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

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Slavery was at the forefront when southern states used it as a justification for secession

No argument there.

Preserving the Union was at the forefront when Lincoln went to war.

If you could put your emotions aside, you would be able to both be glad that the war ended slavery and also acknowledge that the Union was loaded with indifferent racist motherfuckers motivated by power and commerce, rather than benevolence and equality.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

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

Slavery wasn't at the forefront until Lincoln attempted to free Southern Slaves, specifically, as a war measure to further cripple the southern forces. The secession was because of several things, one of the biggest being John Adam's Tariff of Abominations, which caused the South's economy to decline further. Other reasons include an expanding government, as the south believed, rightfully, that Federal Law shouldn't trump State Laws, as the States were originally intended to legislate for themselves, and to be able to opt out of the Federal Government's Nation-wide laws. Lincoln's wanting to free the slaves fell under this category because it's an example of the government eroding state rights through its expanding power.

So, in other words, it had been coming for quite some time, and was about waning agriculture vs expanding industry, and the rapidly expanding government becoming more powerful than the states, due to Presidents, like Lincoln, stomping all over State rights. The US will likely never recover from Presidents like Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and Lincoln. The South just wanted to opt out.

I don't know why you guys want it to be about slaves, the south was leftist anyway, seems like you're attempting to further ruin your own image.

Slavery was at the forefront when southern states used it as a justification for secession

It was not at the forefront, it was an issue which leads to other issues. It also wasn't the only problem cited. You only view it as being at the forefront because you see race in everything.

Which is probably why it was cited among the reasons that the leftists left the union and formed the Confederacy.

 

[ATL]

Slavery was at the forefront when southern states used it as a justification for secession

No argument there.

Preserving the Union was at the forefront when Lincoln went to war.

If you could put your emotions aside, you would be able to both be glad that the war ended slavery and also acknowledge that the Union was loaded with indifferent racist motherfuckers motivated by power and commerce, rather than benevolence and equality.

Those "indifferent racist motherfuckers" dont hold a candle to the southern conservative racist motherfuckers that tried, and continue to try to keep the mantra that "white is right". So save the whataboutism for those that are ignorant of history, or in other words....Trump supporters.

 

[Dschrute3]

It was and it wasn't. Many often try to re-write history to promote their current agendas. The Civil War was above all about the South maintaining sovereignty. It didn't want the North dictating anything to it. And slavery did play a part in that. In the end, a North - South clash was inevitable.

 

[Claudette]

Take a look at the full title of this document which created the United States.


Note the words "PERPETUAL UNION" to which all parties consented.

Which was logically extended by a "more perfect Union"; never abrogated, never renounced, never contradicted. Voluntarily joined.
The Union and its preservation was not based on Lincoln and has nothing to do with any veneration of him, though his efforts to preserve the Union are appreciated by Americans.

Lincoln had one tough row to how trying to keep the Union together.

He wasn't perfect by any means but I think he was the best President this country has ever had.

He was a tyrant that killed raped and pillaged. He shit all over the constitution. Shut down over 300 media outlets. Jailed thousands of journalists.
The best?

No. He was a POTUS trying to hold the union together. It was one thankless job.

He was no more a tyrant than you are. Journalists of today should be jailed for their fake news.

IMO he was the best POTUS this country has ever had.

 

[TNHarley]

Take a look at the full title of this document which created the United States.


Note the words "PERPETUAL UNION" to which all parties consented.

Which was logically extended by a "more perfect Union"; never abrogated, never renounced, never contradicted. Voluntarily joined.
The Union and its preservation was not based on Lincoln and has nothing to do with any veneration of him, though his efforts to preserve the Union are appreciated by Americans.

Lincoln had one tough row to how trying to keep the Union together.

He wasn't perfect by any means but I think he was the best President this country has ever had.

He was a tyrant that killed raped and pillaged. He shit all over the constitution. Shut down over 300 media outlets. Jailed thousands of journalists.
The best?

No. He was a POTUS trying to hold the union together. It was one thankless job.

He was no more a tyrant than you are. Journalists of today should be jailed for their fake news.

IMO he was the best POTUS this country has ever had.

He fits the definition to a T. Pun intended.
I have never suspended due process, habeas corpus, killed, raped, pillaged, stole, wrongfully jailed and shut down the other side by abusing my executive power. So, no, im nothing like that asshole.
He should have been assassinated wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy sooner.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Owning slaves was more important to the south than being in the United States

/----/ I'm not defending slavery by any stretch of the imagination. In fact Ancestry dot com has told me that my ancestors fought and some died for the North in the Civil War. That being said, do you have any idea why slavery began in the s country? Any idea why the South needed to continue the evil practice?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Those "indifferent racist motherfuckers" dont hold a candle to the southern conservative racist motherfuckers that tried, and continue to try to keep the mantra that "white is right". So save the whataboutism for those that are ignorant of history, or in other words....Trump supporters.

Exhibit A

 

[Dschrute3]

What do they say about 'History?' The winners always write the history books. More folks should actually research the Civil War a bit more. The history books don't tell the real complete story. The Civil War wasn't solely about Slavery.

 

[OKTexas]

Take a look at the full title of this document which created the United States.


Note the words "PERPETUAL UNION" to which all parties consented.

Which was logically extended by a "more perfect Union"; never abrogated, never renounced, never contradicted. Voluntarily joined.
The Union and its preservation was not based on Lincoln and has nothing to do with any veneration of him, though his efforts to preserve the Union are appreciated by Americans.

Lincoln had one tough row to hoe trying to keep the Union together.

He wasn't perfect by any means but I think he was the best President this country has ever had.

Bullsht, if we're going to judge people of the past by todays standards, Lincoln was a war criminal, he and his generals targeted non-combatant civilian populations. Sherman didn't follow the conventional rules of war.


.

 

[g5000]

Take a look at the full title of this document which created the United States.


Note the words "PERPETUAL UNION" to which all parties consented.

Which was logically extended by a "more perfect Union"; never abrogated, never renounced, never contradicted. Voluntarily joined.
The Union and its preservation was not based on Lincoln and has nothing to do with any veneration of him, though his efforts to preserve the Union are appreciated by Americans.

Lincoln had one tough row to hoe trying to keep the Union together.

He wasn't perfect by any means but I think he was the best President this country has ever had.

Bullsht, if we're going to judge people of the past by todays standards, Lincoln was a war criminal, he and his generals targeted non-combatant civilian populations. Sherman didn't follow the conventional rules of war.


.

If Trump lives up to his campaign promises about the prosecution of the war on ISIS, he will also be a war criminal. And yet his supporters enthusiastically cheered his war crime plans.

So don't give me any morally righteous bullshit about Lincoln.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

What do they say about 'History?' The winners always write the history books. More folks should actually research the Civil War a bit more. The history books don't tell the real complete story. The Civil War wasn't solely about Slavery.

Amen to that. pretty much everything we were taught in american history was a lie.

 

[Care4all]

It was always greed...and sending our goods to the King's land...initially it was other Englishmen etc, selling themselves in to bondage for 5 to 7 yrs, for their travel expense to get here...the King's men/Governors paid plantation owners through land ownership for every ''head'' they brought here to work and toil the soil...50 acres....whether an indentured servant or slave from Africa.

Plantation owners stopped bringing in white men in bondage because the expense to bring them here 1 by one was getting very expensive.... so they found a cheaper way to bring in each ''head''/ for 50 acres.... they could bring slaves by the shipload, for a lot less money....and they had them for a lifetime of work and not just 5 to 7 years.

So truly, it was all from pure greed....not necessity.... poor Europeans wanting their chance in a new land were lined up by the millions, even having to give up 5 to 7 years of their life in bondage.... but the ship owners and captains kept raising the price to carry them here, the plantation owners....found a cheaper way, that made them more money, and got them to thousands of acres of land ownership, real quick.


Slavery and the headright system. ... This, along with the increase in the amount of money required to bring indentured servants to the colonies, contributed to the shift towards slavery in the colonies. Until 1699, a slave was worth a headright of fifty acres.
Headright - Wikipedia

it later was 100 acres per head they brought to America, given to them by the governor vs just the 50 acres.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If Trump lives up to his campaign promises about the prosecution of the war on ISIS, he will also be a war criminal. And yet his supporters enthusiastically cheered his war crime plans.

So don't give me any morally righteous bullshit about Lincoln.

I think Trump's plan to fight ISIS is COMPLETE BULLSHIT and I do NOT support it, or any war where we are asked to play world police at our own expense to justify and artificially support the military/industrial complex.

So, kiss my ass. I WILL give you the morally righteous TRUTH about the war-criminal tyrant, Lincoln.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

rightwinger has an interesting thesis, "owning slaves more important than being in the united states". I Think I read Jake's Cornerstone speech... Long source, entirely too long.

Cornerstone speech made the points about the French revolution Jacobin philosophers securing the liberty of their fathers of George Washington all over the place, their comparative area to other sovereign countries, what a weird source material to prove your thesis Jake.

rightwinger there is a point to say that the slaveowning, have you ever seen the timelapse of pro-slave and against-slave states, developed out of british colonies times. Where it had been legal at I think after American revolution the north became industrial, which tariffs the south didn't like, tariffs discouraging outside trade, means we produce at higher prices and with the trade tariff you'll want to buy it locally anyway. Comparatively, southern American Gentry such as Robert E Lee, have manors stuffed with British import Victorian fineries and furniture, export 75% of the world's cotton mainly to the british stock exchange I'd think and their famous cotton mills, and couldn't imagine closed trade, nationalistic trade. Point in fact I'm trying to say to rightwinger, throwing off the King is such a repeated confederate point, in that, little else changed except for King Cotton! ha!

King Cotton

So much money to be made......except for those who planted it, maintained it, picked it, ginned it and brought it to market

Those people had the legal status of animals

Southerners Were Prescient

Since, as everybody (including Liberals) has seen, Africans act like animals, then they deserved to be treated like animals.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

But the south was fighting to secede, so they were fighting for secession. They seceded over slavery. What don't you get?

No, the south had already seceded. They were fighting an invasion. The invasion was not to free the slaves, therefore the Civil War was not fought over slavery.

For some people it wasn't about slavery.
For some people it was.

It all came down to slavery and racism

For some it came down to loyalty to a State vs loyalty to a Federal Government.

No, it came down to why that decision was forced upon people. A majority of people in the south wanted to stay in their nation, the United States of America and murderous minority tried to force a theory of anarchy on them

Self-Righteous Slumming Snobs

If you want to see anarchy, go to Chicago, Detroit, etc.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Here are the facts of what really happened in the civil war.
6 Civil War Myths, Busted


as one of the previous posters said so well,the winners are the ones that get to rewrite history and tell it the way they want it to be told always successful in supressing the facts because our schools are so corrupt.

 

[Numbrlina]

5 Causes of the Civil War (Besides Slavery)

 

[rightwinger]

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.

Our Constitution made provisions for states joint the union. They said nothing about leaving it

Secession was treason

Really, it doesn't meet the Constitutional definition of treason.


.

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

 

[rightwinger]

Here are the facts of what really happened in the civil war.
6 Civil War Myths, Busted

and this is what the civil war was really all about.

The Civil War Had Nothing to Do With Slavery

as one of the previous posters said so well,the winners are the ones that get to rewrite history and tell it the way they want it to be told always successful in supressing the facts because our schools are so corrupt.

Revisionist propaganda