Sordid clambake
https://mail.theoneboard.com/board/
I told you so....we would let the nojjers in, the spics in, and the Chinks and Jews in, but we did not want the goddamn Irish. Now look what has happened....Tom In VA wrote:Oh sure blame everything on the poor Irish
No, I blame those who retarded their region's development by remaining addicted to an unsustainable plantation economy.Tom In VA wrote:Oh sure blame everything on the poor Irish
BSmack wrote:No, I blame those who retarded their region's development by remaining addicted to an unsustainable plantation economy.Tom In VA wrote:Oh sure blame everything on the poor Irish
Yea, slavery was so much better.Tom In VA wrote:Lighten up Francis. Your support of imperialism, exploitation of lower economic classes, and false notions of ethnic superiority are duly noted.BSmack wrote:No, I blame those who retarded their region's development by remaining addicted to an unsustainable plantation economy.
Nobody said it was Polly. But enjoy your delusions of moral superiority.BSmack wrote:Yea, slavery was so much better.Tom In VA wrote:Lighten up Francis. Your support of imperialism, exploitation of lower economic classes, and false notions of ethnic superiority are duly noted.BSmack wrote:No, I blame those who retarded their region's development by remaining addicted to an unsustainable plantation economy.
Who was talking about morality? Slavery retarded the southern economy. That it was a moral abomination is secondary to this discussion.Tom In VA wrote:Nobody said it was Polly. But enjoy your delusions of moral superiority.BSmack wrote:Yea, slavery was so much better.
LTS TRN 2 wrote: I think you meant secede, but succeed is pretty much the same thing. I think the southern states had a clear constitutional right to secede, and the issue of slavery would have been theirs to answer for. And they would've suffered quite a bit for it, no doubt. (And fuck that recent British "documentary" about If the South Had Won, it was ludicrous.)
But it wasn't nearly that cut and dried. A protracted negotiation accompanied by international pressure--on both sides--and the War could have been avoided. THAT should have been the priority of the president. More to the point, when the South was for all practical purposes defeated--and certainly open to negotiantions highly advantageous to the North, Lincoln was bent on the ghastly decimation of the entire "culture" of the South, and caused tremendous unnecessary damage to the nation--basically retarding the entire South for about one-hundred years. Lincoln was certainly the best poet ever to hold the office, but he was a dreadful failure ultimately as president.
You're about as credible as a piece of shit commenting on what smells good vs. what smells bad.Goober McTuber wrote:The South is inherently retarded. And it has nothing to do with the war.
Yes, and I was simply illustrating the plain fact that Yankee carpetbagging was only possible because the south had remained economically stagnant BEFORE the war. In fact, even after the war, the south tried to perpetuate the plantation economy through sharecropping and draconian prison work farms like Angola, rather than emulate the industrialized north. I think history has proven that even with the abuses of wage slavery, that the northern industrial economy was a better way out of poverty than the southern system.Tom In VA wrote:Don't get dizzy and for God's sake put anything sharp you might have down. Yes, that's right, you can keep your "wit".
The reference was to the retardation of the south, which was a product of a backlash against Yankee imperialism, AFTER the war.
LTS TRN 2 wrote:I think you meant secede, but succeed is pretty much the same thing. I think the southern states had a clear constitutional right to secede, and the issue of slavery would have been theirs to answer for. And they would've suffered quite a bit for it, no doubt. (And fuck that recent British "documentary" about If the South Had Won, it was ludicrous.)
But it wasn't nearly that cut and dried. A protracted negotiation accompanied by international pressure--on both sides--and the War could have been avoided. THAT should have been the priority of the president. More to the point, when the South was for all practical purposes defeated--and certainly open to negotiantions highly advantageous to the North, Lincoln was bent on the ghastly decimation of the entire "culture" of the South, and caused tremendous unnecessary damage to the nation--basically retarding the entire South for about one-hundred years. Lincoln was certainly the best poet ever to hold the office, but he was a dreadful failure ultimately as president.
Synthetic fabric says what?mvscal wrote:It might have been politically unsustainable, but economically speaking it wasn't going anywhere.BSmack wrote:No, I blame those who retarded their region's development by remaining addicted to an unsustainable plantation economy.
Now you're going to get all serious and academic on me. Yankee carpetbagging was possible because the south was decimated by the war, in every way imaginable. I'm not sure but I think the notion of "scorched earth" policy was born during the Civil War.BSmack wrote: Yes, and I was simply illustrating the plain fact that Yankee carpetbagging was only possible because the south had remained economically stagnant BEFORE the war. In fact, even after the war, the south tried to perpetuate the plantation economy through sharecropping and draconian prison work farms like Angola, rather than emulate the industrialized north. I think history has proven that even with the abuses of wage slavery, that the northern industrial economy was a better way out of poverty than the southern system.
Struck a nerve much?Tom In VA wrote:You're about as credible as a piece of shit commenting on what smells good vs. what smells bad.Goober McTuber wrote:The South is inherently retarded. And it has nothing to do with the war.
Enjoy thinking you have, it's all you got.Goober McTuber wrote:Struck a nerve much?Tom In VA wrote:You're about as credible as a piece of shit commenting on what smells good vs. what smells bad.Goober McTuber wrote:The South is inherently retarded. And it has nothing to do with the war.
And the decimation of the south was made possible by the inherent weakness of the south's slave based plantation economy. They were out manned because immigrants poured into northern cities at a far greater rate to avoid having to compete with slave labor. And they were out gunned because the south relied almost exclusively on imports and had no manufacturing base to convert to weapons production. Even effective troop transport (I'm sure you're familiar with 1st Manassas) became nearly impossible by the end of the war because once a southern rail line had been torn up, the south had no way to replace the track.Tom In VA wrote:Now you're going to get all serious and academic on me. Yankee carpetbagging was possible because the south was decimated by the war, in every way imaginable. I'm not sure but I think the notion of "scorched earth" policy was born during the Civil War.
Reconstruction ended with the election of Hayes to the White House. How do you explain the 90 years after that?After the war, the "south" was no longer in control of "the southerners" as is was before the war.
One needs only to look at 20th Century poverty statistics and migration trends to see how full of shit you are. Only in the last 30 years have we seen a reversal of that trend. Not so coincidentally, that happens to be just as the south started to snap out of their century long experiment with institutionalized apartheid.Granted sharecropping and draconian prison work farms didn't resort to child labor and again ... exploitation of a continuous crop of new immigrants from ... the south and the rest of the world .... so you're right they didn't emulate the north.
Yeah, poverty was eradicated in the "North". You're so right, about being wrong.
So that refutes your argument that they didn't emulate the North. They did.BSmack wrote: BTW: Ask these kids if the south used child labor.
Are you off the wagon Tom? I'm talking about macroeconomics and you're hung up on child labor.Tom In VA wrote:So that refutes your argument that they didn't emulate the North. They did.
BSmack wrote:Are you off the wagon Tom?Tom In VA wrote:So that refutes your argument that they didn't emulate the North. They did.
The 1970s alone would have plunged the south into an economic collapse.mvscal wrote:Yes, of course. Cotton is no longer in use today because of synthetic fibers. Dumbass.
BSmack wrote:The 1970s alone would have plunged the south into an economic collapse.mvscal wrote:Yes, of course. Cotton is no longer in use today because of synthetic fibers. Dumbass.
sin
Did you rent that sense of humor from Terry in Crapchester?Tom In VA wrote:Enjoy thinking you have, it's all you got.Goober McTuber wrote:Struck a nerve much?Tom In VA wrote: You're about as credible as a piece of shit commenting on what smells good vs. what smells bad.
I thought this was fun and games and now you gotta go below the belt. What gives ?Goober McTuber wrote: Did you rent that sense of humor from Terry in Crapchester?
Tom In VA wrote:I thought this was fun and games and now you gotta go below the belt. What gives ?Goober McTuber wrote: Did you rent that sense of humor from Terry in Crapchester?
No need to. Atlanta now has more northerners than Buffalo, Syracuse and Rochester combined. Including two of my brothers. It's amazing how much more civilized the south has become.Dinsdale wrote:I'm thinking we should revitalize Atlanta's economy again.
Only a fag would reset WKRP and not post a picture of Loni AndersonTom In VA wrote:BSmack wrote:The 1970s alone would have plunged the south into an economic collapse.mvscal wrote:Yes, of course. Cotton is no longer in use today because of synthetic fibers. Dumbass.
sin
Due props for the WKRP reset. RACK
I think you meant..David Huddleston.Derron wrote:I told you so....we would let the nojjers in, the spics in, and the Chinks and Jews in, but we did not want the goddamn Irish. Now look what has happened....
Sincerely,
Slim Pickens
[smirking]Yeah... and they have made sooooo much progress since those days, those fucking economy's just kick ass now.[/smirking]BSmack wrote:Who was talking about morality? Slavery retarded the southern economy. That it was a moral abomination is secondary to this discussion.Tom In VA wrote:Nobody said it was Polly. But enjoy your delusions of moral superiority.BSmack wrote:Yea, slavery was so much better.