PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
It wasn't the only factor, it wasn't even brought to the forefront until Lincoln wanted to abolish it as a war measure. Secession had been discussed long before the war, as Pogo mentioned earlier.I phrased it wrong, it was a factor, but not the biggest factor. It was only brought to the forefront of issues when Lincoln tried to free them as a war measure, for more man-power and to cripple the southern economy.Not synonymous, no, but the the right to have slaves did fall under that category.In 1860 states rights and the right to remain a slave state were synonymous. They were equivalent.
Wake up.
If slavery had nothing to do with secession, why was it only the major slave states that seceded?
Coincidence? lol
It was not just the biggest factor, it was the only factor.
As you probably know, a real Democrat, Andrew Jackson, had this response to the question of secession:
"During Jackson's term, South Carolina has threatened to nullify a federal law, or secede from the union, he offered this warning: "Please give my compliments to my friends in your state, and say to them that if a single drop of blood shall be shed there in opposition to the laws of the United States, I will hang the first man I can lay my hand on engaged in such treasonable conduct, upon the first tree I can reach."
"Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, 7th and 8th Presidents of The United States,"
by WILLIAM O. STODDARD, p. 217