User talk:Beowulfwodenson

Welcome!

 * }

Secession and sovereignty themes
You and I are sometimes disagreed, but in your last few edits on ‘Confederate States of America’, I see a couple of provocative themes associated with secession that I’d like to see you expand on, maybe even under new subheading sections ... you just have to say what a scholar says instead of just making your own statements, even if they are what you know to be true based on your past reading.

Yours of 26 Mar 19:09. Kentucky and Missouri are interesting cases of representation and sovereignty. They are in both the CS and US Congresses. The CS (pro-Davis) members were carried over without elections. Why were US Congressmen dropped from Louisiana, Virginia and Tennessee in 1863, while the CS representatives from there were not? I’d be interested in what you could come up with. I can’t find any scholars yet. It is too easy for editors to say its POV when in fact there are interesting aspects of this story that probably never be considered anywhere else but in an article on the Confederacy. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Re yours of 26 Mar 19:15. The difficulty with simply asserting “rights and powers delegated” to the US government “by the states”, is that others would have sovereignty located in the people, so the people delegate. (Declaration, 9th and 10th Amendments). The subject probably merits its own section in this article to describe the “Why” rationale for secession, “Confederate Philosophy on Secession”. Guy Story Brown, Gerald M. Capers, H. Lee Cheek, Charles Wiltse and W. Kirk Wood are referenced as scholars in the Wikipedia article for John C. Calhoun. I wonder if you could do some writing for the article on the philosophy of secession just as stand-alone intellectual history, apart from any political and social elements. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)