From: Dehede011@aol.com
Date: Sun Nov 10 2002 - 15:39:02 MST
In a message dated 11/10/2002 12:58:19 PM Central Standard Time,
charleshixsn@earthlink.net writes: The whiskey tax was unconstitutional.
## That is what you say but when the rebels had the chance to talk
they wanted to fight but when it was time to fight they wanted to talk. Now
that the issue is settled I guess they want to quibble.
"On a strictly legalistic ground, the Southern states had a more
legitimate interpretation of the constitution. Remember that it was
specifically written to allow slavery, etc. to exist."
## There is a good book called The Band of Brothers that explains how
the two side pro and anti slavery recognizing the need to form a union
carefully deferred the question of slavery. But as with the Whisky Rebellion
it has to be noticed that when the crunch came the pro slavery side didn't
sue in court they got cannon and blew an U. S. Fort away. So much for the
intellectual power of their position.
"And the real aid that the French proviced was political manuvering in
Europe which prevented England from paying much attention to what was
happening over here."
## I say it was a combination of material aid from the French, some
military help at a decisive moment and the willingness of the Americans to
keep and bear arms against England. They tried to hold us against our will
and we bled them until they couldn't take it anymore.
"I don't feel *that* guilty, or at all personally responsible. That
doesn't change historical fact.
## Okay, so you want to wring your hands and make PC noises without
ever feeling connected to anything at all personally. That is fine. The
Europeans use of weaponry has been vastly overdone. If you will look at a
book called Guns, Germs and Steel you will find a different explanation for
how the major damage was done. They report estimates ranging as high as a
population of 55 or 60 million Indians from the North Pole to the South Pole.
Of course the white man says he never saw anything to indicate there
were ever that many indians in the Americas. And in fact he didn't according
to my understanding of GG&S. The deadly killer was the diseases the European
carried. According to GG&S the the dying often was taking place 100 miles or
more in advance of the white settlements.
I suggest you read the accounts of the attack on Mexico City and
DeSoto's (name?) march across the American south discovering the Mississippi.
Ron h
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:02 MST