Most of the world abolished slavery without war. I'm not saying the U.S. could have done this, but I am saying to ask why the U.S. different in this regard is a fair question. Even if the conclusion is something like, "No, we were different than Brazil because of A and B and we're different than Canada because of X and Y." it is still a good question. Clearly you know a lot about why the U.S. went to war. Do you know why other countries did not? I admit I don't.
I'm also not saying "We should be like country X!" I'm saying it is a fair question to try to sift through these differences, especially when it comes to slavery, economics, politics, and war.
Let me try to put this another way. I've heard dozens of times about the year or so lead-up to the Civil War in the U.S. Yet I've only heard one person ever even mention that other countries that had slavery were able to abolish it without war. And it wasn't a teacher, who should be the one to bring up these topics.
Why is it so controversial to even pose the question? Why is it so controversial to question the necessity for violence and war?
I don't think you're the type that uses violence for political gain, Sam. I'm not lumping you in with Berkeley at all. I was just reflecting on the sad state of affairs in the country right now.
- Paul