Governor Paul and Secession.

We do have slavery today. The USA is one big plantation with politicians and those who back them being the masters, and the majority living as slaves under their subjugation.

You don't see the chains because they are invisible, but they are there in the form of taxes, interest, and monopoly prices, and countless laws that destroy our freedom.

Voting is just a sham to make people believe they are free, yet the distribution of wealth, resembling that on a slave plantation, provides ample evidence that the majority are enslaved.

As far as the myth that the Civil War was fought to end slavery, you are also in error. It was fought principally because the Southern States were paying 90% of the taxes that funded the federal government since most of the taxes on imports were collected in Southern ports. Slavery was far down on the list of possible causes, and Lincoln himself was not opposed to slavery until he saw such a position as useful to keep France and England out from aiding the South.

Please, do not make me laugh. Are you aware the slavery had nothing to do with the so-called "Civil War" (where I'm from, the War for Southern Independence!) and that, in fact, taxation without representation (i.e. how federal protective tariffs economically exploited the South) was the driving issue? For generations, Northern states had enacted federal protective tariffs into law which, among other things, granted a government-enforced monopoly to Northern industry, forcing Southerners to purchase overtaxed foreign goods or overpriced Northern goods, thereby redistributing Southern property to the federal or corporate treasuries. In 1860, after federal tariffs had been lowered to competitive levels, Abraham Lincoln campaigned in favor of restoring federal protectionism. At the same time, Republicans in Congress were working to pass the "Morrill Tariff," a protectionist tariff that tripled rates. After the Morrill Tariff was signed into law and Lincoln elected, the Southern states, seeing the writing on the wall for more federal oppression, invoked their constitutional (Tenth Amendment) and natural (Declaration of Independence) right of secession. The federal government and Northern industry, fearing the loss of the money and power which which they were accustomed to looting from the South, invaded under the specious pretense of "preserving the Union." Look at Ron Paul's own comments on the "Civil War" for some enlightenment:

http://newsone.com/1812845/ron-paul-made-south-was-right-civ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOE4Ip7In0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CigdTwwO7-I

Here are some illuminating quotes for your edification:

"...war is most often fought for economic reasons. But economic wars are drive by moral and emotional overtones. Our own Revolution was fought to escape from excessive taxation, but was inspired and drive by our desire to protect our God-given right to liberty. The War Between the States, fought primarily over tariffs, was nonetheless inspired by the abhorrence of slavery. It is this moral inspiration that drives people to fight to the death, as so many Americans did between 1861 and 1865."

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do abut slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union." - Abraham Lincoln to Horace Greeley

"On the part of the North, the war was carried on, not to liberate slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; and was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union.
"The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals." - Lysander Spooner, Northern anarcho-capitalist and abolitionist

"We are the serfs of the system, out of whose labor is raised, not only the money paid into the treasury, but also the funds out of which are drawn the rich rewards of the manufacturer and his associates in interest. Their encouragement is our discouragement. The duty on imports, which is mainly paid out of our labor, gives them the means of selling to us at a higher price; while we cannot, to compensate the loss, dispose of our products at the least advance. It is then, indeed, not a subject of wonder, when understood, that our section of the country, though helped by a kind Providence with a genial sun and prolific soil, from which spring the richest products, should languish in poverty and sink into decay, while the rest of the Union, though less fortunate in natural advantages, are flourishing in unexampled prosperity." - John C. Calhoun, 1828

"The Southern states now stand in the same relation towards the Northern states, in the vital matter of taxation, that our ancestors stood towards the people of Great Britain. They are in a minority in Congress. Their representation in Congress is useless to protect them against unjust taxation; and they are taxed by the people of the North for their benefit, exactly as the people of Great Britain taxed our ancestors in the British parliament for their benefit. For the last forty years, the taxes laid by the Congress of the United States have been laid with a view of subserving the interests of the North. The people of the South have been taxed by duties on imports, not for revenue, but for an object inconsistent with revenue - to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the productions of their mines and manufactures.
"The people of the Southern states are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern states, but after the taxes are collected three-fourths of them are expended at the North. This cause, with others connected with the operation of the general government, has provincialized the cities of the South. Their growth is paralyzed, while they are the mere suburbs of Northern cities. The bases of the foreign commerce of the United States are the agricultural productions of the South; yet Southern cities do not carry it on." - South Carolina Secession Ordinance, 1861

Finally, war is only ever just if it is defensive, yet even if the federal government was invading to "free the slaves," how can that possibly be construed as defensive? War is also only just if it targets combatants, but the chief characteristic of any invasion is plunder, rape, and murder, which is exactly what war criminals like Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan committed against Southern women and children. Furthermore, the domestic actions of the federal government - military coups against states, suspension of the Bill of Rights, illegally levying an unconstitutional income tax, nationalizing banking, etc. - discredit the claim that slavery was a motive behind the war. The War of Northern Aggression was an opportunity for the federal government to eradicate the republic of states' rights once and for all and erect a centralized empire in its place.