this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
557 points (94.3% liked)

Memes

45596 readers
1265 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 82 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You can always follow up when someone says “states rights” with “to do what?”… because the answer was “have slaves”.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Another interesting note I bring into the states rights argument is that the south wanted to force the north to send back escaped people and were actually sending people into the north to kidnap black people, many of whom were never born slaves.

So yeah the north wanted the right to gives rights to the people in it, and the south thought that didn't apply to black people.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (5 children)

And "limited government". Limited to do what?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

That’s an easy one.

It means “disassemble all checks and balances, strip the people of all power and authority, and concentrate the power and authority into the hands of a chosen party-aligned dictator or oligarchy.”

Small government doesn’t get any smaller than a totalitarian dictatorship.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Many of them still have privately held slaves. As you can be forced into slavery as punishment for a crime and all but Louisiana, North Carolina, and Arkansas have private prisons.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago

state's rights

wanted the federal government to override the rights of free states

made slavery mandatory rather than leaving it up to the states

tried to flat-out steal entire states using violence

Like every conservative, when they talk about freedom they're only talking about their freedom to do what they want, and their freedom to make you do what they want using violence.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago (1 children)

IMHO the bigger gotcha on the "states' rights" lie is that the Confederate constitution gave states no more rights than the US constitution, while specifically denying one: the right to abolish slavery within their borders.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

the biggest gotcha is asking back

"the state's rights to do what?"

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ok, I know Marx was a contemporary of the civil war and wrote about it but every time I see him with a sensible take on it I’m just like “aren’t you in Germany then and it’s a massive pain in the ass to cross the ocean at the time. Why are your takes so sensible”

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Marx sent a letter to Lincoln, and Lincoln's staff responded via Ambassador Adams. It's a really interesting moment in history that's been buried by US Red Scare ideology.

from wiki on Adams:

Part of his duties included corresponding with British civilians, including Karl Marx and the International Workingmen's Association.[7] Adams and his son, Henry Adams, who served as his private secretary

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh man that would be a fun tidbit for conservatives when they try the old "accckshully Lincoln was a Republican who fought to free slaves so it's the Democrats that are the racists!"

"Ok, so how do you feel about Lincoln working with Karl Marx, you know, Mr.Communisim?"

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Didn't he edit a newspaper? I suppos having takes was kind of his job.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The word “heritage” is a disgusting one these days, thanks ~~conservatives~~ fascists

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

They have ruined heritage, patriot, the Gadsen flag, and damn near the US flag for me.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I am not American so I never understood that phrase. A state's rights? Who gives a shit about a state? Isn't everything about human rights like it always have been?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

well, i think the idea is generally that Americans like issues to be decided at a state level rather than federally due to general "small government" principles, like they can trust their state level government to be more specifically beholden to their interests. this is usually in a right wing context, but not always, like famously California has much stricter environmental regulations than the rest of the country.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which begs the question: why did they join a union in the first place if they wanted decentralized government?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Federalism is a complex topic. Some things are done better In a central way, and some are done better distributed.

Uniform regulation of commerce and military protection is really efficient.

At the time, there was no practical way for one body to make meaningful policy to manage both new York and south Carolina at the same time.

You can basically look at what the EU is doing and that's why the states did it too, just starting with "shit we need money, a navy and soldiers" rather than "can we all just agree on food standards and currency?”

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

It's the 10th amendment. All other 9 amendments and many thereafter are in relation to human rights.

And states rights and human rights can actually go hand in hand, as seen by state legislatures that have passed assisted suicide, same-sex marriage, and legal cannabis laws. It has also been used to ensure electors cast their vote for the nominee or candidate who received the most votes from the people.

Unfortunately it's also been co-opted as a racist, misogynist dog whistle.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I may be an anarchist, but I can admit Marx has some banger quotes.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I tend to consider him right in basically all his criticisms, misguided in formulating the solutions.

Presumably he ran into the trouble a lot of generous, intelligent, and honest people have, they assume everyone is basically like them other than circumstance and stress.

And, obviously you can trust a fellow socialist to run the vanguard states, right?

They get it. Heirarchy bad, racism bad, sexism bad, he's been over this!

Or perhaps he was simply, like everyone, merely a product of his time. The workers of his day were barely literate, every state other than America and France (depending on what exact year we're talking) were absolute monarchies, etc etc etc.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Under no pretense

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Interesting to hear that trying to annex places against the will of the people there is bad. Don't think everyone claiming to follow Marx followed that rule lol

load more comments
view more: next ›