Powerless Results.....

[redcliffsw]

Good read.........

Dear Sir:

What you wrote was very interesting and in fact, a new book out looks 
at the war not from the position of the South but from the position 
of the changes occurring in the North and how that affected the South 
rather than vice versa. Did the war "settle questions about the 
nature of the Union?" I would say, had no Constitution existed, that 
would certainly be a legitimate conclusion. However, the Constitution 
did exist and both sides predicated their actions upon it - the South 
correctly, the North in a facile, illegal and, frankly, mendacious 
way. When you have Lincoln and his ilk declaring that the federal 
government "created" the States, then you know that you are no longer 
dealing with an honest debate or honorable opponents.

Another book has been written which defines the differences between 
those who flocked to the war banner of the Union and those who did so 
on the part of the Confederacy. It is painfully obvious that the 
soldiers of the North told wives and family that they were 
subordinate in position to the need that the soldier felt to "defend 
the flag" and "preserve the Union" despite the fact that one had to 
be downright dull-witted not to know that a "union" is by its very 
nature is voluntary. Union at the point of a gun is conquest and, 
frankly, conquest was the nature of the Northern battle sentiment 
from the beginning. Indeed, long before the first shots were fired, 
Northerners on the whole had nothing but loathing and contempt for 
their so-called brethren in the South! Indeed, as early as 1812, the 
New England states wished to secede from any "union" that included 
the South! Sadly, the War of 1812 ended before that was accomplished.

On the other hand, Southern soldiers went to war primarily to protect 
their faith and families. The cause of the South and their mother 
states was considered one and the same as that of faith and family. 
Unlike their Northern counterparts, there was no need to 
"subordinate" anything of their lives in order to protect the South. 
Now, of course, it is possible that this viewpoint was predicated on 
the fact that the South was not the aggressor but was defending its 
land and people while Northern soldiery would be "making war" upon 
the land and people of other states (treason according to the 
Constitution).

Indeed, practically, the war did "settle the question of the nature 
of the union." On the other hand, as noted above, because the 
Constitution was supposedly in force, the question remains open 
because, in law, one cannot settle an issue by force of arms. So what 
we have today is the wretched result of the North's "victory" - a 
federal government out of touch with "the People," disinterested in 
the "consent of the governed" and on a course of total economic and 
social destruction because it is no longer limited by the power of 
the sovereign states. One wonders if the Northern States could have 
seen the outcome of their foolish and treasonous assault upon their 
fellow Americans at the behest of an unconstitutional NATIONAL 
government if they might not have told Lincoln and his minions to go 
to hell! Remember, the sovereignty of the States of the South was not 
the ONLY state sovereignty destroyed in the War of Secession! When it 
was over, the States of the North were just as powerless as their 
former enemies.
-Valerie Protopapas