Most Conservatives Still Believe The Civil War Wasn't Over Slavery

[Claudette]

Thank you for making the case that the Civil War was not prompted by slavery concerns.

The south overreacted to the the election of Lincoln. He was a political pragmatist and was looking to end the spread of slavery to new states not end the institution of slavery

So they created a slave state to ensure the continuation of slavery forever. By attacking the US, the south opened an opportunity to declare war.

Yes, they did overreact to the election of Lincoln, and, given hindsight, firing on Fort Sumter was pretty dumb too. Regardless, Lincoln's aim for the war was to force them back into the Union, thus that's the cause of the Civil War. The south didn't want a war, and Lincoln did.

As it turned out, if the South had not rebelled against our country, slavery would have lasted another 20 to 40 years and we would have evolved into a South Africa type country
By seceding and attacking Ft Sumter, the south accelerated the end of slavery to just four years and slave owners received nothing

The south overreacted to the the election of Lincoln. He was a political pragmatist and was looking to end the spread of slavery to new states not end the institution of slavery

So they created a slave state to ensure the continuation of slavery forever. By attacking the US, the south opened an opportunity to declare war.

Yes, they did overreact to the election of Lincoln, and, given hindsight, firing on Fort Sumter was pretty dumb too. Regardless, Lincoln's aim for the war was to force them back into the Union, thus that's the cause of the Civil War. The south didn't want a war, and Lincoln did.

As it turned out, if the South had not rebelled against our country, slavery would have lasted another 20 to 40 years and we would have evolved into a South Africa type country
By seceding and attacking Ft Sumter, the south accelerated the end of slavery to just four years and slave owners received nothing

That's entirely speculation on your part, and probably not even close to being correct. Slavery doesn't survive industrialization long, and the south was industrializing.

I couldn't agree more.

Industrialization was on the way and slavery would have been extinct.

Its costs money to keep people as slaves.

Once the industrial revolution hit slaves would be expensive to keep.

Cotton was king and industrialization of the south was a long way off. The need for slaves would not have ended until the 1930s when automated cotton pickers came about
But slavery was about more than cheap labor. It was about the subjugation of a race of people. When challenged on its insistence of a subclass of blacks, the south resorted to terrorism to maintain it

Are you saying there would have been slaves into the 1930"s??

Excuse me while I stand over here and LMAO.

Good Lord.

Good Lord.

 

[rightwinger]

"If slavery is not wrong, then nothing is wrong." - Abraham Lincoln.

He said that at the end of the war, in 1864. You still have nothing showing that's why he started the war. You can't because he didn't

I showed you the 82 times the seceding states named slavery as the reason for secession.

The war was about slavery, and nothing but slavery. Period.

Secession was about slavery. The Civil War wasnt about slavery. The Civil War was about secession.

A = B = C

The war was about slavery. Period.

Slavery was a symptom. The south was motivated by economics. Slavery was part of economics. You dont grasp root causes

The South was capable of paying its workforce. Cotton was a huge cash cow and plantation owners made fortunes. The workers who planted, maintained the crop, picked the crop and brought it to market received zero compensation.

 

[Claudette]

The war wasn't about slavery. It was about secession.

Slavery was a part of the war, but not the bottom line.

Slavery was the ONLY issue. Period.

You all have been parroting a host of bullshit memes. I have provided solid evidence destroying those memes.

These are the memes of sore losers whose pride can't accept the facts, and who harbor secret desires to return to those days. "Make America Great Again".

Bullshit. Slavery was one part of it but States Rights was the bigger part.

Only 1% of Southerners owned slaves. Most Southerners were hard working people who never owned a slave and never would.

 

[g5000]

The state of Kentucky was founded in 1775, the state of Ohio only twelve years later; but twelve years are more in America than half a century in Europe; and at the present day the population of Ohio exceeds that of Kentucky by two hundred and fifty thousand souls. These different effects of slavery and freedom may readily be understood; and they suffice to explain many of the differences which we notice between the civilization of antiquity and that of our own time.

Upon the left bank of the Ohio labor is confounded with the idea of slavery, while upon the right bank it is identifies with that of prosperity and improvement; on the one side it is degraded, on the other it is honored. On the former territory no white laborers can be found, for they would be afraid of assimilating themselves to the Negroes; all the work is done by slaves; on the latter no one is idle, for the white population extend their activity and intelligence to every kind of employment. Thus the men whose task it is to cultivate the rich soil of Kentucky are ignorant and apathetic, while those who are active and enlightened either do nothing or pass over into Ohio, where they may work without shame.

It is true that in Kentucky the planters are not obliged to pay the slaves whom they employ, but they derive small profits from their labor, while the wages paid to free workmen would be returned with interest in the value of their services. The free workman is paid, but he does his work quicker than the slave; and rapidity of execution is one of the great elements of economy. The white sells his services, but they are purchased only when they may be useful; the black can claim no remuneration for his toil, but the expense of his maintenance is perpetual; he must be supported in his old age as well as in manhood, in his profitless infancy as well as in the productive years of youth, in sickness as well as in health. Payment must equally be made in order to obtain the services of either class of men: the free workman receives his wages in money; the slave in education, in food, in care, and in clothing. The money which a master spends in the maintenance of his slaves goes gradually and in detail, so that it is scarcely perceived; the salary of the free workman is paid in a round sum and appears to enrich only him who receives it; but in the end the slave has cost more than the free servant, and his labor is less productive.38

The influence of slavery extends still further: it affects the character of the master and imparts a peculiar tendency to his ideas and tastes. Upon both banks of the Ohio the character of the inhabitants is enterprising and energetic, but this vigor is very differently exercised in the two states. The white inhabitant of Ohio, obliged to subsist by his own exertions, regards temporal prosperity as the chief aim of his existence; and as the country which he occupies presents inexhaustible resources to his industry, and ever varying lures to his activity, his acquisitive ardor surpasses the ordinary limits of human cupidity: he is tormented by the desire of wealth, and he boldly enters upon every path that fortune opens to him; he becomes a sailor, a pioneer, an artisan, or a cultivator with the same indifference, and supports with equal constancy the fatigues and the dangers incidental to these various professions; the resources of his intelligence are astonishing, and his avidity in the pursuit of gain amounts to a species of heroism.

But the Kentuckian scorns not only labor but all the undertakings that labor promotes; as he lives in an idle independence, his tastes are those of an idle man; money has lost a portion of its value in his eyes; he covets wealth much less than pleasure and excitement; and the energy which his neighbor devotes to gain turns with him to a passionate love of field sports and military exercises; he delights in violent bodily exertion, he is familiar with the use of arms, and is accustomed from a very early age to expose his life in single combat. Thus slavery prevents the whites not only from becoming opulent, but even from desiring to become so.

Tocqueville: Book I Chapter 18

 

[g5000]

He said that at the end of the war, in 1864. You still have nothing showing that's why he started the war. You can't because he didn't

I showed you the 82 times the seceding states named slavery as the reason for secession.

The war was about slavery, and nothing but slavery. Period.

Secession was about slavery. The Civil War wasnt about slavery. The Civil War was about secession.

A = B = C

The war was about slavery. Period.

Slavery was a symptom. The south was motivated by economics. Slavery was part of economics. You dont grasp root causes

The South was capable of paying its workforce. Cotton was a huge cash cow and plantation owners made fortunes. The workers who planted, maintained the crop, picked the crop and brought it to market received zero compensation.

Exactly.

The South was an aristocracy.

 

[g5000]

The war wasn't about slavery. It was about secession.

Slavery was a part of the war, but not the bottom line.

Slavery was the ONLY issue. Period.

You all have been parroting a host of bullshit memes. I have provided solid evidence destroying those memes.

These are the memes of sore losers whose pride can't accept the facts, and who harbor secret desires to return to those days. "Make America Great Again".

Bullshit. Slavery was one part of it but States Rights was the bigger part.

Only 1% of Southerners owned slaves. Most Southerners were hard working people who never owned a slave and never would.

No, "states rights" was the excuse for the perpetuation of slavery.

 

[rightwinger]

The south overreacted to the the election of Lincoln. He was a political pragmatist and was looking to end the spread of slavery to new states not end the institution of slavery

So they created a slave state to ensure the continuation of slavery forever. By attacking the US, the south opened an opportunity to declare war.

Yes, they did overreact to the election of Lincoln, and, given hindsight, firing on Fort Sumter was pretty dumb too. Regardless, Lincoln's aim for the war was to force them back into the Union, thus that's the cause of the Civil War. The south didn't want a war, and Lincoln did.

As it turned out, if the South had not rebelled against our country, slavery would have lasted another 20 to 40 years and we would have evolved into a South Africa type country
By seceding and attacking Ft Sumter, the south accelerated the end of slavery to just four years and slave owners received nothing

Yes, they did overreact to the election of Lincoln, and, given hindsight, firing on Fort Sumter was pretty dumb too. Regardless, Lincoln's aim for the war was to force them back into the Union, thus that's the cause of the Civil War. The south didn't want a war, and Lincoln did.

As it turned out, if the South had not rebelled against our country, slavery would have lasted another 20 to 40 years and we would have evolved into a South Africa type country
By seceding and attacking Ft Sumter, the south accelerated the end of slavery to just four years and slave owners received nothing

That's entirely speculation on your part, and probably not even close to being correct. Slavery doesn't survive industrialization long, and the south was industrializing.

I couldn't agree more.

Industrialization was on the way and slavery would have been extinct.

Its costs money to keep people as slaves.

Once the industrial revolution hit slaves would be expensive to keep.

Cotton was king and industrialization of the south was a long way off. The need for slaves would not have ended until the 1930s when automated cotton pickers came about
But slavery was about more than cheap labor. It was about the subjugation of a race of people. When challenged on its insistence of a subclass of blacks, the south resorted to terrorism to maintain it

Are you saying there would have been slaves into the 1930"s??

Excuse me while I stand over here and LMAO.

Good Lord.

Good Lord.

The economic impetus to maintain slaves would have remained. They eventually maintained a workforce of low cost sharecroppers to pick their crops. If left on their own, slave owners would have kept their slaves until around 1900. Beyond that, they would have created some type of apartheid arrangement

 

[OKTexas]

More than 150 years later, the losers still won't take responsibility for the war. As if the US was supposed to just let them secede over slavery.

The war was about slavery. Period.

Why shouldn't they have been allowed to secede? Personally, I wish they had been allowed so I wouldn't have to deal with horrible people like George W. Bush today.

There are no provisions in the Constitution for secession. If the founders intended for states to come and go as they please, they would have established a procedure to do so.
Instead, they had provisions for joining the union and nothing about leaving it

The 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments left that decision to the States and the people of those States.


.

 

[rightwinger]

More than 150 years later, the losers still won't take responsibility for the war. As if the US was supposed to just let them secede over slavery.

The war was about slavery. Period.

Why shouldn't they have been allowed to secede? Personally, I wish they had been allowed so I wouldn't have to deal with horrible people like George W. Bush today.

There are no provisions in the Constitution for secession. If the founders intended for states to come and go as they please, they would have established a procedure to do so.
Instead, they had provisions for joining the union and nothing about leaving it

The 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments left that decision to the States and the people of those States.


.

The Supreme Court says otherwise

 

[koshergrl]

It always comes down to the goons, or the "the end justifies the means" people justifying their desire to force people to accept their authority.

 

[TNHarley]

More than 150 years later, the losers still won't take responsibility for the war. As if the US was supposed to just let them secede over slavery.

The war was about slavery. Period.

Why shouldn't they have been allowed to secede? Personally, I wish they had been allowed so I wouldn't have to deal with horrible people like George W. Bush today.

There are no provisions in the Constitution for secession. If the founders intended for states to come and go as they please, they would have established a procedure to do so.
Instead, they had provisions for joining the union and nothing about leaving it

The 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments left that decision to the States and the people of those States.


.

The Supreme Court says otherwise

AFTER THE FACT.
I know you probably dont understand the importance of that considering you want big brother to wipe your shitty ass for you.

 

[koshergrl]

More than 150 years later, the losers still won't take responsibility for the war. As if the US was supposed to just let them secede over slavery.

The war was about slavery. Period.

Why shouldn't they have been allowed to secede? Personally, I wish they had been allowed so I wouldn't have to deal with horrible people like George W. Bush today.

There are no provisions in the Constitution for secession. If the founders intended for states to come and go as they please, they would have established a procedure to do so.
Instead, they had provisions for joining the union and nothing about leaving it

The 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments left that decision to the States and the people of those States.


.

The Supreme Court says otherwise

The Supreme court are not our rulers.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

]
So you definitely wanted a pat on the back rather than actually discussing the topic. Got it.

Discuss why Alabama wrote this in their declaration?

"Upon the principles then announced by Mr. Lincoln and his leading friends, we are bound to expect his administration to be conducted. Hence it is, that in high places, among the Republican party, the election of Mr. Lincoln is hailed, not simply as it change of Administration, but as the inauguration of new principles, and a new theory of Government, and even as the downfall of slavery. Therefore it is that the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than a solemn declaration, on the part of a great majority of the Northern people, of hostility to the South, her property and her institutions—nothing less than an open declaration of war—for the triumph of this new theory of Government destroys the property of the South, lays waste her fields, and inaugurates all the horrors of a San Domingo servile insurrection, consigning her citizens to assassinations, and. her wives and daughters to pollution and violation, to gratify the lust of half-civilized Africans."

You won't tho -- but hey, keep on defending those Democrats

Cherchez la Femme

Lincoln married a richgirl and adopted her contempt for the common White people. A gawky nerd like him was hard up and was easily twisted into his wife's queenly ambitions. Eggheads get henpecked.

Academic historians will never tell you this, because it hits too close to their own sexual frustrations.

 

[TNHarley]

If secession was illegal, i would probably be on the other side of the fence on this. But it wasnt illegal.








AAAAAAAnd you guys suck off tyrants. And like it.

 

[g5000]

Slavery was one part of it but States Rights was the bigger part.

And here we see the willful blindness of which I so often speak.

I have posted TWICE in this topic the declarations of secession. And those declarations state at least 82 TIMES the cause of slavery as their reason for seceding.

I think we can now state the topic title has been unequivocally proven to be true.

 

[g5000]

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

 

[LeftofLeft]

Civil War still divides Americans

So after 150 years, the majority of conservatives still believe the Civil War wasn't over slavery?

Why is this? Why do they believe the "States Rights" claim is sufficient enough to shield them from the fact that -- those states rights were those states preserving the right to maintain slavery -- so either way you slice it, the civil war was over slavery --


This is why whenever I see a conservative twisting themselves into pretzels to claim otherwise --- it makes their subsequent claims of not being racist look foolish.


Next time conservatives want to pretend that the Civil War wasn't over slavery -- they better travel back in time and tell all of those southern states to stop telling everyone it was over slavery

******* Democrats did this.

The Democrats started the KKK and slavery. Today, they are still fixated on race, only, they purport to hate white devils now.

They are fixated on race as Hitler was.

There is no difference between the KKK and Republican platform TODAY

Really? What is the black unemployment rate under the GOP vs. Dims? Under Obama the black unemployment was never higher and under Trump never lower. And I know, I know, the high unemployment rate can be blamed on "W" for Barak and the low unemployment level under Trump can be credited to Barak. Whatever.

And does the GOP actively seek to lynch blacks? Do tell. You may as well say that the GOP is the Taliban.

Go ahead, say it.

You're rhetoric may be losing it's appeal. That mindless block black vote may be cracking. That is what Dims fear the most, for without, they will be toast. They must maintain the racist black vote against ****** in the GOP.

As Trump said, vote for me. What in the hell do you have to lose?

Under the Great Obama the black unemployment rate dropped by eight percent. It has only dropped one percent under Fat Donnie

What snapshot are you looking at?

 

[gipper]

You act as if the war wasn't about slavery because Lincoln was just supposed to let the slave states destroy the country!

The defense rests, your honor.

The Lincoln cult ‘logic’ is really something to behold. They don’t even know how dumb they are.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Even after the civil war, blacks were kept in virtual slavery in the South for another century. We'd probably still have slavery today if not for the Civil War.

And now you're just being ridiculous.

 

[g5000]

If secession was illegal, i would probably be on the other side of the fence on this. But it wasnt illegal.

Secession was, is, and always will be illegal.

“The constitution of a confederated republic, that is, of a national republic, formed of several states, is, or at least may be, not less an irrevocable form of government, than the constitution of a state formed and ratified by the aggregate of the several counties of the state.” Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story