one could argue that the prelude to the civil war started before independence, since the Quakers were anti-slavery. even disregarding that, fighting was occuring over slavery for decades prior to the formation of the Confederacy - the famous bit at the tail end of that, “bleeding Kansas”, occured in the early 1850s.

a mere 4 or 8 year length of time is largely inconsequential.

The US Civil War is more significant than just the penultimate legal question on slavery. It also set the tone for politics for the next 50 years, completely destroyed the population and economy of nearly half the country, and paved the road for some of the most important Amendments to the US Constitution.

Plus the advances in war time technologies, tactics, and medicine weren’t too shabby.

What I find particularly interesting is that the Confederacy only existed for 4 years, meaning to run around with an Obama flag would more historically relevant than this shit.

“Historically relevant” or “historically significant” is really tricky thing to judge sometimes. While Obama’s 2 terms as president meant he was in charge for 8 years vs the Confederacy’s 4, I believe the Confederacy and the US Civil War they caused was more historically relevant than Obama’s 8 years as president.

There’s a whole lot of nasty from the war and immediate fall out we’re seeing feeling today.

Someone has been downvoting me every time I get a response from you on each comment.

That’s interesting. That’s not what I can see on my end, but then again Memmy has been pretty glitchy the last few days.

Are you seeing my point now?

Have you seen anyone downvoting you? Even when you’re acting like a stubborn fool, your karma for this conversation hasn’t been negatively impacted.

I feel like you are being a dick about this.

Funny, I could say the same about you.

I really don’t think you do, you are being incredibly closed minded and sticking your head in the sand. Because it has no* effect on you (yet).

That is a bold assumption to make. I’ve absolutely been affected by it on Reddit, and I’ve been banned from subreddits from saying the “wrong” things. Hell, I’m a lesbian who was banned from r/ActualLesbians because I said lesbians are attracted to women and not non-men.

I’m not sticking my head in the sand.

But not ‘being a dick’ is far too subjective in a global village… The world does not beat to one drum.

While I hear what you’re saying, it’s really not as complicated as you’re making it out to be.

I think that is too idealistic. It could very easily go into a downward spiral that a community could never get out of. It happens already on several subreddits already. You may not have experienced it, but I can say it for certain happens. There have even been scifi series written about it that have taken the concept to the extreme.

I’m familiar with some of the subreddits, but I believe you’re taking the spiral too steeply and too quickly.

The “don’t be a dick” philosophy will get you more than enough karma to comment on whatever subreddit you want to participate in, outside of some super niche ones.

requiring basic levels of karma most certainly is. You have to say the right things first to get the group approval before you can contribute.

Again, I disagree. You can say the “right things,” certainly, or you can say “neutral things.” Really anything short of overt hostility would be acceptable.

Requiring basic levels of karma or age is not “group think.”