Why Did The South Secede?

[NoNukes]

The South Seceded so they could create a conservative utopia

A society run by white males that enforces a pool of free labor. A society that doesn't recognize human rights. A society built to ensure the dominance of the white race

The correct answer might be that they seceded as a matter of economics. Thinking that the British would step in to help them implies that they thought the BRITISH still ruled the world.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

PC's blathering reveals she has little clue to anything outside of her extremely limited view of reality.

Hey....be fair!

It's my job to make you look like a fool......stop doing my job!!

This is the opening line of the Mississippi secession declaration:

In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.


"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."

...and to the specifics:

"That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.

The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.

The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.

The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.

It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.

It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.

It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.

It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.

It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.

It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause.

It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood.


Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it."

Now go ahead and make your argument that secession was not about the fear of the abolishment of the institution of slavery.

link Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Mississippi Secession

This is where the thread ended.

Any argument to which you agree must be a loser.

I documented the South claiming that the entire world would knuckle under to the power of "King Cotton."

I provide the speech by the Senator from South Carolina.

I gave Abraham Lincoln's own words, post #62, stating that slavery was safe in those states that wanted it.

I have proven that is was Southern misjudgment about their own importance that caused secession, not fears of slavery being outlawed.


So....neither facts nor logic support your position.




But here is what does: your irritation over how frequently I eat your lunch in these disagreements.
And the reason for that is that my posts are based on something you and the other mental midgets cannot understand: knowledge.

scientia sit potentia

The south attempted to peacefully withdraw from the union.... like the Patriots attempted in 1776 and for the same reasons.
The north invaded what the people who lived there determined was a new, sovereign nation.....like the British did in 1776.

The north decided it was better to crush freedom by force than to allow people the right of self determination.

The irony of your post is excruciating.

Let me ask you this: whose right to self-determination was the North not allowing? Slave owners, right? Not allowing slave owners to own human beings. What else did they stop slave owners from doing? Hm, can't think of anything else right now. I guess it's just that ONE thing.

Now, whose right to self-determination was the South not allowing? Oh, yeah! The slaves themselves! And what were the slaves not allowed to do? Nothing other than be slaves! Just that ONE thing, right?

The world will be a much better place when you and your racist ilk finally go extinct.

 

[paperview]

The South seceded because they had been itchin to...

The fires were burning many, many years before 1861, This is fact.

The slavery issue was a major one in the preceding presidential election. (not to mention the high intensity of the full 1850's decade...)

The South was itching for a fight, and they intended to take it home over that issue.

Let's go back, 4 years earlier, to just before the November, 1856 election.
Here is an article from ----> OCT 1856, from the New York Times, quoting a Richmond editorial, entitled: LOOK THE FUTURE IN THE FACE

...where future secessionists threaten war and the evil of what they term "Black Republicanism" (their term for the Republicans who favored emancipation ) is castigated, and where they predict, nay - taunt, the coming bloodbath.

I present a picture of the actual paper below...read it:

Here is the top line:

It begins:

"The Southern political Press has never been more open and frank in its avowal of political purposes and plans, than it is during the present canvass.

The triumphs of Slavery during the past four years,--the successful repeal of the Missouri Compromise, a measure for which oven Mr. CALHOUN never dared to hope,--and the ready, eager promptitude with which the Democratic party at Cincinnati yielded to the exactions of the Slaveholding power, seemed to have inspired the political leaders of the South with the belief, that time has come when they can safely and even with advantage to themselves, make open proclamation of the projects they have in store for the future.

....We invite attention to the following lead editorial from Richmond (the NY Times here quotes from the Southern paper) where Southerners state: "'Tis treason to cry "Peace!" "peace!" when there is no peace. There is, there can be, no peace, no lasting union between the south and Black Republicanism."

And they go on:
Forewarned...Forearmed!" We see the numbers, the characters, the designs of our enemies/ Let us prepare to resist them and drive them back

....A common danger from without, and a common necessity (Slavery) within,
will be sure to make the South a great, a united, a vigilant and a warlike people."
..

",...the division is sure to take place...Socialism, communism, infidelity,licentiousness and agrarianism, now scarcely suppressed by union with the conservative South will burst forth in a carnival of blood..."

Those were the Southern sentiments well before the Confederates started seizing forts and arsenals and firing on Unions ships in January of 1861. They continue:

"The great object of the South in supporting Buchanan is to promote and extend the perpetuation of the "conservative institution of Slavery." And the votes by which it is hoped he may be elected, are to become the basis of a secession movement and the formation of a Southern Slave Confederacy...

See the full newspaper article here: (!) Bold Avowals--The Election of Buchanan to be a Stop Towards Disunion. - Article - NYTimes.com

1856. Itchin' itchin itchin.

 

[Rotagilla]

The south formed a nation of traitors dedicated to the proposition that owning other human beings was an essential right

The war of northern aggression wasn't fought to preserve or abolish slavery.

Everyone knew that slavery was a dying practice...especially the leaders of the southern cause.
The industrial revolution was beginning and everyone saw that it was too impractical to house, feed and clothe farm animals when machines that could do twice the work at 1/3 (or less) of the overhead..

You need to believe (and promote the idea) that, had the south been allowed to peacefully secede, we'd all be sitting on our porches drinking mint juleps while the darkies ploughed the fields...

The southerners were trying to peacefully exercise their right to withdraw from the union due to government oppression and unfair taxes and tariffs...the same reasons the colonists did in 1776. They were called "traitors", too...but to us they're known as "Patriots".
Lincoln was a lying, opportunistic politician who purposely turned war criminals Phillip Sheridan and William T. Sherman loose in the south to murder civilians, destroy their property, homes, infrastructure and businesses.
Waging war by purposely targeting civilians is cowardly and...typical...

 

[paperview]

Electing Buchanan calmed these crazy ass Southerners down a bit, and he was every bit the suckass they wanted him to be.

Lincoln getting elected was what it took. They never even waited for him to take office to officially secede and commence hostilities.

 

[Rotagilla]

The irony of your post is excruciating.

Let me ask you this: whose right to self-determination was the North not allowing? Slave owners, right? Not allowing slave owners to own human beings. What else did they stop slave owners from doing? Hm, can't think of anything else right now. I guess it's just that ONE thing.

Now, whose right to self-determination was the South not allowing? Oh, yeah! The slaves themselves! And what were the slaves not allowed to do? Nothing other than be slaves! Just that ONE thing, right?

The world will be a much better place when you and your racist ilk finally go extinct.

Slavery was a dying practice and the southern leaders and most of the citizens knew it.

The north needed an issue to pretend to sieze the moral "high ground"..."emancipating" some (not all) of the slaves made lincoln look good...and further destabilized the south.
If lincoln wanted to "free the slaves" he could have done it the day he took office...instead he waited until late in the war to do it in order to exploit it and use it as leverage...

The north was losing on the battlefields...there were draft riots in the north..People didn't want to send their kids to fight to keep the south in the union. "Let our erring brothers go in peace" was a popular sentiment...The war effort was losing support and lincoln needed SOMETHING to "justify" the earlier illegal invasion of Charleston...

 

[Rotagilla]

Electing Buchanan calmed these crazy ass Southerners down a bit, and he was every bit the suckass they wanted him to be.

Lincoln getting elected was what it took. They never even waited for him to take office to officially secede and commence hostilities.

The south didn't start the war.
Lincoln (illegally) sent troops and ships to invade Charleston (fort sumter) after the south had seceded...invading a foreign nation is an act of war. Any nation would be right to defend themselves from invaders.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

The south formed a nation of traitors dedicated to the proposition that owning other human beings was an essential right

The war of northern aggression wasn't fought to preserve or abolish slavery.

Everyone knew that slavery was a dying practice...especially the leaders of the southern cause.
The industrial revolution was beginning and everyone saw that it was too impractical to house, feed and clothe farm animals when machines that could do twice the work at 1/3 (or less) of the overhead..

You need to believe (and promote the idea) that, had the south been allowed to peacefully secede, we'd all be sitting on our porches drinking mint juleps while the darkies ploughed the fields...

The southerners were trying to peacefully exercise their right to withdraw from the union due to government oppression and unfair taxes and tariffs...the same reasons the colonists did in 1776. They were called "traitors", too...but to us they're known as "Patriots".
Lincoln was a lying, opportunistic politician who purposely turned war criminals Phillip Sheridan and William T. Sherman loose in the south to murder civilians, destroy their property, homes, infrastructure and businesses.
Waging war by purposely targeting civilians is cowardly and...typical...

Nope:

"A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.

In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.

The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.

The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.

The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.

It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.

It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.

It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.

It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.

It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.

It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause.

It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood.

Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England.

Our decision is made. We follow their footsteps. We embrace the alternative of separation; and for the reasons here stated, we resolve to maintain our rights with the full consciousness of the justice of our course, and the undoubting belief of our ability to maintain it."

 

[Coloradomtnman]

The irony of your post is excruciating.

Let me ask you this: whose right to self-determination was the North not allowing? Slave owners, right? Not allowing slave owners to own human beings. What else did they stop slave owners from doing? Hm, can't think of anything else right now. I guess it's just that ONE thing.

Now, whose right to self-determination was the South not allowing? Oh, yeah! The slaves themselves! And what were the slaves not allowed to do? Nothing other than be slaves! Just that ONE thing, right?

The world will be a much better place when you and your racist ilk finally go extinct.

Slavery was a dying practice and the southern leaders and most of the citizens knew it.

The north needed an issue to pretend to sieze the moral "high ground"..."emancipating" some (not all) of the slaves made lincoln look good...and further destabilized the south.
If lincoln wanted to "free the slaves" he could have done it the day he took office...instead he waited until late in the war to do it in order to exploit it and use it as leverage...

The north was losing on the battlefields...there were draft riots in the north..People didn't want to send their kids to fight to keep the south in the union. "Let our erring brothers go in peace" was a popular sentiment...The war effort was losing support and lincoln needed SOMETHING to "justify" the earlier illegal invasion of Charleston...

Wrong:

"A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.

The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.

The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.

The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.

It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.

It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.

It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.

It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.

It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.

It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause.

It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood.

Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England.

Our decision is made. We follow their footsteps. We embrace the alternative of separation; and for the reasons here stated, we resolve to maintain our rights with the full consciousness of the justice of our course, and the undoubting belief of our ability to maintain it."

 

[rightwinger]

The south formed a nation of traitors dedicated to the proposition that owning other human beings was an essential right

The war of northern aggression wasn't fought to preserve or abolish slavery.

Everyone knew that slavery was a dying practice...especially the leaders of the southern cause.
The industrial revolution was beginning and everyone saw that it was too impractical to house, feed and clothe farm animals when machines that could do twice the work at 1/3 (or less) of the overhead..

You need to believe (and promote the idea) that, had the south been allowed to peacefully secede, we'd all be sitting on our porches drinking mint juleps while the darkies ploughed the fields...

The southerners were trying to peacefully exercise their right to withdraw from the union due to government oppression and unfair taxes and tariffs...the same reasons the colonists did in 1776. They were called "traitors", too...but to us they're known as "Patriots".
Lincoln was a lying, opportunistic politician who purposely turned war criminals Phillip Sheridan and William T. Sherman loose in the south to murder civilians, destroy their property, homes, infrastructure and businesses.
Waging war by purposely targeting civilians is cowardly and...typical...

Evidently the Southern Traitors did not realize that slavery was a "dying practice" as they institutionalized it in their Constitution to ensure that it would flourish

 

[Rotagilla]

The South seceded because they had been itchin to...

The fires were burning many, many years before 1861, This is fact.

The slavery issue was a major one in the preceding presidential election. (not to mention the high intensity of the full 1850's decade...)

The South was itching for a fight, and they intended to take it home over that issue.

Let's go back, 4 years earlier, to just before the November, 1856 election.
Here is an article from ----> OCT 1856, from the New York Times, quoting a Richmond editorial, entitled: LOOK THE FUTURE IN THE FACE

...where future secessionists threaten war and the evil of what they term "Black Republicanism" (their term for the Republicans who favored emancipation ) is castigated, and where they predict, nay - taunt, the coming bloodbath.

I present a picture of the actual paper below...read it:

Here is the top line:

It begins:

"The Southern political Press has never been more open and frank in its avowal of political purposes and plans, than it is during the present canvass.

The triumphs of Slavery during the past four years,--the successful repeal of the Missouri Compromise, a measure for which oven Mr. CALHOUN never dared to hope,--and the ready, eager promptitude with which the Democratic party at Cincinnati yielded to the exactions of the Slaveholding power, seemed to have inspired the political leaders of the South with the belief, that time has come when they can safely and even with advantage to themselves, make open proclamation of the projects they have in store for the future.

....We invite attention to the following lead editorial from Richmond (the NY Times here quotes from the Southern paper) where Southerners state: "'Tis treason to cry "Peace!" "peace!" when there is no peace. There is, there can be, no peace, no lasting union between the south and Black Republicanism."

And they go on:
Forewarned...Forearmed!" We see the numbers, the characters, the designs of our enemies/ Let us prepare to resist them and drive them back

....A common danger from without, and a common necessity (Slavery) within,
will be sure to make the South a great, a united, a vigilant and a warlike people."
..

",...the division is sure to take place...Socialism, communism, infidelity,licentiousness and agrarianism, now scarcely suppressed by union with the conservative South will burst forth in a carnival of blood..."

Those were the Southern sentiments well before the Confederates started seizing forts and arsenals and firing on Unions ships in January of 1861. They continue:

"The great object of the South in supporting Buchanan is to promote and extend the perpetuation of the "conservative institution of Slavery." And the votes by which it is hoped he may be elected, are to become the basis of a secession movement and the formation of a Southern Slave Confederacy...

See the full newspaper article here: (!) Bold Avowals--The Election of Buchanan to be a Stop Towards Disunion. - Article - NYTimes.com

1856. Itchin' itchin itchin.

So?
I can find an "editorial" opinion from a contemporary newspaper that gives different causes.

Here's what a famous "leader" said about "secession";


Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can may revolutionize and make their own of so many of the territory as they inhabit."


Abraham Lincoln
Jan 12, 1848



Lincoln was (probably) also in favor of the american revolution "secession" from england, one would have to assume...otherwise he wouldn't be "president".

 

[paperview]

Electing Buchanan calmed these crazy ass Southerners down a bit, and he was every bit the suckass they wanted him to be.

Lincoln getting elected was what it took. They never even waited for him to take office to officially secede and commence hostilities.

The south formed a nation of traitors dedicated to the proposition that owning other human beings was an essential right

The war of northern aggression wasn't fought to preserve or abolish slavery.

Everyone knew that slavery was a dying practice...especially the leaders of the southern cause.
The industrial revolution was beginning and everyone saw that it was too impractical to house, feed and clothe farm animals when machines that could do twice the work at 1/3 (or less) of the overhead..

You need to believe (and promote the idea) that, had the south been allowed to peacefully secede, we'd all be sitting on our porches drinking mint juleps while the darkies ploughed the fields...

The southerners were trying to peacefully exercise their right to withdraw from the union due to government oppression and unfair taxes and tariffs...the same reasons the colonists did in 1776. They were called "traitors", too...but to us they're known as "Patriots".
Lincoln was a lying, opportunistic politician who purposely turned war criminals Phillip Sheridan and William T. Sherman loose in the south to murder civilians, destroy their property, homes, infrastructure and businesses.
Waging war by purposely targeting civilians is cowardly and...typical...

Evidently the Southern Traitors did not realize that slavery was a "dying practice" as they institutionalized it in their Constitution to ensure that it would flourish

This Rogatini fella is a piece of work. Trolling to recruit White Supremacists is the best I can figure with his astoundingly off-base revisionist history.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"One of the most momentous debates in Senate history began over a plan to curtail western land sales. Senators from western states viewed this proposal by a Connecticut senator as a cynical scheme to preserve for northeastern manufacturing interests a cheap labor supply that might otherwise be lured away by the beckoning opportunities of plentiful western lands. Senator Robert Hayne of South Carolina saw in this developing Northeast-West dispute an opportunity to build a political alliance between the South and the West. Hayne shared the view of southern planters that an agricultural system built on slavery could only survive with an unlimited supply of cheap western lands."

Untitled
Webster-Hayne Debate, 1830

And, an opinion:

Highway to Hell The Great National Highway Debate of 1830 and Congress as Constitutional Interpreter by Charles J. Reid SSRN
Abstract:
This Article focuses on the role of the Constitution in the 1830 Congressional debate over the Buffalo to Washington to New Orleans National Road. It takes as its inspiration David Currie's monumental study of the ante-bellum Congress as constitutional interpreter. It moves beyond Currie, however, in the intensity of its focus on a single congressional debate.

The debate over the National Road was largely a proxy for the larger struggles over slavery and sectionalism.

 

[paperview]

...and Rogatini also doesn't understand the difference between secession and revolution.

 

[Rotagilla]

The irony of your post is excruciating.

Let me ask you this: whose right to self-determination was the North not allowing? Slave owners, right? Not allowing slave owners to own human beings. What else did they stop slave owners from doing? Hm, can't think of anything else right now. I guess it's just that ONE thing.

Now, whose right to self-determination was the South not allowing? Oh, yeah! The slaves themselves! And what were the slaves not allowed to do? Nothing other than be slaves! Just that ONE thing, right?

The world will be a much better place when you and your racist ilk finally go extinct.

Slavery was a dying practice and the southern leaders and most of the citizens knew it.

The north needed an issue to pretend to sieze the moral "high ground"..."emancipating" some (not all) of the slaves made lincoln look good...and further destabilized the south.
If lincoln wanted to "free the slaves" he could have done it the day he took office...instead he waited until late in the war to do it in order to exploit it and use it as leverage...

The north was losing on the battlefields...there were draft riots in the north..People didn't want to send their kids to fight to keep the south in the union. "Let our erring brothers go in peace" was a popular sentiment...The war effort was losing support and lincoln needed SOMETHING to "justify" the earlier illegal invasion of Charleston...

Wrong:

"A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.

The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.

The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.

The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.

It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.

It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.

It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.

It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.

It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.

It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause.

It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood.

Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England.

Our decision is made. We follow their footsteps. We embrace the alternative of separation; and for the reasons here stated, we resolve to maintain our rights with the full consciousness of the justice of our course, and the undoubting belief of our ability to maintain it."

Of course "slavery" is mentioned. The north used it as a weapon to inflame people. The south would naturally reply.
Slavery was a legal, but fading practice and everyone knew it.... but an intrusive federal government used it as an excuse to selectively violate its' own laws to achieve political gain...(like siccing the IRS on political enemies)....

If the war was fought to "free the slaves" as you have been indoctrinated to believe, why didn't lincoln do it on the first day of his presidency?...why wait until the north was losing to do it? Why didn't he emancipate all slaves everywhere simultaneously?...why did he make exceptions?

 

[rightwinger]

The South Seceded so they could create a conservative utopia

A society run by white males that enforces a pool of free labor. A society that doesn't recognize human rights. A society built to ensure the dominance of the white race

The correct answer might be that they seceded as a matter of economics. Thinking that the British would step in to help them implies that they thought the BRITISH still ruled the world.

The traitorous south built a society on the economics of Free Labor

 

[Rotagilla]

The south formed a nation of traitors dedicated to the proposition that owning other human beings was an essential right

The war of northern aggression wasn't fought to preserve or abolish slavery.

Everyone knew that slavery was a dying practice...especially the leaders of the southern cause.
The industrial revolution was beginning and everyone saw that it was too impractical to house, feed and clothe farm animals when machines that could do twice the work at 1/3 (or less) of the overhead..

You need to believe (and promote the idea) that, had the south been allowed to peacefully secede, we'd all be sitting on our porches drinking mint juleps while the darkies ploughed the fields...

The southerners were trying to peacefully exercise their right to withdraw from the union due to government oppression and unfair taxes and tariffs...the same reasons the colonists did in 1776. They were called "traitors", too...but to us they're known as "Patriots".
Lincoln was a lying, opportunistic politician who purposely turned war criminals Phillip Sheridan and William T. Sherman loose in the south to murder civilians, destroy their property, homes, infrastructure and businesses.
Waging war by purposely targeting civilians is cowardly and...typical...

Evidently the Southern Traitors did not realize that slavery was a "dying practice" as they institutionalized it in their Constitution to ensure that it would flourish

The north made it an issue..the south responded directly. Constitutions can be amended when a law becomes obsolete....but that doesn't work with your narrative....

Do you seriously believe that as the dawn of the industrial revolution occurred before their very eyes, anyone really wanted to keep slaves rather than use modern, efficient, low cost machines?

Do you seriously believe that had the south been allowed to peacefully withdraw there would still be negroes out in the fields today chopping cotton?

 

[Rotagilla]

The South Seceded so they could create a conservative utopia

A society run by white males that enforces a pool of free labor. A society that doesn't recognize human rights. A society built to ensure the dominance of the white race

The correct answer might be that they seceded as a matter of economics. Thinking that the British would step in to help them implies that they thought the BRITISH still ruled the world.

The traitorous south built a society on the economics of Free Labor

The southerners were peaceful patriots who wanted to be left alone, but were forced to fight when their homeland was invaded.

 

[rightwinger]

The south formed a nation of traitors dedicated to the proposition that owning other human beings was an essential right

The war of northern aggression wasn't fought to preserve or abolish slavery.

Everyone knew that slavery was a dying practice...especially the leaders of the southern cause.
The industrial revolution was beginning and everyone saw that it was too impractical to house, feed and clothe farm animals when machines that could do twice the work at 1/3 (or less) of the overhead..

You need to believe (and promote the idea) that, had the south been allowed to peacefully secede, we'd all be sitting on our porches drinking mint juleps while the darkies ploughed the fields...

The southerners were trying to peacefully exercise their right to withdraw from the union due to government oppression and unfair taxes and tariffs...the same reasons the colonists did in 1776. They were called "traitors", too...but to us they're known as "Patriots".
Lincoln was a lying, opportunistic politician who purposely turned war criminals Phillip Sheridan and William T. Sherman loose in the south to murder civilians, destroy their property, homes, infrastructure and businesses.
Waging war by purposely targeting civilians is cowardly and...typical...

Evidently the Southern Traitors did not realize that slavery was a "dying practice" as they institutionalized it in their Constitution to ensure that it would flourish

The north made it an issue..the south responded directly. Constitutions can be amended when a law becomes obsolete....but that doesn't work with your narrative....

Do you seriously believe that as the dawn of the industrial revolution occurred before their very eyes, anyone really wanted to keep slaves rather than use modern, efficient, low cost machines?

Do you seriously believe that had the south been allowed to peacefully withdraw there would still be negroes out in the fields today chopping cotton?

The traitorous south was on the outside looking in at the dawn of the industrial revolution. Their economy was built around king cotton and there was no automated picking tool on the horizon
The traitorous south went into a panic that with Lincoln as President, they would lose their supply of Free Labor. So rather than concede the inevitable end of slavery, they created their own nation built upon the backs of slave labor

 

[Rotagilla]

...and Rogatini also doesn't understand the difference between secession and revolution.

"rogatini"..How mature!


.word games? You don't want to address the issues but want to play word games now...LMAO.

rev·o·lu·tion
noun \ˌre-və-ˈlü-shən\
: the usually violent attempt by many people to end the rule of one government and start a new one

se·ces·sion
noun \si-ˈse-shən\
: the act of separating from a nation or state and becoming independent
1: withdrawal into privacy or solitude : retirement

2: formal withdrawal from an organization


The south tried to peacefully secede. They were forced to defend themselves when their homeland was invaded by northern troops attempting to reinforce ft sumter. Which no longer belonged to the union but was purposely used as a casus belli so lincoln could have his war.