The civil war was the first instance of this federal overreach. Things haven’t really gotten better since then.
I'm not familiar with it.
Are we talking about temporary war powers, or was this the long term government structure that would have been powerfully centralized?
If accurate, it would certainly change my understanding of the ideals of the confederacy.
For example, it was written into the constitution of the confederacy that no state could ban slavery. The confederacy also had strong centralized control over things like money. These were not temporary powers.
It was; the state vs federal authority to regulate / abolish slavery. Both points of view are right but ignore the other half of the equation.
>The confederacy also had strong centralized control over things like money. These were not temporary powers.
Can you expound on this? One of the issues with the confederacy is their ability to fund the war through taxation, because many states didn't feel they were obligated to pay it, because state's rights (of course). It's pretty ironic that they seceded over the federal authority over slavery, and the lack of that authority in their own government to fund the war was a major contributing factor in them losing the war, and no longer existing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_war_finance
It's crazy, the plantation class was unwilling to fund the war for their own economic survival, that they were winning at the time. Absolutely mind blowing.
Yeah, I'm sort of over absolutism.
Everything has nuance.
Authoritarianism's favorite tool is to reduce complex issues to "us" vs "them" absolutes.