Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
Read the resolutions of secession and Alexander Stephens' famous "Cornerstone Speech." As they state explicitly, the point of secession was to better establish and fortify slavery.

Despite the limited terms of the Emancipation Proclamation, it marked a decisive shift in the North's war aims, from simple preservation of the union to preservation plus the end of slavery.

If the South had instead remained in the union, they could have stymied abolition while undertaking gradual reforms that ameliorated the conditions of slavery. Doing so would have preserved the South's prosperity and political power.

45 posted on 05/01/2017 9:43:52 AM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: Rockingham
Read the resolutions of secession and Alexander Stephens' famous "Cornerstone Speech." As they state explicitly, the point of secession was to better establish and fortify slavery.

The Southern states reasons for leaving have nothing to do with the Northern States reasons for forcing them back in. Since the Northern States had control of the war, it was *THEIR* reasons that mattered in the conflict, not the Southern States reasons for wanting out of the Union.

The Northern states had no interest in stopping slavery when the war began. They only wanted to get those Southern states back under their control.

Despite the limited terms of the Emancipation Proclamation, it marked a decisive shift in the North's war aims, from simple preservation of the union to preservation plus the end of slavery.

Well see, there you go. Yes it did mark a decisive shift. It moved the goal posts to something other than what actually started the war. If the point of the North going to war wasn't to end slavery, then why do people keep repeating that it was?

If the South had instead remained in the union, they could have stymied abolition while undertaking gradual reforms that ameliorated the conditions of slavery. Doing so would have preserved the South's prosperity and political power.

On the other hand, had they simply been allowed to remain independent, they could have been even more prosperous anyways without having to listen to their Moral superiors in the North East telling them what horrible human beings they were.

Producing 3/4ths of all US Exports without New York taking a 40% cut out of their profits would have given them plenty of capital to build industries to rival the North. This I think was the real reason why the US went to war with them. There were plenty of Robber Barons with power and influence who would have lost both had the South remained independent of their control.

51 posted on 05/01/2017 10:31:43 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson