It just wouldn’t be Wednesday of we didn’t again re-fight the War Between the States aka The Civil War aka The War of Northern Aggression.
Actually, it has been a little while since we saw some Southern Dander up.
Got my popcorn...
All hands to Quarters. The Threadnaught is leaving the harbor.
“In this corner, the War Of Northern Aggression team! In the opposite corner, the Treason Of The Slaveholders team! Touch gloves, boys, keep it clean, and go to a neutral corner in the event of a knockdown... No LET’S GET READY to RRRRUUUMMMMMBBBBLLLLLEEEE!!!”
Foremost among these questions was the question of states rights. Did the Southern states have the right to take their ball and go home like a bunch of whiny spoilsport crybabies the first time the country elected a president who publicly opposed slavery? On this question the North and South could not agree. The Southerners insisted that the individual states had the absolute right to withdraw from the Union whenever they desired to do so, and in general took an uncompromisingly strong stance on states rights.
There was also the question of enforcement of federal laws. Did the Northern states have the right to pass laws that hindered the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act? Here again there could be no agreement: the Southerners insisted that the federal law must be supreme, and in general took an uncompromisingly strong stance against states rights.
Then there was the question of the territories. Should slavery be allowed in them or not? Should they be admitted to the Union as slave states or free states? Many Southerners vehemently opposed the Missouri Compromise, which roughly divided the territories between free in the North and slave in the South, on the grounds that each newly admitted state should be allowed to decide the question of slavery for itself. Likewise, Southerners were appalled when California, at its own request, was admitted to the Union as a free state, on the grounds that the admission violated the Missouri Compromise.
So you can see that slavery was in fact the least of the difficulties dividing North and South.
- Dr. H. Albertus Boli
I would suggest one read the articles of secession by the Confederate States before answering. (if it wasn’t the primary reason, it was a close second or a catalyst reason).
There was nothing truly radical about it, though. Even the Founding Fathers looked forward to the eventual end of slavery.
In the short term, however, Lincoln and the Republicans weren't going to rock the boat with sudden moves or lunges.
Here we go again...
Well considering that Salon.com brought it up again ad nausea, nope. But every so often here, the war has to be fought again and again.
[Disclaimer: My use, below, of the words “meme” and “multifactorial” should in no way suggest that I might be a pointy-headed liberal.]
As a proud Southerner boy, both by heritage and inclination, I had long bought the “states’ rights” meme. In recent years I have looked into the matter quite a bit more deeply for myself, and I have to say that, while the underpinnings of the conflict were multifactorial, the prime cause was slavery. I must also say that this shift in understanding in no way diminishes my hatred of the North or of Lincoln for the conduct and aftermath of the war.
This will be my sole contribution to the Afternoon Delight that now stretches out luxuriously before us.
Let's just cut to the chase.
For the North, the answer is: mostly yes
For the South, the answer is: no
The Civil War was actually about making the rich pay their fair share.
Now why don’t you go pay your taxes? Your government is broke. :)
If anyone has any doubts, they should set aside a few weeks to read the seven Lincoln-Douglas debates. Unthinkable in our day and age, Lincoln and Douglas toured around Illinois, their arguments evolving over time, yet remaining polite, and they went in depth to the issues of the day.
The amount of brain power involved in that effort was staggering, but the end result was extraordinary. At the time the debates were published in newspapers around the country and made Lincoln a star.
Yes, it was almost entirely about slavery.
Because of the debates, Douglas became senator from Illinois, and Lincoln, president.
After losing the senate race, Lincoln did a pretty fair edit and published the debates in a book.
Actually, Lincoln went back and forth with the South, finally offering for the South to keep their slaves in exchang for not seceding. The South refused, still wanting secession.
Well, isn’t this just perfect timing? /s
The war of northern aggression was *not* about slavery. It was about state’s rights. I believe it was over taxes/ tariff’s imposed on Southern crops.
When will *someone* recount the actual, factual details of how slavery happened, *who* the slavers were, & who forced their own people to be sold as slaves? Nobody is going to do that because it would pretty much destroy the narrative that is, apparently, working so well. How many generations have passed?
Why weren’t these folks repatriated to their homeland & their family ties? They had been here for barely 2 generations. Wouldn’t that have been the decent & logical thing to do?
As far as the left is concerned, *everyone* who doesn’t go along quietly with their communist “transformation” of America- & especially those of us in the South- all of us, are racist. Look at what was said about Mia Love, Allen West, Herman Cain, JC Watts, & Condi Rice. It’s perfectly okay then.
There is *nothing* we can do or say to prove otherwise & it doesn’t even matter if it’s true or not to any degree. We can slit our wrists en masse & bleed to death but It. Will. Never. Be. Enough.
It was about the expansion of slavery.
These threads are better than the Hatfields and McCoys mini-series.
Slavery was an issue of State’s rights, but many things other than State’s rights also contributed to the war, including the economic tyranny the southern States were receiving in the Congress from the northern States. Lots of hatred went into that war, same as today.