Wasn’t it KINDA About STATES’ RIGHTS?!?!?!?!?!?!?! REACTION | DaVinci REACTS
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 06. 2022
- Broadcasted live on Twitch -- Watch live at / devon_davinci
Every week Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays at 3pm ET.
Wasn’t it KINDA About STATES’ RIGHTS?!?!?!?!?!?!?! uploaded by Atun-Shei Films
Original video: • Wasn’t it KINDA About ...
Twitter: / devon_davinci
Patreon: / devondavinci
Discord: / discord
Twitch: / devon_davinci
DailyMotion: www.dailymotion.com/dm_9e222d...
#CivilWar #AmericanHistory #Reaction
Like my Graphic Tees? Check out my Affiliate Store Page to see which shirts I recommend. Purchasing T-shirts from this promo link will not cost you anything extra. It will however help the channel, so give it a look if you're interested. www.teepublic.com/stores/devo...
Reaction request must have #davincireacts in the comment.
Leave #askdavinci in a comment to the a question to me.
Anonymous questions can go to my twitter DM:
/ devon_davinci
Or my Email: dtproductions2K@gmail.com
*email is only for serious questions and business inquiries. anything else will be DELETED!!! - Hry
No one is mentioning the fact that the Palpatine impression was just
Spot on.
The irony of the Confederacy and States Rights was the moment they realised immediately that giving the rebel states so much freedom was just giving them more problems in the war effort , and that authoritarianism , was literally the way forward in order to ensure both victory , but also law and order
Have you ever read Owsley, a “Southern Agrarian” writer, who literally blamed states rights for the Confederacy’s defeat in the Civil War.
@@astrobullivant5908 State's rights literally hampered the Central Government's efforts to coordinate the war lmao
Even more is that the Confederacy suppressed their own secessionist attempts as Eastern Tennessee attempted to secede as West Virginia did
"I can tell you there's no Santa Claus, even though I've never been to the North Pole."
Damn, what a good line.
THE LIES OF THE SANTA CLAUS DENIERS CONTINUE AND INSTENSIFY!!!!
"States' rights..." I love how they just drug out the break before we all knew what was coming. Just building it up for so long but somehow keeping it from being boring. Well done.
Also, even if it was about "states rights, " well, the federal government has "rights," too.
"ARE YOU AN ANARCHO-SYNDICALIST?"
😆😆😆😆
What that means?
@@RonDiani no idea lol
@@RonDiani Well, Syndicalism is basically a type of workers movement that works against capitalism, and anarcho is a way to say anarchy.
I think you can piece it together from there.
@@RonDiani The idea is that the state and capitalism would be abolished, that's the the anarcho part. In it's place society would be governed by a network of worker syndicates, think suped up trade unions.
@@RonDianibasically medieval guilds on crack.
59:53 So the Klaus bits are...confusing. His arc really starts in the archaeology video Atun-Shei did about the Annenerbe, and then possessing Johnny in that one Checkmate Lincolnites, and then moving forward from here. Also there was one where he and Atun Shei were roommates in modern day, but I don't think that's part of the character's canon.
Anway. In short, Klaus, presumably from a find on an archaeological dig, was able to become an interdimensional being, and is talking to and shooting himself from another timeline.
I saw another comment that put it best: if the civil war wasn’t about slavery, someone should go back in time and tell the confederacy.
👍🤣
So why was slavery not abolished until after the war?
@@duanedavis27 the 13th Amendment was passed by Congress before the war ended, but not ratified until about 8 months after it ended. But I’m curious, the way you ask that sounds like you think it’s a smoking gun. Like an “ah ha!”
The confederacy was very clear about its reasons for secession, and the preservation and expansion of slavery was at the very forefront. That’s the point of my comment. “Someone should tell the confederates” because it was the confederates who first sounded off that the cause was slavery. The Union didn’t initially cite abolition as their cause.
The north wasn’t united in abolition. Plenty of northerners wanted slavery to continue. Kentucky, for example, was Union during the Civil War, but also a slave state. Many thought slavery needed to continue if there was any hope of restoring the south to the fold. The North was not staunchly anti-slavery in cause. The South, however, was undeniable in its loud proclamations that the preservation of slavery was the primary reason for secession.
The fact that abolition was passed and ratified in the same year that the plantation owners were brought to heel doesn’t do much to bolster what point you might be attempting to make.
@@Jordanmode isn't it true the South just wanted to be rid of the North, the North could be slave or not, made no difference to the South? But Lincoln chose to de-facto enslave the South through military aggression. Not to mention exempting Missouri, Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland from his so-called "Emancipation" proclamation.
So, I suppose you are correct, the civil war was about slavery - about the North enslaving the South.
@@duanedavis27 no. No, dude. Educate yourself. The south seceded to preserve and expand slavery. That’s repeatedly their primary reason. I gotta stop my interaction with you. I have to assume you’re trolling at this point. No one in 2024 could have this much access to information and be this obtuse and stupid.
In 1820 there were ZERO slaves in Vermont. In 1777, at the formation of the Vermont Republic, there were ZERO slaves in Vermont. Any slaves that were brought to Vermont automatically became free men. Slavery was forbidden - period. This was before the Abolitionist Movement had even begun. I can't speak for the laws/traditions/history of any other New England states
God Klaus has become such a great villain, far from the simple joke that he was when first introduced.
12:13 that DOES sound like Ronald Regan! 😂😂
Regarding your comparison to trying to defend Nazi Germany as "Just being about the German people wanting to have their state and it wasn't really about authoritarianism"... yeah, people have tried to make that exact argument.
You know, it's kinda weird but I think they might've actually been an authoritarian nation, no real telling though, since I can't read Germinican
Got to disagree on the outfits, Civil war era is my favorite in terms of style American wise.
Not sure why, exactly, but I've always liked the look of double-breasted coats. The symmetry is pleasing to me.
I love the uniforms cuz I love the civil war, but yea, objectively pretty bad.
Check out the uniforms from other countries at the time.
I would be shirtless then 😂 since I’m allergic to wool so I couldn’t wear the Union uniform 😂 or I steal the confederate theirs. Then I will be shoot by my own soldiers.
@@sleepyburrI have a blue coat like this but I can’t wear it because I’m allergic to wool.
I also felt violated after Johnny Reb’s ‘enthusiastic’ feeling… 😳 Great vid by him as always though lol. Always enjoy your reactions to these as well. Shame I missed you react to it live; my schedule has been a bit chaotic.
I mean, did the Revolutionary army REALLY have a uniform. The officers did, sure, but most soldiers, much like the civil war, showed up with whatever they decided to leave home with and was handed a rifle if they didn't already have one.
@44:30,
George Fitzhugh actually got on the Freedman's Bureau after the War.
@46:47,
You had a group called Knights of the Golden Circle where the Confederates wanted to conquer the Caribbean and expand slavery there.
@31:07,
The Indian Removal Acts were opposed by a large number of Southerners, including famous somewhat pro-Slavery Southerners like Davy Crockett and Sam Houston. Even in the Confederacy, there were a sizable number of somewhat "sympathetic"(note the quotes) voices for particular tribes such as Albert Pike. For perspective, roughly 40% of the Cherokee were pro-Confederate such as Stand Watie and William Holland Thomas.
I will say everything, and everyone is hypocritical to some extent. If you oppose anything that has been the established order makes you to some extent or other a hypocrite as you participate and benefit from said order. In my view this hypocrisy is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that the northerns did do wrong, but then sought to correct those wrongs to whatever extent possible. Southerners sought to continue doing wrong no matter what. In many circumstances you have to play the game until you acquire enough power and means to upend the game and make things more just. Frankly I will take the conflicted and regretful hypocrite over the shameless supremacist any day as the morally conflicted individual will make concessions with the aggrieved class, while the shameless supremacist will bulldoze over them.
New checkmate Lincolnites just dropped 🤩
"What about that pile of skulls though? Somebody organized that!"
Nah, that's just Northern Virginia.
But in all seriousness, as someone who grew up in Virginia during an era when the Civil was the states only acknowledged major attraction, I get the desire to believe the Civil war was about States Rights. I really do. It's way better to feel proud of your great grand parents for fighting and dying for "The freedom of our state!" then it does to say "Yeah, they were willing to kill to perpetuate slavery". And to a certain point I can agree with the idea about "We were fighting for our rights"... but then logic kicks in. No one fights for "our rights®" . That's just not practical. No, people fight for the right (right meaning the governmental backed protection) to do something. Women fought for the right to vote. They didn't fight for "Generic Women's rights®"
And that's the critical point. What was it the seceding states wanted to do that they feared the Federal government wouldn't allow them? Simple: expand Slavery.
Some fun tidbits:
In the Confederate Cornerstone speech the term slave/slavery/enslavement is mentioned 13 times
A fun little quote from it:
"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. "
Georgia's Declaration of secession mentions slavery 35 times, South Carolina's mentions it 18 times,
Texas' mentions it 22 times, and explicitly lists "They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States." as one of their principle complaints against the USA and reason for their secession.
Mississippi's declaration of secession explicitly states: "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. "
Point 4 of Section 9 of the CSA Constitution says:
"4. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."
Article 4, section 2:
1. The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired."
3. No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs; or to whom such service or labor may be due.
Section 3:
3. "...In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States."
Yeah... it was totally about State's rights... rights to maintain and expand slavery.
On the subject of uniforms, how dare you sir!? I suppose they are a bit plain, but then you do get some regiments with cooler looks. Exhibit A, the 14th Brooklyn, officially the 84th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment
Not even 10%, my guy.
It was 30%
Any chance you will react to the “Checkmate Linconites: Is History being Rewritten”?
Hey Devon, could you react to some akala talks or rap he’s a genius
I think you shouldn't do live chat when doing reaction videos, especially ones with history as the subject. You, IMHO, get too distracted and miss a lot of things.
It’s why I for the most part don’t watch reaction videos that are done during a live stream, they are almost always way too damn distracted and don’t pause the damned video.
Would love to watch your reaction to the video. But the audio level is too low, I have earbuds in with volume is all the way up. I’ll have to catch the next one.
Yeah, this was from one of my Livestreams. Audio levels may adjust as I continue to adjust my settings.
It has to be on your end than, because I just got done watching on my phone with my earbuds and the audio level was just fine for me. Try without your earbuds or with a different pair and see if that doesn’t help.
I will try to watch again later. I enjoy the content and your reaction/ additions.
17:32 still true to this day lol
We are in modern slavery just the difference is now its the government and corporations who owns you not another human.
@@RonDiani technically it’s still people, now it’s a small group
States rights? What about country rights? 😂
What my comment means is that state rights go against the federal government and unity.
Are you trying to cultivate the CJ from GTA look?
The only thing you can do is what the declaration of Independence date. The supreme Court has ruled that the declaration of Independence is a legal document same as the Constitution. You cannot secede from the union but you may rebell against the government to appoint a new government to represent you more appropriately. Or in the case of your state not doing so you may rebell against that state government and replace it with a new state government but you may not leave the union know violate the constitution.
They did no such thing. The Declaration of Independence is not a legal/governance document for the USA. Do you think the US government if beholden to the Magna Carta too?
Sir they are valled uniforms, not outfits.
Called uniforms, out fits are wot lady's wear
Reject Pronouns. Embrace Bronouns.
I don't think having a Muslim is President bothers most Americans we just don't want to elect one that is you know an extremist. So we are very careful. Now you can say what you want with that but I mean it's really only been what 20 some years after 9/11 you know that is still a fairly fresh wound so we do got to keep that in mind too. If Americas not ready to elect a Muslim as president i dont see the issue with it. If the majority vote for that im cool with it too unless they are a an extremist
People have Obama crap just for the RUMOR that he was Muslim. And that was debunked before he was even elected. People to this day still call him a Muslim as an attack. If an actual Muslim was leading in an election, half the country would be threatening to secede.
And there's a BIG issue with your second paragraph. You are generalizing all Muslims with the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11. It wasn't acceptable in 2001, and it's not acceptable today. Unless the person running has some tie to terrorism, it's not justified to "not be ready."
Why isn't this comment in a checkmate lincolnites video?
@@DevonDaVinci what you going to do Force the rest of this country to pretend like they are ready for a Muslim president? You can say it's not justified but you know what you don't know anybody's reasoning for not wanting a Muslim president. Just like there's a reason why America hasn't had a bitch for a president yet. We're not ready for one and we're not going to be forced to elect one. It's no different with Muslim people so if you want to say a bunch of Americans who are traumatized by 9/11 who would much rather not have a Muslim as their president is unjustified why don't you go tell that to the almost 3,000 Americans families that lost loved ones because of 9/11. You can dislike it all you want but you know what you can't force the whole country to vote for someone if they don't want to vote for that person or because they aren't ready. That's like calling America misogynistic because we haven't elected a female as president America is not ready for it. If the country is not ready for it the country's not fucking ready for it say this is what's wrong with a lot of citizens in this country you want to force something on a part of the country that is not ready for that yet.
Well the emancipation was just a thought in 1863, so 2 years of fighting about nothing at all? and didn't pass till after the war, Lincoln made deals with 4 slave states if they joined the union they could hold slavery, which Lincoln made good on his word, till it became official the emancipation Proclamation, new jersey was the last state to officially own slaves, so i at least take that into consideration, and you could legal grab a man off the streets in the north with some paperwork so, slavery wasn't legal they just created a loophole to still profit off people.