The Supremacy Clause was part of the original Constitution- Madison addressed it in the Federalist Papers in #44 in 1788.
Barring Madison having been a time traveler from the next century; of course.
Shay’s Rebellion- under the Articles of Confederation-in 1786 which President Washington put down and who sought to succeed- was one of the main causes prompting the Constitution- the need for a supreme federal government. And to put down a rebellion.
It’s true that Lincoln did not prosecute the war in order to abolish slavery. His objective was to overthrow the rebellion and preserve the Union.
The rebellion had been started in order to preserve slavery, though. Consequently there was always the likelihood that the rebellion being overthrown would also result in slavery being overthrown.
The Emancipation Proclamation was issued to harness strong Northern anti-slavery sentiment to the cause of the war at a time when Northern public morale had begun to sag.
Paragraph breaks are also a thing for a reason. Please, rant responsibly and break your screeds into paragraphs to prevent eye-strain in readers - well, where it’s unrelated to eye-rolling anyway
Not that surprising when you realize how much wealth Plantation owners had tied up in their slaves. They very well realized the importation of a new supply would inevitably lower the value of the ones that the already owned.
Correct. Given that we’re discussing these issues with denialists and bigots who tend not to know their civics and history, it’s worth noting further that changes or additions to the original document are enacted by mechanisms known as Amendments.
Apparently these same folks also need “Schoolhouse Rock” lessons in the proper use of paragraphs and capitalisation.
I have yet to see a “revisionist” saying positive things about the Confederacy or “Southern Culture & Tradition” who wasn’t a white supremacist liar. You have not changed my opinion.
There is far too much in your Gish Gallop to unpack at once.
But lets make things clear:
The Confederacy defined itself by the right to own human beings as chattel property
The Confederacy took up arms and shed blood to defend that right
Nothing you have said about the Union or Northern states negates 1&2
No nation in its right mind celebrates both losing an armed insurrection or owning human beings as chattel property
Its telling that the descendants of the Confederates became the longest standing domestic terror group the nation has seen and went on to legalize attacks on civil liberties.
“Products”? You mean. . . cotton? Basically the entire economy of the South relied on slave labor as its foundation, so there’s no way to remove slavery from the equation.
Not sure what universe you’rr from, but it sure ain’t this reality.
In this reality, the dumbass Confederacy explicitly spelled out their reason of agitation: to preserve the institution of chattel slavery, and to uphold white supremacy.
Are you following me so far?
What had the confederate dumbasses downright terrified was the possibility that whites were actually inferior. Having brutally abused, mistreated, maimed, and killed people of colour, these whiteass dunces knew the same could be done to them, just like in the fledgling Dominican Republic.
So the confederates decided to attack the Union before people like John Brown could aid a slave uprising.
And the confederate dumbasses got their asses handed to them. It was never a war that the confederacy couls win. Nor were the continental powers likely to intervene, having recently dealt with destructive wars of their own.
And that, is why the dumbass Confederates are in the wrong in this universe we call Reality. Wrong morally, wrong aggresively, and niw mostly totally extinct.
… but you knew that already, didn’t you, you dumbass confederate?
Sadly, I’m pretty sure it’s probably more like a “not brown people” gun shop.
Edit: Well, “sadly” in that it exists it all. I mean to say that he doesn’t have such a technology, and instead he’s just a racist who assumes that brown people in general are Muslims.