- Aug 21, 2020
- Reaction score
You are right, that's why the Confederacy was willing to fight a war to protect it's "peculiar institution".The souths economic power was rooted in slavery and the "export" you were talking about was cotton harvested by slaves. The interesting thing is that so many of those pushing the narrative of the civil war wasn't about slavery all just give euphemisms in an attempt I assume to not use the actual word slavery.It's certainly not complete, there were both economic and political reasons for the South to secede. Prior to the ACW, the South controlled the Federal government and was an economic powerhouse that provided a very large percentage of US exports. That was rapidly changing due to immigration into the free states and the industrialization of the North. Power was shifting North and the leaders of the southern states wanted to stop it.I understand that, but not everyone is attempting to revise history by acknowledging nuances. When someone states “The civil war was all about slavery”, that isn’t painting the entire picture. Not saying it’s incorrect, just not complete.If they all connect to the same one the other reasons aren't all that relevant and for the purpose of revisionism distracting at the least and dishonest at worst.That was the point I was trying to make, as you correctly stated,war does not break out over one particular reason. The issues may all connect to one main one, but it does not mean they are all one and the same.The problem I have is that all the other causes you are I would be willing to name will all boil down to slavery. War never ever breaks out over one particular reason. The US civil war has probably one of the most straightforward root causes in history.
I usually appluad nuance I really do but to often in this narrative its used as a justification for starting a war in order to preserve something that was recognised as reprehensible even at that time.