At least Q was acting independently

Posted on: August 3, 2025 at 14:48:38 CT

My actual take on those days is that Missouri's original goal of "armed neutrality" where it tried to tell both the Union and the Confederacy to f*** off and just leave our state alone was the only approach that would have truly served Missourians as a people.

Forces larger than us ripped that apart from the outside, but left to their own devices I think Missourians would have worked those issues out among themselves just fine.

As an example - the Emancipation Proclamation *did not* end slavery in Missouri or other occupied border states. Missouri as a legislature decided to emancipate on its own. Sure, the Union occupancy influenced the makeup of the Legislature at the time, but the simple fact is majority rule by Missourians as their own sovereign state would have led to a vote for emancipation on its own organically.

Very few Missourians were slave holders compared to the deep South and it wasn't a critical piece of the MO economy like it was down there. Missourians just wanted to be left alone for the most part.

The problem we faced is Missouri was a valuable asset to both the Union and Confederacy because of the strategic location, resources, population etc. Divide and conquer was an easy thing to do because of Missourians' propensity to bicker and fight amongst themselves like we still do now in 2025.

I like the Texas approach where even though they are also a large, diverse state, they tend to worship their own state pride and state flag above all else and have a "screw the rest of the world, we do things our own way here" mentality.

Edited by McMuffin at 14:50:48 on 08/03/25