Re: Georgian Yeast

On Wed, 27 Sep 100 04:32:59 GMT aebrain@dynamite.com.au writes:
>>In the Confederacy's case, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation (where
>>all slaves, in all states -- including Rebel states -- were declared 
>free)
>
>
>Um. Correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC the Emancipation Proclamation 
>didn't apply
>to the Northern slave-owning states (Kentucky, basically, IIRC. There 
>were some
>more but I forget them, (Maryland?) and only in Kentucky was there a 
>significant
>number of unmanumitted slaves).
>

IIRC, it appplied to union controlled states in rebellion or some
such...

>It was in this durned furriner's opinion, a masterpiece of 
>RealPolitik. Others
>might call it outrageous hypocracy, to free "their" slaves not "ours". 
>The loyalty
>of Kentucky was rather shaky, but this shored it up. A.Lincoln was a 
>great statesman,
>but again IMHO not because he was a moral paragon: far from it, he had 
>a grasp
>of political expediency unmatched by anyone except possibly Otto von 
>Bismark.
>He saw that although the southern states, individually or in 
>combination, had
>every constitutional right to secede, such a move would destroy the 
>USA as a
>viable entity. Both the CSA and USA would be at the beck and call of 
>the European
>superpowers. So to hell with the legality, the end justifies the 
>means.
>
>That he's gone down in history as "The Great Emancipator" is just one 
>of those
>little ironies. Cynics would say that it's because the Victors write 
>the history
>books. I prefer to say that (as Salvor Hardin said?) he never let 
>morality get
>in the way of doing the right thing. Because his actions, for whatever 
>reason,
>resulted in the abolition of that "peculiar (-ly odious) institution", 
>which
>I think no-one with 2 neurons that fire consecutively could possibly 
>say was
>anything other than a really good outcome.
>
>The tragedy is that a lot of morally unimpeachable people (Robert E. 
>Lee being
>merely the most famous) saw the US Constitution as being sacrosanct, 
>and their
>first loyalty being to their state rather than a monolithic and 
>usurping federation.
>Thank God they lost though.
>
>US history - especially from 1770-1820 - has always interested me. 
>Australian
>history is even more colourful, but rather less bloody. And less 
>well-known.
>I suspect few non-Aussies on this list have heard of the Eureka 
>Stockade, or
>the Rum Corps and the coup d'etat against Bligh (yes, THAT Captain 
>Bligh, as
>in HMS Bounty and all that). Many might know of Pitcairn, but few know 
>of Norfolk
>Island. And Ned Kelly for that matter - how many people outside Oz got 
>the significance
>of that part of the opening ceremony? 
>
>This is a pity, as the events of Australian history can provide many 
>an inspiration
>for the Tuffleyverse. Imagine planets way beyond the explored rim 
>inhabited
>by ESU mutineers (even secondary colonies from them)... isolated 
>planets taken
>over by Drug and Zaibatsu interests abetted by the military 
>garrison... miners
>revolts over taxes... Criminal/Pirate gangs with hi-tech armour, proof 
>against
>all but the heaviest of weapons...
>
>p.s. The title of this rather OT essay might be a bit cryptic. Suffice 
>to say
>that "The South Shall Rise Again!" :-)
>

I thought that occurred when Northern clothing manufacturers stopped
there in route to Asia?

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.