The Fool wrote: > > Then there's this: > > http://www.ka.net/randy/conspiracies/shadow/html/shadow.html >
I don't have time right now to read the whole thing, but when I get to a quote like this I'm not sure I want to anyway: "Lincoln was caught in the middle between the Northern industrialists and the Southern agriculturists, who both wanted to dominate Western expansion because of the wealth it offered. The industrialists knew that the agriculturists depended on slavery because cotton, upon which Southern wealth was based, was very labor intensive and required the inexpensive labor that slavery provided. They knew that if the Western lands were declared "free states" then the Southern agriculturists would be unable to compete, and would be forced to leave Western expansion, and its potential profits, to the Northern industrialists." Slavery was never an efficient source of labor. The Civil war was about maintaining an Aristocracy, first and foremost. The Southern system of agriculture was extremely inefficient according to just about everything I've read on the subject. Slavery is inherently inefficient, and slaves were not inexpensive. One of the primary reasons the South wanted to expand into the west (and into Mexico and the Caribbean) was that they knew that if they did not maintain the balance of power in the U.S. Government, their way of life was doomed. Thus we see the South demanding a Slave state be admitted to the Union for every free state until just before the war. -- Doug email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zo.com/~brighto "Imagine all the people, Living for Today" John Lennon
