is nothing more than the instrument they utilize to insure the indebtedness of the working class, regardless of the color of their skin. Not that it matters but I happen to be a white, native born american. All I can say is that we should have nationalized the banks when we bought and paid for them during the TARP bail-out.


OK i totally understand your point the fault is that when you imply that the reason for the civil war was slavery is not the truth.However when slavery was ended that was the best thing the usa has done.The civil war was started over money and manipulation.I dont think it will be north against south.I agree somewhat with your points of the rich and poor however when we have a gold backed us treasury currency and states rights that will be the foundation to build on.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flatfish

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by beezzer
 


What the OP is saying is that some people are obviously attempting to return us to the days of open discrimination and oppression without recourse. The only difference is that the determining factor between the oppressed and the oppressors is no longer the amount of black pigment contained in one's skin, but rather it's the amount of green pigment contained in one's wallet.

Hope that was simple enough for you.


Class warfare. Got it. Thanks.


I knew you'd eventually get it and yes, I guess you can call it class warfare, hell I've called it that myself on many an occasion but in reality it's more of a "greed" warfare situation. Not everyone in the uber rich community is against paying their fair share you know, some of them are even proponents of the idea. i.e. Warren Buffet

Warren Buffet? Isn't he the guy who's fighting paying a 1 billion dollar IRS bill?




posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
FLAT TAX!!!
edit on 31-8-2011 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I don't think it's more of the Confederacy returning than it is Prescott Bush's plan for a fascist America coming to bear.

See, some people think that the only solution to the problems in the United States is an extremist Nationalist stance. Where they believe that only "Real Americans" (Ask the German Jews back in the 30's if they ever heard something similar about "Real Germans" and you will know what the real end game is) are worthy of freedom in this country and if you don't fit into their narrow vision of what a "real American is, than you must be eliminated as a domestic enemy.

Don't you love it when history repeats itself?


edit on 31-8-2011 by HauntWok because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


There is some truth in your statement.Why do you feel necessary to bring up the the hate??
I look around and i dont see people being killed or persecuted the way you make it sound.
I dont see all the hate that you do i see all the struggles and hardships and that is what makes strong.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flatfish
At that time, "states rights" meant the right to own slaves.

It's always sad to see the benefits of a public education in the wild.


OP, prior to 1865 we were called "these United States." We should be moving toward that, just as the nation was intended to be. A confederacy is a group of individual states, with a limited central governing body. A union is a singular, powerful governing body composed of several individual states. In the former, the power is with the states. In the latter, the power is with the central government.

This is how it should be, as this is how best to be a group of individuals. We are not a flock of sheep, we are individual people with individual ideals and values. A kollectivist mindset kills individuality and personal responsibility.

/TOA



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 01:45 PM
link   
The Confederacy was fighting for States Rights.

Lincoln did not want to end Slavery, the country was making a fortune with its slaves.

RUSSIA wanted America to end Slavery. And to get Russia's support, Lincoln had to declare he was going to end Slavery. Then Russia sent its entire Atlantic and Pacific Naval Fleets to Union ports, securing Lincoln's win over the South.


Labor Unions in America are evil. That's why Americans don't want them.

You can pick your Union President, but in America....you CAN NOT pick your Union Steward. In America the Union President has "Executive Powers" and picks who HE wants as Union Stewards. It's NOT a Democratic entity.

There is NO Federal or State Law allowing YOU to pick your Union Steward....and it's this which leads to corruption and an uncontrollable Labor Union which led to its demise in America.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Confederacy? How about a return to the Articles of Confederation instead? The federal government has gotten too big. It needs some serious limitations in order to restore freedom to the citizenry. They will not obey the Constitution, seeing it instead as a "hindrance" or an "obstacle" to be gotten around instead of THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. Thus I propose a return to the Articles of Confederation.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


While I agree that government has gotten way too big. I don't think scrapping things like the 13th Amendment is a good idea, but nice try to do an end run around freedom there buddy.

People remember that some things that happened after the 1700s were good too. I know that it takes a little bit more time to think about things like women's rights and the right not to be sold into slavery, but these are actually good things and shouldn't be ignored. (course some people aren't ignoring them but betting on the ignorance of the American people to get what they want)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Wow - what a great, well thought out post. Star and Flag.

It's threads like this that make me want to stay on ATS.

Well done, OP!



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
I don't think this is just happening in the USA. I think rather than the Confederacy rising, there will soon be some sort of uprising with the poor versus the rich.

The world over, the low and middle classes are having services cut back, while tax cuts for the richest members of society continue unabated. It seems as though only the French have had the guts to increase taxes on their wealthiest citizens, and even then, it's only on those making more than the equivalent of about $10 million a year. The brunt of the Gov't cutbacks worldwide are being taken by the people that can least afford them, while the rich continue to enjoy the lowest tax rates that they've had in almost 70 years.

I don't think it's the Confederacy trying to return. On reflection, this is more a class thing. It's got more in keeping with the French or Russian revolutions than the Confederacy (where the richest people could afford the best, including education, for their children, but most of society worked 18 hour days just to get by), but I still LOVE your original post.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


While the 13th amendment is good, and so are the first 10, there are some bad amendments. When the Constitutional convention convenes, we can hammer out a new bill of rights and the good amendments can be added right in. The bad ones, like the 12th, 14th, 16th, 17th, 18th, and 20th could be excised. It would take a Constitutional convention to return to the Articles of Confederation, unless we actually have another revolution.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


So, given your definition, you support the rights of states to legalize slavery and racial segregation I suppose? I mean we are talking about the United States in literal terms right? You hear that folks? Fascism is A-ok so long as it's at the state level. We are the United States.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by The Old American
 


So, given your definition, you support the rights of states to legalize slavery and racial segregation I suppose? I mean we are talking about the United States in literal terms right? You hear that folks? Fascism is A-ok so long as it's at the state level. We are the United States.


Yep, that's exactly, precisely what I've said in every one of my posts. Oh, and I support the Jim Crow laws, the abolition of suffrage for women, and bombing abortion clinics, too.

/TOA



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by openminded2011
It seems to me that a trend is building. Anti union, anti education, pro wealthy. They want workers rights stripped, our schools dumbed down, and to crush any ability to challenge the supremacy of the wealthy families of this country. And thinking about it, there is a perfect analogy to this: The old south and the confederacy. Plantation owners didnt give their slaves any rights other than to work for them. Education was allowed only for the children of the wealthy (some poor whites got minimal education, but only minimal). Small groups owned vast portions of the total wealth of the country. Anyone questioning this system in any serious way found themselves hanging from the end of a rope. I do believe, that there is a cabal of people in this country who would like to see a return to an approximation of this system. Maybe not outright slavery. But a system where workers have little or no rights and the rich have all the rights. these positions are mostly supported by conservative organizations, and the republicans, who control the red states. If you look at a map of the "red states vs the blue states, its literally the same states that were in the confederacy that are red states. I dont think this is coincidence.

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 31-8-2011 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-8-2011 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)


NO NO!.

You have taken it to one side of the ridiculous spectrum.
Just because people want a return of states rights, NOT SLAVERY, as the Country was born has nothing to do with stripping away this or that.
Looking at it through a monocle will only give you one view.

If Alabama wants Unions, then so be it. Good for them. If Florida does not, then so be it and good for them. It is not up to nor the right of the Fed govt to step in and decide either way. The idea for states rights was to provide the collection of peoples in America the ability to choose which state suites them best. Whether it be state provided health care, no unions, a different approach to education.

What you are scared of is what is pitched by alot in your idea camp, if the States get to decide, then all hell breaks loose.
No, no it does not.

And please, don't anyone retorting to this come back with the whole slavery issue crap. The country, as created and born did not allow slavery, as it went against parts of the Bill of Rights and Constitution.
If you enlighten yourself and realize what the compromise on slaves being counted did, then this argument will go to the curb, where it belongs.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Even though this thread didn't start out so great i think there is some great info in here that people should read.Maybe its worth a flag?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join