Started By
Message
re: Do you think the Civil War was started over slavery?
Posted on 2/18/15 at 5:49 pm to Stonehog
Posted on 2/18/15 at 5:49 pm to Stonehog
I found this tidbit.
Interesting. Was not aware of it.
Interesting. Was not aware of it.
quote:
Pres. Abraham Lincoln was personally against slavery, but in his first inaugural, he made it clear that placating the Southern states was more important. Quoting himself in other speeches, he said, "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
1
Posted on 2/18/15 at 9:24 pm to SECdragonmaster
after 10 pages, the dude above me is the only one to nail this arguement
this was about slavery but in particularly what "started the war" was the expansion out west.. i.e what states would be admitted to the union as free states and what states would be admitted as slave states.
southerns wanted them to be slave states, northerners wanted them to be free states
so what you got was the kansas / nebraska act and a bunch of southerners barnstormed kansas and voted for it to be a slave state after it was in fact a free state under the old missouri compromise.
abolitionists, such as John Brown, threw a hissy fit and started killing motherfrickers i.e bleeding kansas.
The entire Abraham Lincoln / Steven Douglas debates were about slavery. Lincoln won all of the northern states, Douglas won all of the south and lincon won the presidency and that was pretty much a wrap. at that point we were going to war.'
Then south Carolina succeed. Fort Sumter is in south carolina and they would not allow for the union to refill supplies at the base, and that is when the confederates fired the first shot and it was game on.
it was 10000% about slavery. i don't know why it's so chic to suggest the civil war was about anything other than slavery.
The south wanted the ability to expand west to the new territories and the north did not want that.
The north was pretty much okay.. well not okay.. but they tolerated slavery as long as it did not expand. If we could have avoided the civil war by allowing for the confederate to still hold slaves my black arse would be on a plantation today lol
this was about slavery but in particularly what "started the war" was the expansion out west.. i.e what states would be admitted to the union as free states and what states would be admitted as slave states.
southerns wanted them to be slave states, northerners wanted them to be free states
so what you got was the kansas / nebraska act and a bunch of southerners barnstormed kansas and voted for it to be a slave state after it was in fact a free state under the old missouri compromise.
abolitionists, such as John Brown, threw a hissy fit and started killing motherfrickers i.e bleeding kansas.
The entire Abraham Lincoln / Steven Douglas debates were about slavery. Lincoln won all of the northern states, Douglas won all of the south and lincon won the presidency and that was pretty much a wrap. at that point we were going to war.'
Then south Carolina succeed. Fort Sumter is in south carolina and they would not allow for the union to refill supplies at the base, and that is when the confederates fired the first shot and it was game on.
it was 10000% about slavery. i don't know why it's so chic to suggest the civil war was about anything other than slavery.
The south wanted the ability to expand west to the new territories and the north did not want that.
The north was pretty much okay.. well not okay.. but they tolerated slavery as long as it did not expand. If we could have avoided the civil war by allowing for the confederate to still hold slaves my black arse would be on a plantation today lol
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News