The conspiracy that launched US federal government .

When the US was ruled under the articles of Confederation prior to the adoption of the Constitution. The central government had little if any power . The power of the federal government was strengthened by the Constitution and the supremacy clause .


The conspiracy starts with the Alien and sedation acts. In 1799 Thomas Jefferson and James Madison authored the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions . In which the Kentucky and Virginia state legislatures took the alien and sedition acts as unconstitutional . Were these resolutions controversial ? I would say so both northern states and southern states quoted them .

The Resolutions had been controversial since their passage, eliciting disapproval from ten state legislatures. Historian Ron Chernow assessed the theoretical damage of the resolutions as "deep and lasting... a recipe for disunion".[1] George Washington was so appalled by them that he told Patrick Henry that if "systematically and pertinaciously pursued", they would "dissolve the union or produce coercion".[1] Their influence reverberated right up to the Civil War and beyond.[2] In the years leading up to the Nullification Crisis, the resolutions divided Jeffersonian democrats, with states' rights proponents such as John C. Calhoun supporting the Principles of '98 and President Andrew Jackson opposing them. Years later, the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 led anti-slavery activists to quote the Resolutions to support their calls on Northern states to nullify what they considered unconstitutional enforcement of the law.[3]

source





The states argued that all states had the right and duty to nullify anything the states saw as unconstitutional. This position was also known as the principles of 98 .

The Principles of '98 refer to the American political position that individual states could judge the constitutionality of central government laws and decrees, and could refuse to enforce laws deemed unconstitutional. This refusal to enforce unconstitutional laws is generally referred to as "nullification," but has also been expressed as "interposition," i.e. the states’ right to "interpose" between the federal government and the people of the state. The principles were widely promoted in Jeffersonian Democracy. Especially by the Quids, such as John Randolph of Roanoke.

source


Now in this statement I go back to quote the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions.......

Between 1798 and the beginning of the Civil War in 1861, several states threatened or attempted nullification of various federal laws. None of these efforts were legally upheld. The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were rejected by the other states. The Supreme Court rejected nullification attempts in a series of decisions in the 19th century, including Ableman v. Booth, which rejected Wisconsin's attempt to nullify the Fugitive Slave Act. The Civil War ended most nullification efforts.

Look at that last highlighted statement again . It was after the Civil War that subjugation of all states to the federal government was etched into stone .

Let everybody be clear when I say this . The US Civil War was fought over slavery !!!! but the issue runs much deeper than that. It started immediately after the adoption of the US Constitution . Because many Americans feared a oppressive Federal government ( like we have now ).

Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and I'm glad to add the state of Kentucky along with Virginia lead the charge . You also need to remember the mindset back then most people never traveled more than 10 miles from their home. To them the state was their country and the federal government was a intruder. These feelings were never more prevalent in the rural South as opposed to the industrialized North who reaped the benefits of federal government .

The US federal government which we are all currently suffering under. Chose the best time in history along with championing the most noble cause of the abolishment of slavery . In order to consolidate the federal government's power over all states . Abraham Lincoln said the Civil War was . It was the conspiracy the federal government was founded on. Apparently it is one conspiracy many people missed because of the righteous causes given for the war.


Everyone knows the Civil War was about slavery . The problem is that concentrating on that part of the issue completes the federal governments obfuscation of the rest of the issues . If you only look at slavery you are only looking where Washington DC wants you to.



People don't realize that the Civil War was about removing states powers and settling an issue that has been bubbling since 1798 .

A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.

The above quote is South Carolina's justification when it became the first state to secede from the union after Abraham Lincoln was elected.

a reply to: muse7

Yes and I said that in a big bold highlighted statement. " The Civil War was fought over slavery" yep I admitted that freely at the very beginning of my thread. But what I am saying is it is not the only issue and that a very righteous ( and completely correct ) position was used to obscure the real issue .


I'm just curious as to how many more times in this thread people are going to repeat to me a statement I already made?

Now that there is no debate on that issue and I agree with you. Would you kindly look around that to get the rest of the information supplied ?

Did you notice the part where nullification was never successful?

it was designed that way, states for whom a law was good would vote to keep that law - and on occasions where htye did not outnumber states opposing a law, then they would usually have the help of states that wanted their goodwill, who who were out to "get" the state attempting to Nullify.

Now imagine the process with 50 states.

it's one of those ideas that is great on paper, but is non-functional in practice. so... might as well save paper.

originally posted by: TheTengriist
Did you notice the part where nullification was never successful?

it was designed that way, states for whom a law was good would vote to keep that law - and on occasions where htye did not outnumber states opposing a law, then they would usually have the help of states that wanted their goodwill, who who were out to "get" the state attempting to Nullify.

Now imagine the process with 50 states.

it's one of those ideas that is great on paper, but is non-functional in practice. so... might as well save paper.

Did you notice the part where nullification was never successful?

Certainly I noticed that.

But I also realize pre-Civil War was when these issues were truly being decided . And as I stated in my OP when the Civil War was over they were decided once and for all .

One other thing you could pick up in the links is. There were 35 states at that time . Only 10 of those states came out in opposition to the state nullification theorem .



In the rest of the post you described how the government runs. I was addressing in my OP that if it wasn't for the Civil War the government definitely would not run the way it does today . ( that's the conspiracy )

After the Civil War is when the federal government stomped down on every citizens head .

You have it the wrong way around - nullification was eth conspiracy - to destroy the USA by over-ruling the clear provisions of the constitution that provide for the judiciary to decide on the lawfulness of Federal actions.

Nulification was an attempt to grab power.

Excellent OP, you make many good and salient points.

Keep in mind however:

1) Lincoln did not invade the Southern states to end slavery, he did so to preserve the Union.
2) 94% of all Southerners did NOT own slaves.
3) Many in the North did NOT want to emancipate the slaves, it proved equally unpopular among the Union troops.
4) The emancipation proclamation served 2 primary purposes, neither of which were based on altruism -
A) To keep France and England out of the war.
B) To tie down troops in Southern states to guard against slave rebellions and use Black troops to bolster Union numbers.

I think what bothers me most is this perception that everyone in the South hated and abused Blacks and everyone in the North was a kindly abolitionist type. So far from the truth it hurts to contemplate the depth of this erroneous perception.

a reply to: Greathouse

My personal opinion is that the Constitution illegally replaced the Articles of Confederation. The Bill of Rights wasn't even supposed to be in the Constitution. Thank God for the Anti-Federalists.

And the Civil War was about controlling the resources in the South to feed the indusrtialism in the North. The slavery issue was about to be resolved with legislation anyways, so that was really a cover story masking the real financial war.

But you'll never hear any of that anymore, especially not in school. And if you teach it you'll be labelled a racist, potential lone-wolf domestic terrorist, who hates kittens and rainbows.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

That was well said .

But you'll never hear any of that anymore, especially not in school. And if you teach it you'll be labelled a racist, potential lone-wolf domestic terrorist, who hates kittens and rainbows.

That statement right there is exactly what happens when you try to bring up the other issues about the Civil War .

a reply to: Greathouse

Well, fear not, once we ban that flag, every single one of America's problems will evaporate. It's freshly cut green lawns and white picket fences from here on out.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Greathouse

Well, fear not, once we ban that flag, every single one of America's problems will evaporate. It's freshly cut green lawns and white picket fences from here on out.

Lol


Sorry but I'm even more scared now than when I started this thread . I brought up points in this thread that not many people talk about . I made an exerted effort by admitting in the OP that the Civil War was about slavery . In order to remove that issue from this thread so people could look at the alternative issues .

What scares me is that the US governments obfuscation of their war on state and personal rights. Is still so affective . That even today when people have a unlimited amount of information to draw upon . They are still buying the governments version hook line and sinker.

a reply to: Greathouse

When it all boils down, people in general are just like sheep. They're nearly blind, stupid, easy to scare and even easier to manipulate when put in a state of shock. These days, there is no sense of morality, honor, respect, or personal responsibility to maintain a well defined state of individuality, so everyone just runs with the crowd...and right now the crowd is running towards the edge of the cliff. I will gladly stand still.

It happened during the Civil War when they played the race card, and it's happening again. Its almost poetic..."The March of the Sheeple".

Keep teaching the truth, someone has to do it. Good night for now. God only know what collective stupidity awaits us tomorrow.

I would say slavery was a issue but not the only one. The big one IMO that gets missed is money but hey, what do I know.

The Creature From Jekyll Island tells a vastly different story than in any history book I've read. I don't know. I wasn't there nor do I live in those times, and they were very different than the times we live in today. It's hard to imagine, families with sons and fathers fighting on both sides.

That's how screwy it is trying to figure out why these people actually fought this war. James McPherson's book For Cause and Comrades is full of letters from soldiers on both sides, trying to make some sense of it all and it doesn't. There just wasn't one all-encompassing reason they fought.

Remember, they never put Jefferson Davis on trial. Nor any other government official from the South. Ask yourself why that is.

As for the government becoming the behemoth it is because of the Civil War, that is true. It just took a while. Pretty much 1865-1900. There was a great thread here years ago but I can't find the member that I think wrote it. It was really good detailing how this came to be. Bummer I can't find it as it was a really good history lesson.

originally posted by: TheSpanishArcher
I would say slavery was a issue but not the only one. The big one IMO that gets missed is money but hey, what do I know.

The Creature From Jekyll Island tells a vastly different story than in any history book I've read. I don't know. I wasn't there nor do I live in those times, and they were very different than the times we live in today. It's hard to imagine, families with sons and fathers fighting on both sides.

That's how screwy it is trying to figure out why these people actually fought this war. James McPherson's book For Cause and Comrades is full of letters from soldiers on both sides, trying to make some sense of it all and it doesn't. There just wasn't one all-encompassing reason they fought.

Remember, they never put Jefferson Davis on trial. Nor any other government official from the South. Ask yourself why that is.

As for the government becoming the behemoth it is because of the Civil War, that is true. It just took a while. Pretty much 1865-1900. There was a great thread here years ago but I can't find the member that I think wrote it. It was really good detailing how this came to be. Bummer I can't find it as it was a really good history lesson.

It's not much different today, I've started to see families divided by political ideology. This cannot last.

a reply to: Aazadan

I gave my Bro in law Jekyll Island. He calls it the most important book he's ever read but he didn't get it at all. He still thinks Bill O'Reilly is telling him the truth and that Republicans are the best and all Democrats are heathens.

So, yeah, I see your point. The brainwashing is strong and for many it's too difficult to let go of.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Excellent OP, you make many good and salient points.

Keep in mind however:

1) Lincoln did not invade the Southern states to end slavery, he did so to preserve the Union.
2) 94% of all Southerners did NOT own slaves.
3) Many in the North did NOT want to emancipate the slaves, it proved equally unpopular among the Union troops.
4) The emancipation proclamation served 2 primary purposes, neither of which were based on altruism -
A) To keep France and England out of the war.
B) To tie down troops in Southern states to guard against slave rebellions and use Black troops to bolster Union numbers.

I think what bothers me most is this perception that everyone in the South hated and abused Blacks and everyone in the North was a kindly abolitionist type. So far from the truth it hurts to contemplate the depth of this erroneous perception.

This is one of the best bullet points post regarding the Civil War I've read in a long time. Finally, someone has done their homework. Thank you.

One thing that never ceases to amaze me . Is that if you bring actual intelligent well-founded research into an ideological discussion nobody wants to talk about it .


It seems like people hate when nasty facts get in the way of their biased opinions .

originally posted by: Greathouse
One thing that never ceases to amaze me . Is that if you bring actual intelligent well-founded research into an ideological discussion nobody wants to talk about it .


It seems like people hate when nasty facts get in the way of their biased opinions .

I find the same is true in my threads too (though most of my threads are based on textual criticism of the bible). No one ever wants to discuss information, its always trolling or the conversation stagnates.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest

originally posted by: Greathouse
One thing that never ceases to amaze me . Is that if you bring actual intelligent well-founded research into an ideological discussion nobody wants to talk about it .


It seems like people hate when nasty facts get in the way of their biased opinions .

I find the same is true in my threads too (though most of my threads are based on textual criticism of the bible). No one ever wants to discuss information, its always trolling or the conversation stagnates.

The number one thing I see on all threads is justification of position instead of discussion of facts . It is actually quite boring because it's hard to get anyone into a honest discussion when they are constantly defending their selves . Discussions like that all inevitably end up in one-sided affairs until one or both parties give up having gained no knowledge .

Maybe it's me? But I have had more intelligent conversation with drunks at a bar than I have here sometimes . ( that was totally meant in jest )

a reply to: Greathouse

Your right. To make things interesting, did you know that the Paleo-Hebrew Feast of Trumpets is the 180th day starting from the Vernal Equinox? That is the same day that the final draft of the Constitution was illegally chosen for a vote. I dont remember what its called, but it involved the Constitutional Convention. Federalist conspiracy indeed.