@WanjiruNjoya@Jeff_Davis1808 ok, this is now becoming a waste of my time.
if you read anything i've ever written, you'd know that what you just wrote is an absurd claim.
i know my arguments quite well, think about these things a lot.
@WanjiruNjoya@Jeff_Davis1808 from the perspective of classical political science it is pretty obvious what the govt was in the slaveholding states.
look at who controlled the offices of govt in ALL of the slaveholding states - very high % high slaveholding.
this fact has to be dealt with. you don't.
@PaleoconJohn@WanjiruNjoya@Jeff_Davis1808 that's neither here nor there.
what is relevant is that the settlers who influenced political cult in SC from the beginning were from west indies, esp. barbados. So to obtain a more neutral opinion, you can look at what contemporaries say about brit. west indies.
@BrionMcClanahan That is wrong.
Again, he's an historian & might know the smell of Edgefield County but many don't know how to make political sense of the facts.
Both houses of the state leg were dominated by high slaveholding men. They elected the gov.
@BrionMcClanahan John Brown was the lamented counter-attack, which was understandable but wrong, just as oaths to start war now after so many assaults on the civil liberties of conservatives today would be understandable but wrong. That was the point of my article.
@BrionMcClanahan Bottom line, if you want to know my compass, John Adams is my north star. I would have liked to have been a Federalist in 1800 and a Republican in 1856.
@BrionMcClanahan The people you mention, Richardson, Foner and Sinha could not do regime analysis either. I have nothing in common with their politics but do with yours.