Not in 2018 but yes in 1800 in world... and yes in 1861 in Alabama and yes in 1885 in the Spanish West Indies....the right depends on place...right?You don't have the right to own another human being, another thinking, rational being. Your idea of freedom.deprives others of theirs. The free right of property is not absolute, you can't own people and torture them for your pleasure you insist is your right. The Constitution that Southern states all signed on allows the state to take private property for the public good with just compensation, to build a road for example. Sorry, your argument is fundamentally flawed.
About the right of property you can think is not absolute... I think it is absolute...i am against Leviathan can take private property to build a road... if the road it is necessary for the owners.. i am sure they will agree to do the road.. if they don´t want... not road at all.
You think it is a Marquis Sade´s novel...
8% population had slaves according to Census. Missisiipi 49% families but only 7% free population.. the other 93% Free people in Mississippi had none slave...In South Carolina 6,6% Free people had slaves (93,4% no).. Census 1860Lots of ordinary people owned slaves
Slave-holders were a minority in South.. around 5 to 8%...free people... 90% free people in South hadn´t slaves. And if we talk about great owners... maybe 0,5%... So yes, it is true.. only a minority.
Spain and Portugal had more dominions than Germany or Austria for sure... in 1861 enough to land in Mexico... and in the areas were the slaves worked.. of course, yes, they were greater power than Germany.. sorry, in 1861 not Germany but Prussia...How many naval bases had Prussia in Caribbean in 1861? more or less than Spain? and in India? More or less than Portugal? Oceanie? Asia? Africa? in 1861.. Prussia not even had Schleswig- Holstein!!!The major powers, which Spain, Portugal, and Belgium most certainly were not, had abolished slavery. The US was the only first tier country not to have abolished it. The peers of the US had all abolished slavery.
Your problem is you are watching the world as in 2018 not as 1861...After Great Britain and France.. Spain was the third Country the Confederacy wanted to be recognized...still more when Montgomery saw Spain as a Major Slave-Holding Power.
Prussia had not seaborne land in 1861... Spain and Portugal yes in every continent.
"The leaders of the Rebellion expected Great Britain, France and Spain immediately to extend recognition, welcome the Confederacy into the family of the nations"...
The South didn´t have too much hope about Prussian, Austria, Russia...
And the three out five European countries with dominions in America recognized the Belligerent rights of Both sides: Confederacy and Union. in 1861: Great Britain May 13th. France, June 10th and Spain June 17th.
I agree.. Spain was not the 1808 Spain... but for sure in 1861 was stronger than Prussia in America. And in Asia-Africa-Oceanie. Not in Europe. The Prussian Navy was almost nothing in 1861 and it was proved in 1864...and in 1871.
You are thinking as 2018 and I agree with you in 2018.People aren't property. Cars aren't self aware, they are inanimate objects. And even if future AI give things like cars self awareness, they would have been created specifically for that purpose, while slaves weren't. Although with the idea of self aware AI does raise the issue of slavery and civil rights for self aware machines. Many science fiction writers have futures where artificial intelligences have rights as person's. For example, the artificial Android Data in Star Trek the Next Generation has rights of a person, and holds official rank in Star Fleet.
Not minor powers in 1861... you are thinking as in 2018... in 1861 not minor.. in fact.. it was the Second largest Seaborne Colonial Empire in world: 1st British 2nd Spanish (The French Empire in 1861 still only had some areas in Argelia). It is true was a second level.. but Prussia not even have "level" out of Europe!As I said, all these were minor powers. The major.leadinf countries of the world had abolished slavery. It is like justifying something because North Korea does it.
Where were the Southern diputies and Senators? By other side a Democracy is not a Dictatorship of Majority.... I care a dam if 6 Billions people vote against my Propiety rights...I will defend it.In a democracy, you don't aways get your way all the time. The Amendments were democratically and legally passed as set down in the Constitution. You have asserted that slavery owners were only a minority of the population, so we should not be surprised at the outcome. It is part of any democratic government that the minority view has to accept the majority verdict, otherwise you don't have a government, but anarchy, where the strongest do whatever they like, a Mad Max type world.
A Democracy is the system respects to their citizens...their opinions and their ways of life ..not the System says to their citizens what their must think, to opine or how they must live their lifes... that is not democracy.. not matter what majority say... I care nothing...If I want to smoke.. you can be sure I will smoke and care nothing if 5 billions people have voted to ban the tobacco...I don´t give them any rights on me. And not to Mr Lincoln, of course.
OK.. I won´t discuss because it is not my speciality...but by the same line of thought..with the same logic, India invaded Goa, Diu, Damao in 1961 stealing the Portuguese Propieties.. paid by Portuguese citizens for 500 years! and the same Nasser in Suez in 1956 (The Egyptian didn´t built the Channel but mostly the French). For not talking about the Serbian propieties stealing by NATO in Kosovo in 1999...The same morale and the same measure for everybody.. not only for Northern States.. ok?Only Lost Causers dispute the the fact that it was the South that started the war.
No way! if the situation is previus to the law... the State have not right to attack the the situations prior to the law... that the reason because the State is LEVIATHAN. An awful Monster mauled our money and our freedom.A state does have the right to lock someone up for violating established laws
That is a fallacy. The State was built with the slave-holders living there...in fact... the fathers of constitution were not few.. slaves-holders...A state does, by he simple that by chosing to live under the rule of the state or being a citizen, you have given the government that right.
But in 2018.. not, nobody have chosen to live under any laws. .when those laws are vote by a minority to force a majority in profiting of a minority and breaking acquired rights.
In this Totalitarian Contemporanean societies we have the false "copyright"... I don´t accept them and I do not recognize them. Because they are not private propiety when they sell. If you sell me something to me.. I am My own king in my propiety...and i will do with the object I bought to you what I want... withouth any limit in my propiety.... you can sell or not.. it is your decision.. but if you sell... you know my condictions.
Finally still there are slaves.. but today is not so fashion.. because slavery is in Sahel and in Brazil... not in Cuba or in Alabama (and the moder Slave-holders are not elegant Spanish entrepeneurs as Bacardi or Xifré nor refined gentlemen of the South)...I hope in future the Pennsylvania´s boring old spinsters show the same interest that their ancestors showed in South Carolina.
Ok I put end this interesting controversy. Everybody here has freely expressed his views in this thread... we are agree according to 2018 views.. our only small difference it is if we were in 1861. In any case, a pleasure to have exchanged messages.