US National ID Numbers

[mwfanelli]

I don't think I've ever seen "Civil War" and "basic freedoms" ever used in this context... Certainly hope not, anyway.

The Civil War was not really about slavery, that was just the battle cry. The real fight, ever since the constitution was first created, was states rights. The south wanted a weak national government so the power would never stray too far from home. The north wanted a strong centralized federal government making most of the rules.

It appears to me that if states had more power to govern their own affairs, wild out-of-control federal government power in the hands of a few could not happen. Perhaps the north winning the civil war was a bad thing in the long run.

[another view]

It appears to me that if states had more power to govern their own affairs, wild out-of-control federal government power in the hands of a few could not happen. Perhaps the north winning the civil war was a bad thing in the long run.

This could be interpreted in different ways. I, for one, am glad that the "wild out-of-control federal government" stepped in to end slavery.

The Civil War and events leading up to it all happened in the days before telephone, TV, satellites and internet forums. You could probably theorize that it was more likely to find a group of like-minded people in close proximity than it is today.

Taking one example, here at PR.com we're from all over the world. It's just as easy to exchange ideas with someone in another country as it is the person sitting next to you. Back in the 1860's, it took days/weeks to get news from across the country - nowhere near as easy as it is here. On the state level, maybe they didn't see much of a problem with it (well, everybody I know is doing it!) but on a national level - a larger group - it's possible that some of these ideas were held in check.

If individual states could do as they choose, then what would stop them from putting up borders and requiring a passport? Since I live 20 miles from Wisconsin, that would be a big (unnecessary) hassle. What if my driver's license wasn't valid there, etc?

[mwfanelli]

This could be interpreted in different ways. I, for one, am glad that the "wild out-of-control federal government" stepped in to end slavery.

The Civil War and events leading up to it all happened in the days before telephone, TV, satellites and internet forums. You could probably theorize that it was more likely to find a group of like-minded people in close proximity than it is today.

Taking one example, here at PR.com we're from all over the world. It's just as easy to exchange ideas with someone in another country as it is the person sitting next to you. Back in the 1860's, it took days/weeks to get news from across the country - nowhere near as easy as it is here. On the state level, maybe they didn't see much of a problem with it (well, everybody I know is doing it!) but on a national level - a larger group - it's possible that some of these ideas were held in check.

If individual states could do as they choose, then what would stop them from putting up borders and requiring a passport? Since I live 20 miles from Wisconsin, that would be a big (unnecessary) hassle. What if my driver's license wasn't valid there, etc?

You have some good points but... The government that the Confederacy envisioned would not have allowed passports or other border restrictions. It wasn't "states have all the power" but "federal government does federal things only." Canada works sort of like this and seems to work pretty well!

Slavery was a non-issue as the southern states were slowly eliminating it anyway as ineffective. Many southern slave owners were embarrassed but held on to spite the abolitionists. It was an issue to rally around. The southern states wanted to guide their own future, not have a handful of guys up north do it for them.

In Denver, small amounts of grass was made legal. Why should the federal government say no? The old national speed limit of 55 mph, mandating the speedometers no less, was a federal function? Assisted suicide should be determined by the loony tunes in Washington rather than the people in Oregon? Pornography is guided by "local standards" but abortion is national?

The constitution as it exists actually gives very limited power to the federal government. The constitution has been artificially expanded to give the federal government much more power than it was ever meant to have. Our lives are being run by a small number of professional politicians and the special interests that buy and sell them on eBay. This is why it is so much easier to grab and abuse power.

This is why, in recent years, I've been leaning very heavily towards the Libertarian party. Small and specific federal government the way it was meant to be.

[another view]

The government that the Confederacy envisioned would not have allowed passports or other border restrictions.

It's not like passports are really listed in the Constitution - security in those days (or even the 1860's) wasn't really the issue it is today, worldwide.

Slavery was a non-issue as the southern states were slowly eliminating it anyway as ineffective...The southern states wanted to guide their own future, not have a handful of guys up north do it for them.

But without "incentive", how long would it have taken? Generations?

This is why, in recent years, I've been leaning very heavily towards the Libertarian party. Small and specific federal government the way it was meant to be.

They certainly have their advantages. I'm afraid that politics is such a corrupt world that it may never catch on, but in a strongly Democrat-based town we did elect an independent mayor by a large margin.

[mwfanelli]

Originally Posted by mwfanelli
Slavery was a non-issue as the southern states were slowly eliminating it anyway as ineffective...The southern states wanted to guide their own future, not have a handful of guys up north do it for them.

But without "incentive", how long would it have taken? Generations?

Then again, the only reason the north even cared about slavery was so they could focus on exerting their power over states. Lincoln's abolition of slavery policy was widely ridiculed in the northern states. Without the Civil War, it would have taken much longer to get it right anyway.Good often stems from bad intentions, but we can't later rewrite the history and claim that good came from good intentions. There was politics back then as well!

[srobb]

Well, from another veteran, they will put a tug under my skin only after I am dead. I am truly ashamed of how this government is getting to be. Michael, I have been looking towards the Libertarians for quite some time. Do you happen to have a link, or know the particular bill this was attached to? I have some straight-laced Repub friends I would love to show it to.