Opinions expressed on the Whig Blog, in the Forums and in comments are those of the individual authors and do not necessarilly represent positions of the Modern Whig Party. The ability to post opinion pieces and comments is not restricted to Whig members (although blog entries are by invitation.) These items are not pre-screened but are subject to our Terms of Use. Please Contact Us if you have concerns about the content.

Call for discussion on What We Believe

11 replies [Last post]
admin
admin's picture
Offline
Whig
Joined: 12/17/2010

Following is a discussion on the Book page item titled: What We Believe.
Here is the item for your reference:

The Modern Whigs are a pragmatic, common sense, centrist-oriented party where rational solutions trump ideology and integrity trumps impunity.

Our core modern Whig philosophy relies on several fundamental tenets:

INDEPENDENT THINKING, Modern Whigs try to practice independent critical thought. We sprang up as a reaction to ill conceived public policy that did not represent the will of the People. Today, we witness policy debates based on ideology, not on concrete solutions. Critical thinking means challenging all assumptions, and mapping and analyzing all possible solutions based on facts and potential outcomes, not on party ideology. Whigs are also keenly aware that much of what constitutes political debate today are people "parroting" others' opinions without reliance on facts or their own self discovery.

Modern Whigs come from a place of discovery. We assume that the best solutions are still waiting to be discovered by an empowered and engaged electorate, and that the current two party system is an impediment to our progress as a Nation. An undivided electorate who can approach issues with an open mind, without prior prejudice, is what our Nation needs to forge bold new solutions built on firm common ground. We believe in American ingenuity!

MERITOCRACY is another pillar of the modern Whig methodology: we believe that society should reward merit, which is a combination of intelligence, talent, competence and hard work. Merit is determined through an objective evaluation of an individual’s professional accomplishments, educational achievements and personal character. Similarly, solutions to problems should be formed and judged in a rational manner based on a process of discovery, analysis and proposed solutions based on their merits, not on prior prejudice, pure self interest or false beliefs.

INTEGRITY is as fundamental a pillar to modern Whigs as Independent Thought. Integrity means honesty and a commitment to an ethical approach to politics. Integrity in thought, integrity in action. Whigs practice what they preach, live up to their promises and do not make promises they cannot keep. Integrity also means accountability: no one is above the law and everyone lives by the same rules. You'll find modern Whigs near mum on issues of social morality, as these are personal. On issues of ethics or integrity, however, we will hold our officers, leaders and candidates to the highest of ethical standards, above today's actual legal requirements.

These are the core tenets that form the foundation of the Modern Whig philosophy; These concepts allow us to look for genuine,long term solutions to our problems not just for today, but for the next generation as well. Each of our members are encouraged and expected to contribute to this process by helping to shape the discussion and choosing competent people to hold office.

Modern Whigs are neither Conservative nor Liberal and do not wish to be confined to the traditional left-right political spectrum. In fact, in a purely historical or classic context, we can be considered Conservative Liberals. Really! In our current political reality, this seems like nonsense doesn't it? It is, however, patently true. How? To borrow a phrase from President Clinton's campaign, "Its the system stupid!"

Beyond philosophical tenets, modern Whigs also promote a concrete platform of political ideals and policies which we believe are the most critical issues to the welfare of our country. These principles bind us as moderates, unify us as Americans, and come from a place of inclusiveness, not division.

1.Fiscal Responsibility -Any action of the government must respect principles of fiscal responsibility and public accountability.

2.Energy Independence- Develop practical domestic energy sources and economically viable alternative energy to reduce dependence on foreign energy sources and strive towards energy independence. This is also a component of our inward looking economic focus.

3.Inward looking economic focus - It's about time we refocus on ourselves and discover and implement policies to grow domestic demand and our manufacturing base to provide an environment that can create the kinds of jobs that will support American families within the context of a globally interdependent world.

4.State's Responsibility- Each state can generally determine its course of action based on local values and unique needs. Whigs believe in a strong government at every level and separation of powers. Yet, strong and competent local and state governments are important, as they are the level of government where the people can get most involved. All citizens need to ensure the Federal government doesnt usurp its Constitutional authority.

5.Social Acceptance -When the government is compelled to legislate morality (laws), every citizen should be considered as equal.

6.Education and Scientific Advancement- Increase public and private emphasis on math and science to promote American innovation to compete in the global economy.

7.Veterans Affairs -Vigilant advocacy relating to the medical, financial, and overall well-being of our military families and veterans.

8.Electoral & Government Reform- Support efforts and work for governmental reform that makes the American government efficient, fair, and responsive at all levels. Support efforts and work for electoral reform to allow all Americans to have their voices heard and make it rational for citizens to participate in the government and electoral processes.

A more comprehensive list of current Whig stands on a broad range of issues can be found in our " Where We Stand" section.

What modern Whigs do not attempt to do is to tell Americans how to believe. Your personal morality is of little concern to us. Your civic mindedness and personal ethics, however, are of paramount concern as they should be to all our fellow citizens at the most fundamental level.

Whigs believe it is time to change the antiquated two party system with a more open and citizen-centric solution.

Whigs believe it is critical for citizens to re-engage in civic affairs with new tools. Citizens' reliance on proxy political parties as their proxy has in large part caused the mess we're in. ( Whig Academies)

Whigs believe that focusing on the processes of governance and refocusing political participation in America, is the ONLY proper long term solution to enable truly effective public policy and better governance. ( Modern Whig Philosophy - methodology not ideology)

Below is the discussion so far. Feel free to add your own comments!

E. G. Nolte
Offline
Joined: 04/29/2012

My interest in this party stems primarily from its clear support of electoral reform. A government more accountable to the public will be better-equipped to resist the influence of well-heeled corporations and special interests. No matter what one believes, one should wish to have a true voice in government, not a choice between the dominance of one faction or another.

Atlas
Offline
Whig
Joined: 05/25/2012

I am glad to see a third party that is actually trying to bridge the gap between conservatives and liberals to find common ground. I am a proud liberal, but I believe this party is needed for us all to work together and break the political grid lock of the two-party system.

gene
gene's picture
Offline
Executive CommitteeWhig
Joined: 04/08/2011

To Nolte, it may be beyond accountibility. MWP feels is about control. In fact, President Washington warned us of giving the parties our proxy. We did, and we lost control and representation. When demographics were favorable, and the economy was perking along, it wasn't so noticeable. Once we entered a different era, however, their gross malfeasance has become all too apparent.

Atlas, I believe I am both a liberal ( not marxist) and conservative at the same time, and I do not find it logically inconsistent , nor any sort of cognitive dissonance. ( not proud as that implies ego, and this is strictly intellectual with me - but there is no implicit judgement in that comment) It is the system that now contains the dissonances and logical inconsistencies, so utterly pervaisive that many voters have become blind to them,i.e., they know its broken, but can't seem to find the answers.

So lets get it done!

Gene Chaas, CFA
Charter Member of MWP (2008)

NY Whig - State Committee Chair

MWP - Northeastern Regional Chair

www.nywhig.org

 

EdandBunny
Offline
Joined: 10/15/2013

I wandered here after seeing posts in other discution groups that had this link. I tended to like what the posters had said, so here I am.

Am I a conservative liberal? Absolutely not. Just because an idea is labeled as being one or the other does not make it so. They are all just ideas that need to be looked at on their individual merits.Some of my ideals fall directly in line with liberal or conservative views, others are a blend or compromise of the two. So what does that make me? A Modern Whig, a centrist, or something else? I dont know, but what I do know is that neither of the two major parties or idiologies we currently have properly represent me.

Ed

South Central Michigan

JustANote
Offline
Joined: 11/08/2013

I felt obligated to edit this peice, not for content (though I'm not agreeing nor disagreeing) but merely for grammar.

 

First of all, you can, if you absolutely must, refer to your party as the Modern Whigs. However, there the capitalization must cease. "The people," should never be capitalized. Also, whenever using quotation marks either a comma or a period must fall before the closing mark. "Nation," should also not be capitalized unless it is the first word of a scentance. Also, words after a semi-colon should not be capitalized, they function much as commas in that reguard.

 

If the constitution were written today, it would not adhere to the Chicago Manual of Style. It would also put a black peron's Humanity at approximately three-fifths the value of a white. So I'm going to stick with black peolpe being able to read and modern grammer rules.

=====

 

Ya Welcome.

The Modern Whigs are a pragmatic, common sense, centrist-oriented party where rational solutions trump ideology and integrity trumps impunity.

Our core modern Whig philosophy relies on several fundamental tenets:

INDEPENDENT THINKING, <probably looking for a colon here instead of a comma> Modern Whigs try to practice independent critical thought. We sprang up as a reaction to ill conceived public policy that did not represent the will of the People <lowcase p, please>. Today, we witness policy debates based on ideology, not on concrete solutions. Critical thinking means challenging all assumptions, and mapping and analyzing all possible solutions based on facts and potential outcomes, not on party ideology. Whigs are also keenly aware that much of what constitutes political debate today are people "parroting" <comma after parroting but before the quoation mark> others' opinions without reliance on facts or their own self discovery.

Modern Whigs come from a place of discovery. We assume that the best solutions are still waiting to be discovered by an empowered and engaged electorate, and that the current two party system is an impediment to our progress as a Nation <lowecase n, please>. An undivided electorate who can approach issues with an open mind, without prior prejudice <this is redundant, prejudice is PRE>, is what our Nation <again, nation should not be capitalized> needs to forge bold new solutions built on firm common ground. We believe in American ingenuity!

MERITOCRACY is another pillar of the modern Whig methodology: we believe that society should reward merit, which is a combination of intelligence, talent, competence and hard work. Merit is determined through an objective evaluation of an individual’s professional accomplishments, educational achievements and personal character. Similarly, solutions to problems should be formed and judged in a rational manner based on a process of discovery, analysis and proposed solutions based on their merits, not on prior prejudice, pure self interest or false beliefs.

INTEGRITY is as fundamental a pillar to modern Whigs as Independent Thought <Why is it that so many "fringe ideolouges," are into their own grammer with tons of capitalization?>. Integrity means honesty and a commitment to an ethical approach to politics. Integrity in thought, integrity in action. Whigs practice what they preach, live up to their promises and do not make promises they cannot keep. Integrity also means accountability: no one is above the law and everyone lives by the same rules. You'll find modern Whigs <YOU MUST BE CONSISTENT. They were "Modern Whigs," throughout the peice now they're "modern Whigs?" As my third grade teacher used to say: if your going to break the rules, you must know what your're doing.> near mum on issues of social morality, as these are personal. On issues of ethics or integrity, however, we will hold our officers, leaders and candidates to the highest of ethical standards, above today's actual legal requirements.

These are the core tenets that form the foundation of the Modern Whig philosophy; These concepts allow us to look for genuine,long term solutions to our problems not just for today, but for the next generation as well. Each of our members are encouraged and expected to contribute to this process by helping to shape the discussion and choosing competent people to hold office.

Modern Whigs are neither Conservative nor Liberal <no capitalizations in either, they're adjectives here for chrissakes> and do not wish to be confined to the traditional left-right political spectrum. In fact, in a purely historical or classic context, we can be considered Conservative Liberals <adjective + noun, not Adjective + Noun>. Really! In our current political reality, this seems like nonsense doesn't it? It is, however, patently true. How? To borrow a phrase from President Clinton's <Actual person, plus an office which he held, this is correct :)> campaign, "Its the system stupid!"

Beyond philosophical tenets, modern Whigs <again inconsistent in whether you capitalize modern or not> also promote a concrete platform of political ideals and policies which we believe are the most critical issues to the welfare of our country. These principles bind us as moderates, unify us as Americans, and come from a place of inclusiveness, not division.

1.Fiscal Responsibility <titles such as this are fine and can be capitalized>-Any action of the government must respect principles of fiscal responsibility and public accountability.

2.Energy Independence- Develop practical domestic energy sources and economically viable alternative energy to reduce dependence on foreign energy sources and strive towards energy independence. This is also a component of our inward looking economic focus.

3.Inward looking economic focus <But be consistent! All four wods should've been capitalized!>- It's about time we refocus on ourselves and discover and implement policies to grow domestic demand and our manufacturing base to provide an environment that can create the kinds of jobs that will support American families within the context of a globally interdependent world.

4.State's Responsibility- Each state can generally determine its course of action based on local values and unique needs. Whigs believe in a strong government at every level and separation of powers. Yet, strong and competent local and state governments are important, as they are the level of government where the people can get most involved. All citizens need to ensure the Federal government doesnt usurp its Constitutional <nope, adjectives CANNOT be capitalized unless they begin a scentance> authority.

5.Social Acceptance -When the government is compelled to legislate morality (laws), every citizen should be considered as equal.

6.Education and Scientific Advancement <perfect, "and," doesn't get capitalized but everything else does, absolutely correct>- Increase public and private emphasis on math and science to promote American innovation to compete in the global economy.

7.Veterans Affairs -Vigilant advocacy relating to the medical, financial, and overall well-being of our military families and veterans.

8.Electoral & Government Reform- Support efforts and work for governmental reform that makes the American government efficient, fair, and responsive at all levels. Support efforts and work for electoral reform to allow all Americans to have their voices heard and make it rational for citizens to participate in the government and electoral processes.

A more comprehensive list of current Whig stands on a broad range of issues can be found in our " Where We Stand" <comma before last quotation mark> section.

What modern Whigs <again be conssitent about whether modern is capitalized> do not attempt to do is to tell Americans how to believe. Your personal morality is of little concern to us. Your civic mindedness and personal ethics, however, are of paramount concern as they should be to all our fellow citizens at the most fundamental level.

Whigs believe it is time to change the antiquated two party system with a more open and citizen-centric solution.

Whigs believe it is critical for citizens to re-engage in civic affairs with new tools. Citizens' reliance on proxy political parties as their proxy has in large part caused the mess we're in. ( Whig Academies)

Whigs believe that focusing on the processes of governance and refocusing political participation in America, is the ONLY proper long term solution to enable truly effective public policy and better governance. ( Modern Whig Philosophy - methodology not ideology)

stuartleitch
Offline
Joined: 11/17/2013

Also you may as well fix a few spellings and weird usages: 

acheive [achieve]

near idly [make that just "idly"]

doesnt [doesn't]

dialouge [dialogue (happens twice)]

" Where We Stand" [omit the space]

to wright our Republic [to right our Republic]

jessilaurn
Offline
Whig
Joined: 11/08/2013

As luck would have it, I've been discussing the MWP on a few other political forums.  And I'm getting some feedback that we should probably address from our "Where We Stand" page.

Under Taxes & Income Inequality:  quite a few are taking our mention of Flat/Fair Tax as "well researched" to be a major red flag.  Because these tax proposals have so often been presented in regressive fashion, and because they are so often seen as a way to reduce revenue and (as Norquist infamously put it), "...reduce [the government] to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub," I'm getting a lot of replies that lump us in with the Tea Party fiasco (or as some have put it, "a refuge for Tea Partiers upset that their group was hijacked by social conservatives").

Under several categories:  defaulting to "let the states decide."  You'll find this under a number of categories, from defaulting to the states for marriage recognition to reproductive rights to lump-sum grants in place of Federal programs.  This sends up another red flag for many, since they're so used to seeing "states' rights" as an argument in favor of allowing regressive and even oppressive practices to continue.  It's a definite perception problem for us.

Under Immigration:  I'll be frank here.  Damned near everyone I know who has seen this has quipped Heinlein back at me (the "Service Equals Citizenship" bit from Starship Troopers).  Remember that ST was a dystopian novel.  If we're going to hope to be taken seriously, we need a policy regarding illegal immigrants that isn't ripped from the pages of a dystopian novel.

The Whigs were the prototype of a progressive party (albeit one eventually sundered by the issue of slavery).  If we're to bear their mantle, we need to bear their hallmark quality.  And that means ensuring that our policy positions aren't something that looks like it would come from a Dixiecrat handbook.

Jessica Orsini

Duffy
Duffy's picture
Offline
Whig
Joined: 10/14/2012

Oh yes, progressing to what end? This is the answer that progressives never answer.

And speaking Red Flags, let us consider all the great “progressive” experiments of the 20th Century. The Soviet Union, National Socialist German Workers Party in Germany. Mao’s great progressive China, Pol Pot.  But not here in America, we are smarter than everyone else who has tried the progressive route before. Our progressives can swing it where it has failed everywhere else. So again, just what is good about “Progressiveness” ? You never actually describe just what you mean about progressive and regressive.

But I do love the bit about red flags, because it is ironic, yet, appropriate.

I also appreciate your complaint about the Tea Party “Fiasco”. Must be disheartening what with 5 million losing their insurance plans, and the probability that in the next year 50 million plus who get insurance through their employer will also be forced to seek new plans at a higher cost.  Is that the definition of progressive? Ruining the insurance plans of millions who were actually paying for their own insurance in order to get thousands more onto the ever increasing bottomless pit sucking money down that is Medicaid?

Wow, how progressive.  Must be disheartening to all the progressives that those simple minded retards in the Tea Party were right about the horribly misnamed Affordable Care Act, and the progressive self appointed intellectuals were, wrong. And we are now 17 Trillion dollars in debt.

The ‘intellectuals” generally are wrong, they thought the Soviet was a great idea, admired Germany from 1936-1939, spoke lovingly of the cultural revolution in China. I thought the word intellectual was related somehow to intelligence, and implied intelligent. But the intellectuals prove to me I do not understand how that works.

On letting the states decide. This is also defined as Federalism. This was actually the point of a Union of separate Sovereign states, each on an experiment. When something worked really well in one state, others might adopt it, or not, as its citizens chose.  Yes that was the point of the United States. A Republic consisting of separate Sovereign states with a central, limited, Federal Government. I guess that is unprogressive.  Most progressive won’t be satisfied until we get a proper Peoples Democratic Republic going. Like North Korea.

Star Ship Troopers was a Dystopian Novel? Did you actually read it? It was not a Dystopian novel, it was a Military Science Fiction Novel. Indeed, if you had read it, you would have understood that life in the Federation depicted by Heinlein was pretty good until the War started with a sneak attack. Remember, the dispute between the protagonist and his family? Join the Military and get the franchise or follow his father into the family business and attend Harvard. Dystopian, yeah. I guess that would pretty bleak for a progressive.

What really bothered you about Starship troopers was what the Service for the Franchise was.

How do you keep a Republic with strong protections of individual liberties from turning into a democracy where the voters vote themselves, progressively of course, into recipients of the public Treasury. You probably are disgusted with me by now. I am good with that. Heinlein’s point, like Tocqueville’s, was that Democracy only last as long as the majority of the voting population does not decide to start progressively voting themselves the treasury.  Put the decision making progress into the hands of those who have already shown the willingness, through Military service, to put the welfare of their Nation, their people, and their community ahead of their own.

And that, literally, is where we sit now.  On the verge of an Economic Collapse, with a group of people demanding the Government do whatever it takes to give them security and comfort, with the Fiasco of a few unwilling to trade their personal liberty for the “benign” progressive  benevolent hand of a few, Rich, well powered self appointed intellectual elites.

 

Duffy

Eric_Roeske_RVA
Offline
Whig
Joined: 11/06/2013

I'm still chewing over the majority of what Duffy posted, but I did want to chime in on the State Decision "default" setting that was mentioned.  I'll agree, when I first glanced through and gave this information a very cursory look, my initial reaction was somewhere along the lines of "they just keep passing the buck to the states, why won't they take a stance?"

However, the more I thought about it the more I realized that the federalist stance, as Duffy put it, is in fact the ideal situation.  With a nation as large and diverse as ours it's a flight of fancy to think that what's good for John in Tampa, Florida, will also be good for Jim in Seattle, Washington (with some exceptions, of course).  

I think part of what has upset so many people in this country recently is the perception that their lives are being too directly influenced by the interests of groups that are located across the country from them.  Individual states should be able to decide how they want to act on particular topics; for instance, if the majority of people in...I don't know, Oklahoma for instance, decide that they don't want to allow people of the same sex to get married in their state, then that is their decision (as long as they still recognize same sex marriage from other states) and they shouldn't have people from California or New York telling them otherwise.  Or, if the majority of folks up in Rhode Island vote for stricter background checks before someone can buy a handgun, people in Texas shouldn't be able to tell them they can't.  Obviously these are generalities that I'm speaking in, as I haven't taken the time to really think out the minutae, but overall I think a return to the states being able to think and decide for themselves (within reason) will greatly help improve the political climate in this country.

Cue the debate on "within reason"...

Duffy
Duffy's picture
Offline
Whig
Joined: 10/14/2012

I would point out that the Idea of States Rights as a “Red Flag” is a Red Herring.

Pointedly, the issue of States Rights prior to the Civil War was not the Southern position that the states had a right to maintain slavery as an institution within their own states.

There was, in fact, never an attempt at the National Level to end slavery in the Southern states, where it existed as an institution. Thus, the association with "States Rights" with the institution of slavery is a post civil war fiction, created by Southern Apologist for slavery, and happily embraced by Leftist Progressives who sought the same thing that the antebellum Southern elitist Aristocracy did. Albeit for different reason, both wanted the destruction of the sovereignty of the individual states in favor of more central Homogenized uniform National Power.

First point, every bit of evidence, from Opinion Editorials in newspapers to actual Legislation introduced and debated in Congress, from the period before the American Civil War indicates that the divisive issue between the North(east), (Mid)west and the South was slavery. There were peripheral issues, to be sure. From Economic Policy, Trade Policy and westward expansion, but at the root of them all was slavery.

The South wanted high Tariffs on Raw Material that they could produce from coming into the country and Low Tariffs on finished products from Europe to support the institution of Slavery in the South. At the expense of the Industrializing Northeast. They wanted low Tariffs on foodstuffs so they did not have to be economically dependant on the West (Midwest) for food. All to support the institution of Slavery and keep it Economically viable.  Yes the Southern Economy was heavily agricultural, but primarily geared towards Cotton and Tobacco, they were not self sufficient in the production food staples. This is critical because you remember the lynchpin of the first Whig party economic policy was the American Plan-Raw Material from the South, Food from the Midwest, and Finished products from the Northeast. The South also viewed the Economic Development of the Northeast with Alarm. In the Northeast, the theory of wage Labor was taking hold, along with the concept of the right of an individual to the product of his labor. As opposed to the concept of the Generous kindly Benevolent head of the Family model widely perceived as the Southern Model. The plantation owners role as “father Figure” responsible for all the needs, from food and shelter to medical care, of the Southern slaves, and extended to the poor whites in the south based on the fact that they had to accept the wages sat by a landowner who could always bring in slaves instead of “leasing” land to white sharecroppers was severely threatened by the concept of a individual having the right to choose who to sell his labor to.

Second point, there never was an attempt to, either through Legislation or Litigation (Congress and the Courts) to make slavery illegal. The whole Abolitionist movement, to include John Browns actions was to prevent attempt to expand the power of the Slave States in the South to expand slavery, and therefore create new slave states, into the territories in the West organizing for statehood. States like, well Missouri, Kansas, Arizona and New Mexico (as well as attempts to gain control of Cuba, Durango, Chihuahua and Sonora as potential new slave states). Most abolitionists recognized that with more open and free markets within the United States, the institution o slavery was economically unviable and woud “wither” on the vine.

The Laws and Court decision which trampled States rights were not about ending slavery, it was about expanding the power of Slave states and the Slave Owning political class, and protecting the institution of slavery.

The Fugitive Slave Act(s) all designed to expand the definition of slave, and the power of the slave owning class, to the states which had outlawed the institution. New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Ohio, Indiana were free, but if a southern slave owner said a Black person was a slave, it did not matter what the those states said, he was a slave and could be dragged to south in chains.

The Supreme Court’s decision in The Dread Scott case, It did not matter that a person was taken in slavery to a free state, and lived there a decade in slavery, and his “owner” died. He was still property of the heirs and part of the estate and could be dragged back to the south. Why, because the Supreme Court says that a Black Person cannot be a Citizen. Never mind the fact that many Free blacks had been living as citizens in the Northeast since the Colonial Era, they were now not citizens as of the effective date of that decision. It was settled law, approved by the Supreme Court and the primary plank of the Democrat Party.

But those citizens of the free states said no, and stood on the Sovereignty of their States, their States Rights to refuse to allow the institution of slavery to exist within their states. And the Slave owning Political Class in the South refused to accept the rights of those states to outlaw slavery, and decided to secede.

Yeah, I can see why the concept of states’ rights might bother “good” progressives.

 

Duffy

Duffy
Duffy's picture
Offline
Whig
Joined: 10/14/2012

I do not believe it was a slavery issue. I believe it was the issue related to slavery that was the cause of the Civil War. But there are many other examples of States rights issues.

My goal was twofold, to dispute the assertion that the States Rights argument was used to defend the institution of slavery, and the justification for secession. Rather, that it was the states’ rights of Free states, that were being compelled to tolerate and support the institution of slavery, and their refusal to do so, that led to the civil war. When everyone argues against states rights, slavery is the first issue they bring up to discredit the concept of states’ rights.

Second, it was the concept of states’ rights that allowed the Free states to oppose the expansion slavery.

 

Duffy

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer