The Civil War

[forkup]

Slavery was one of the main causes of the civil war. However, it was not the sole one.

Name a specific other one please?

Apologies, that should have read”slavery was the main cause, not the sole one”

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.

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.

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.

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.

Why did Lincoln lie about that then?

What specifically is "that" if you want me to respond?

YOu made a point. My reply was addressing your point.


"That", was a reference to your point.



I understand that this is very alien to you.



Now, to take this back to my point.



Why did Lincoln lie about that then?



(i hope you were able to follow that. I know it was a lot of information and very complex, what with you saying something and me asking you a question about it)

The concept of replying to a well conceived counter argument is not alien to me. Since yours wasn't I asked you to clarify the specific lie "that" signifies. Since you won't and only want to be condescending I feel no need to spend time on you.

 

[Correll]

Slavery was one of the main causes of the civil war. However, it was not the sole one.

Name a specific other one please?

Apologies, that should have read”slavery was the main cause, not the sole one”

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.

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.

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.

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.

Why did Lincoln lie about that then?

What specifically is "that" if you want me to respond?

YOu made a point. My reply was addressing your point.


"That", was a reference to your point.



I understand that this is very alien to you.



Now, to take this back to my point.



Why did Lincoln lie about that then?



(i hope you were able to follow that. I know it was a lot of information and very complex, what with you saying something and me asking you a question about it)

The concept of replying to a well conceived counter argument is not alien to me. Since yours wasn't I asked you to clarify the specific lie "that" signifies. Since you won't and only want to be condescending I feel no need to spend time on you.

Ok, I will spell it out for you


Why did lincoln lie ABOUT THE CAUSE OF THE CIVIL WAR BEING ABOUT SLAVERY?

 

[TheParser]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

I do not know much about the Civil War or the War Between the States.

I have read, however, that not a few young men in the North did not want to fight in order to abolish slavery.

I also understand it was perfectly legal to pay someone else to take one's place if drafted.

I think, for example, there were draft riots in New York City.

Eventually, of course, enough young men in the Northern states were drafted or volunteered in order to win the war.

And, I think, many of those young men felt that they were fighting to keep the Union together rather than to liberate the slaves. This is the position that President Lincoln at first articulated himself, though he later changed his position.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

No , the CW was about keeping slavery from the South’s perspective
From the North : they did not want to lose the $$$ in the vast agricultural of the south

Also the plan of the Confederates was that when the push into the new west was going to happen, the Southern White Democrats, wants to keep slaves and have them go into the new territory also. When you treat black people like an animal, then you deserve to be punished. But just look at what BLM/ANTIFA are doing today, burning, looting and murdering minority businesses, just like the KKK did after Reconstruction.

 

[Jets]

Slavery was one of the main causes of the civil war. However, it was not the sole one.

Name a specific other one please?

Apologies, that should have read”slavery was the main cause, not the sole one”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

 

[gipper]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

You shouldn’t post an OP when you know nothing about the topic. Chalk this up as a learning experience.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

LET'S SAY "WAR BETWEEN THE STATES"
The Conflict (1861-1865) between the Northern States (The Union) and the Southern States which seceded from the Union to form the Confederate States has been given many names.
The official Union designation was "The War of the Rebellion." Other names have been "The War of Secession" and "The War for Southern Independence." In the South, the conflict is called "The War Between the States." The Congress of the United States used the term, "War Between the States" in two measures enacted into law; one measure became Public Law 834 in 1950, and a Resolution, H.580 was adopted by the House in 1944. The term "War Between the States" has been used in various reports on bills during the 70th, 71st, 72nd, 74th, 80th and 81st Congresses.
The name "Civil War" has also been widely accepted, no doubt because it is short. Actually the term "Civil War" is misleading and inexact. The war was not a class struggle, but a sectional combat, having its roots in such complex political, economic, social and psychological elements that it is difficult for historians to agree on all its basic causes.
The fact that for four years the Confederacy maintained an entirely separate government (with its own currency, commerce, army and navy) established the Confederate States of America as a separate nation.
This nation, the Confederate States of America, levied and collected revenue, enlisted its armies and issued cotton bonds which were accepted in foreign commercial marts.
Its navy, though small, fought brilliantly, and introduced with the Virginia (Merrimac) a new type of warship, the ironclad.
The Confederate Flag, "The Stars and Bars" was recognized all over the world as belonging to a nation other than the United States of America.
The "War Between the States" does not imply a war between individual states. The noun, "States," is used in its collective sense. the official titles of the contending parties during the conflict were the "United States" and the "Confederate States."
Therefore, since the war was between two groups of states, the United States and the Confederate States - two separate nations - the most exact name for that great conflict of the 1860's is "War Between the States."

Let's Say "War Between the States"

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

I do remember. Do you remember that they shot at Sumpter because they seceded from the Union? Do you remember the reason they did that?

Yes; it was then Sth Carolina so a part of the Confederate States; the Union soldiers were trespassing. Re-inforcing the fort was an act of war. Also, Ft Sumter was about 85 Union Troops of whom 84 survived....ONE died when his cannon blew up!!!

btw: your buddy Marx said:

"In October 1861 Marx, who was living in Primrose Hill, summed up the view of the British press: ‘The war between the North and South is a tariff war. The war is, further, not for any principle, does not touch the question of slavery and in fact turns on Northern lust for sovereignty.’ That view was shared by Charles Dickens, who wrote: ‘The Northern onslaught upon slavery is no more than a piece of specious humbug disguised to conceal its desire for economic control of the United States.’"

The American Civil War: A North-South Divide | History Today

www.historytoday.com

Greg

What the War Between The States was really about........https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/07/no_author/why-the-civil-war-wasnt-about-slavery/Why the Civil War Wasn’t About Slavery - LewRockwell

 

[rightwinger]

Any reason you give for the Civil War always comes down to slavery.

The South panicked when Lincoln was elected
Lincolns going to take our slaves.
Best Lincoln could have done was stop the expansion of slavery

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Any reason you give for the Civil War always comes down to slavery.

The South panicked when Lincoln was elected
Lincolns going to take our slaves.
Best Lincoln could have done was stop the expansion of slavery

Everything You Know About the Civil War Is Wrong

It’s perhaps the most misunderstood event in the history of the United States

medium.com

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Page not found | Teaching American History

teachingamericanhistory.org

 

[forkup]

Slavery was one of the main causes of the civil war. However, it was not the sole one.

Name a specific other one please?

Apologies, that should have read”slavery was the main cause, not the sole one”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Interpreting history by nature is subjective and determining cause and effect is difficult to establish. Completeness in that respect can stand in the way of accuracy.

I could for instance claim that one of the reasons WW2 broke out, was because Britain and France declared war on Germany after they invaded Poland. I would be factually correct, yet I think you wouldn't give me high marks for accuracy. You could make a compelling case for other reasons for WW2, the one I described would not be one of them.

The civil war is way more straightforward than WW2 in causality.

 

[rightwinger]

Any reason you give for the Civil War always comes down to slavery.

The South panicked when Lincoln was elected
Lincolns going to take our slaves.
Best Lincoln could have done was stop the expansion of slavery

Mr. Lincoln and Slavery

5 Things You May Not Know About Abraham Lincoln, Slavery and Emancipation | HISTORY

The 16th U.S. president was firm in believing slavery was morally wrong, but his views on racial equality were sometimes more complicated.

www.history.com

Lincoln was a political pragmatist
He was morally opposed to slavery but knew he was limited in what he could do.
Almost nobody believed in racial equality back then.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Documenting the American South, or, The Southern Experience in 19-th Century America.

www.docsouth.unc.edu

 

[gipper]

Documenting the American South, or, The Southern Experience in 19-th Century America.

www.docsouth.unc.edu

Good column, but I knew all that. The following summarizes it:
Viewing the Civil War as a crusade to end slavery is simply not correct; abolitionists never accounted for more than a sizable minority in the North. The cause of war in 1861 wasn’t slavery. It was about the loss of millions in tax revenues.

In reality, it wasn’t even a Civil War. The Confederate states had no aspirations to rule the Union any more than George Washington sought control over Great Britain in 1776. In both the American Revolutionary War and the Civil War, independence was the goal.

The idea that the Civil War was some sort of a morality play about freeing Southern slaves is an ideological distortion that obfuscates many of the atrocities that occurred during and after the war.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Documenting the American South, or, The Southern Experience in 19-th Century America.

www.docsouth.unc.edu

Good column, but I knew all that. The following summarizes it:
Viewing the Civil War as a crusade to end slavery is simply not correct; abolitionists never accounted for more than a sizable minority in the North. The cause of war in 1861 wasn’t slavery. It was about the loss of millions in tax revenues.

In reality, it wasn’t even a Civil War. The Confederate states had no aspirations to rule the Union any more than George Washington sought control over Great Britain in 1776. In both the American Revolutionary War and the Civil War, independence was the goal.

The idea that the Civil War was some sort of a morality play about freeing Southern slaves is an ideological distortion that obfuscates many of the atrocities that occurred during and after the war.

Real reasons for the Civil War

This is well-reasoned document concerning the reasons the Civil War occurred. Many people think the Civil War of 1860-1865 was fought over...

ntlconsulting.blogspot.com

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

good lord you are a dumb fuck.

Slavery was the central issue. Everybody knows that. Although states were fighting for their own rights, everyone of their declarations stated that they had the right to continue their slavery.

Now shut the fuck up you goddamn idiot.

The current Civil War we're engaged in, which was started by you communist faggots has nothing to do with any slavery but that of white men.

Now go fuck yourself.

 

[schmidlap]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

If it was only about slavery, why did Lincoln offer to make slavery a Constitutional right so long as the Southern states came back into the Union?

The compromise Lincoln offered to the states rebelling against the U.S. in order to preserve the Union (Lincoln's primary goal) was about slavery. After the slave states rejected Lincoln's offer, abolition of slavery became a more important objective in the war.

HARPER'S WEEKLY.​

MARCH 22, 1862.​

THE President last week sent in to Congress a Message recommending the passage of the following or a similar resolution :​

Resolved, That the United States ought to co-operate with any State which may adopt a gradual abolishment of slavery, giving to such State pecuniary aid, to be used by such State in its discretion to compensate for the inconveniences, public and private, produced by such change of system.​

​

This Message has been applauded with equal fervor by the opponents and by the supporters of slavery. It is equally approved by the Herald and by the Tribune, by the Evening Post and by the Journal of Commerce.​

​

The old friends of slavery commend it because it recognizes the right of the Southern slave-owners to their slave property, and the exclusive right of the slave States to regulate or abolish the institution within their limits.​

​

The friends of freedom rejoice at it because it places the United States Government squarely on the record as preferring freedom to slavery, in the abstract, and as looking forward, in some future time, and in some yet undetermined way, to the abolition of slavery, and the emancipation of the negro race...​

​

Lincoln Offers Slavery Compromise

In this Harper's Weekly newspaper, Abraham Lincoln Offers a Slavery Compromise to the Southern States

www.sonofthesouth.net

​

 

[Jets]

Whats interesting is that many people think the Emancipation Proclamation banned all slavery...

 

[there4eyeM]

Slavery was inextricable from the economic questions, so it is false to try to separate the two. The South was addicted and couldn't change while the rest of the country couldn't continue with it. The South would not accept legal resolution, so chose illegal. Partisans may not agree, but you know what opinions are like.