Started By
Message
re: Do you think the Civil War was started over slavery?
Posted on 2/13/15 at 3:27 pm to Prof
Posted on 2/13/15 at 3:27 pm to Prof
quote:
FWIW, I've always considered Kingsport/JC/Bristol absolutely horrific on race. I could never live there and don't know how you did.
That is all true - Knoxville and the surrounding suburbs are different than Upper East Tennessee. Upper ET is much more West VA/Eastern Kyish. Knoxville and Chattanooga are much more North Georgia ish. People that aren't from the areas don't get what that means, but I assume you totally understand what I mean. A little more southern, a little less harsh and far less "backwoods" and "us against the world"ish.
Also, I agree about the Tri-Cities and the surrounding regions. It was just awful. There were stories of Unicoi County pelting our high schools football bus with rocks as late as the mid-late 1980s because we took black kids over there.
Tennessee is just a really interesting state. Even the regions themselves, which as everyone knows are distinctly different, are very different depending on wheteher you are north or south. Clarksville is much more like Southern Ohio and Kentucky than Alabama, while Pulaski is no different than Madison, AL or Huntsville.
And I lived there because my dad moved me there (to work with the legal folks at "The Eastman"). They are still there, but my dad has never really accepted it as his home. My mom is all in, but dad ehh. It is what it is.
This post was edited on 2/13/15 at 3:30 pm
1
Posted on 2/13/15 at 4:34 pm to TbirdSpur2010
This is insane...The Christian God in no way ever said that the races were created unequal.
quote:
They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.
Posted on 2/13/15 at 4:38 pm to motionmagic
quote:
The Christian God in no way ever said that the races were created unequal
Well he only created 1 race, so yea, there is that.
Posted on 2/13/15 at 4:58 pm to BlackPawnMartyr
Yeah, the human race!
Posted on 2/13/15 at 5:14 pm to motionmagic
quote:
Yeah, the human race!
And they were irish apparently.
Posted on 2/13/15 at 5:38 pm to motionmagic
So we're 8 pages into this topic with no consensus in sight. One faction cites primary sources to support the idea that the slavery issue was the central cause of the war. Things like speeches, articles of secession, even the Confederate constitution which guaranteed slavery.
Another group gravitates towards a broader economic conflict theory in which an aggressive, capitalist, imperialist North forces war on a semi-feudal agrarian South, which only wants to be left alone. It's basically the Marxist interpretation of the war.
Odd that only we Southerners still go at it about this subject. I don't think Northerners are much interested in the war.
Another group gravitates towards a broader economic conflict theory in which an aggressive, capitalist, imperialist North forces war on a semi-feudal agrarian South, which only wants to be left alone. It's basically the Marxist interpretation of the war.
Odd that only we Southerners still go at it about this subject. I don't think Northerners are much interested in the war.
Posted on 2/13/15 at 5:49 pm to PikeBishop
quote:
Odd that only we Southerners still go at it about this subject. I don't think Northerners are much interested in the skirmish.
Real thoughts...
Posted on 2/13/15 at 6:17 pm to PikeBishop
quote:It's not really.
Another group gravitates towards a broader economic conflict theory in which an aggressive, capitalist, imperialist North forces war on a semi-feudal agrarian South, which only wants to be left alone. It's basically the Marxist interpretation of the war.
LINK
Some of you might recognize the second paragraph; Lost Causers like to cite it out of context for the proposition "Marx said it was a tariff war!" when Marx is actually summarizing the views of people he is about to refute. His actual view was this:
quote:
The whole movement was and is based, as one sees, on the slave question. Not in the sense of whether the slaves within the existing slave states should be emancipated outright or not, but whether the twenty million free men of the North should submit any longer to an oligarchy of three hundred thousand slaveholders; whether the vast Territories of the republic should be nurseries for free states or for slavery; finally, whether the national policy of the Union should take armed spreading of slavery in Mexico, Central and South America as its device.
This post was edited on 2/13/15 at 6:18 pm
Posted on 2/14/15 at 7:53 am to Stonehog
The Civil War didn't even need to be fought. It was fought because Lincoln had to preserve the Union. If he let the Southern states just back out as they did with no retaliation, the union would never stand -- as NY and Mass wanted to back out years earier.
One of the biggest factors that led to secession was how polarizing the North and the South really were. Lincolns name wasn't even on the 1860 presidential ballot in any southern state (outside of Virginia I believe)
The south for years had a political Dynasty over government that they were going to lose.From 1789 to the civil war 2/3 presidents were southerneners and no northerner ever was re elected if they won the presidency. The south took preemptive measures by leaving the Union as they saw the tides changing in the US.
Slavery was a states right but you must remember the government kept passing Tariffs that greatly harmed the south and benefitted the north. The north had the factories and businesses that tariffs protect, the south had to deal with other nations potentially passing greater tariffs in retaliation. The South had "King Cotton" so at the time of secession, they believed France and England would support them in any civil war as those countries relied off of the souths textile production. Tariffs for years were harming the south and were a driving force for them to leave. "No taxation without representation" round two.
The South was tired of being misrepresented and now that they had lost control over the government (still had a ton of pull but over reacted) in 1860, their next fear was losing slavery. Slavery was indeed a huge part of the conflict but so many outside forces were more prevelant. Slavery was the way to justifiably start a war and create an enemy. It's not really someone's fault they grew up with slavery, they were used to that way of life. When someone tells them it's wrong and they live a thousand miles away, what makes that persons opinion so right over theirs?
New Jersey didn't even outlaw slavery until 1865. Why no war on them? Dirty Yankee slave owners. Hell, they had slaves throughout the damn war
Tl; dr
One of the biggest factors that led to secession was how polarizing the North and the South really were. Lincolns name wasn't even on the 1860 presidential ballot in any southern state (outside of Virginia I believe)
The south for years had a political Dynasty over government that they were going to lose.From 1789 to the civil war 2/3 presidents were southerneners and no northerner ever was re elected if they won the presidency. The south took preemptive measures by leaving the Union as they saw the tides changing in the US.
Slavery was a states right but you must remember the government kept passing Tariffs that greatly harmed the south and benefitted the north. The north had the factories and businesses that tariffs protect, the south had to deal with other nations potentially passing greater tariffs in retaliation. The South had "King Cotton" so at the time of secession, they believed France and England would support them in any civil war as those countries relied off of the souths textile production. Tariffs for years were harming the south and were a driving force for them to leave. "No taxation without representation" round two.
The South was tired of being misrepresented and now that they had lost control over the government (still had a ton of pull but over reacted) in 1860, their next fear was losing slavery. Slavery was indeed a huge part of the conflict but so many outside forces were more prevelant. Slavery was the way to justifiably start a war and create an enemy. It's not really someone's fault they grew up with slavery, they were used to that way of life. When someone tells them it's wrong and they live a thousand miles away, what makes that persons opinion so right over theirs?
New Jersey didn't even outlaw slavery until 1865. Why no war on them? Dirty Yankee slave owners. Hell, they had slaves throughout the damn war
Tl; dr
This post was edited on 2/14/15 at 8:12 am
Posted on 2/14/15 at 8:45 am to Iosh
You do realize that northerners owned slaves too don't you? They didn't just wake up one day and say hey, war started, time to free everyone.
Yes, started over slave laws.
Yes, started over slave laws.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:20 am to Old Money
quote:
Lincoln had to preserve the Union. If he let the Southern states just back out as they did with no retaliation,
True, Lincoln understood his first and primary task was to maintain the Union. This was hardly just a "personal feeling" but a root understanding of what his duty and responsibility as President was.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:21 am to nc14
In 50 years, kids will be taught in school that WWII was fought to save the Jews from Hitler.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:43 am to deeprig9
This is from the Confederates their own words.
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."
This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.
The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
LINK
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."
This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.
The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
LINK
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:47 am to nc14
quote:
You do realize that northerners owned slaves too don't you?
In fact there were freed blacks who owned slaves. Not many, to be sure, but ..
I learned this interesting fact on a tour of the city of Fredericksburg, VA, site of a particularly bloody Civil War battle.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:56 am to PikeBishop
quote:
we're 8 pages into this topic with no consensus in sight. One faction cites primary sources to support the idea that the slavery issue was the central cause of the war. Things like speeches, articles of secession, even the Confederate constitution which guaranteed slavery.
Another group gravitates towards a broader economic conflict theory in which an aggressive, capitalist, imperialist North forces war on a semi-feudal agrarian South, which only wants to be left alone. It's basically the Marxist interpretation of the war.
Excellent summation, sir
quote:
Odd that only we Southerners still go at it about this subject.
Now I'm offended.
I'm a Texan-American, not a southerner.
You take that back, Pike!
Posted on 2/14/15 at 10:11 am to Stonehog
quote:
stonehog
White guilt bitch.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:57 am to SummerOfGeorge
Oh I definitely here ya. Tennessee is one crazy place in terms of getting a feel on which places are which way. They did their best to divide us into the 'three states of Tennessee' and enshrined that in the Grand Divisions of East, Middle, and West but it's more complicated than just three main regions. In the East, it's almost like every county is it's own kingdom and it may or may not have anything to do with the county beside it. But I guess that happens with so many different people passing through at different times, borders next to more defined cultures and other things.
Wow. I had no idea about Unicoi doing that but I've never even been there. Does Unicoi even have black people? They seem so much more isolated than even some of the other mountain counties I listed.
And I think you told me about Eastman before - that was a good place to work back in the day despite the toxic shite. Glad your mom has made herself a home and settled in - I wouldn't let anyone run me off or make feel otherwise either (sometimes stubborn streaks are a good thing).
Wow. I had no idea about Unicoi doing that but I've never even been there. Does Unicoi even have black people? They seem so much more isolated than even some of the other mountain counties I listed.
And I think you told me about Eastman before - that was a good place to work back in the day despite the toxic shite. Glad your mom has made herself a home and settled in - I wouldn't let anyone run me off or make feel otherwise either (sometimes stubborn streaks are a good thing).
Posted on 2/14/15 at 12:09 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Just as a followup on East Tennessee and political leanings
Pretty sure Knoxville voted Obama in 2008 but Knox Co. did not and of course the county is bigger. Knoxville is pretty much the only place in my vicinity that went for Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if the Chattanooga proper didn't too but had the same issue with the county going the opposite.
This post was edited on 2/14/15 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 2/14/15 at 12:15 pm to TbirdSpur2010
TbirdSpur2010: Yeah, I guess it's more accurate to just call us Southwesterners or plain Texans. I originally come from Deep East Texas, beyond the Pine Curtain.
It's never surprised me that Texas seceded from the Union. It does shock me that they chose to then join the Confederacy, though. It would have been more in keeping with the Texas vibe to just redeclare itself a separate nation allied with the Confederacy.
"Texas. It's like a completely different country." People don't say that for nothing.
It's never surprised me that Texas seceded from the Union. It does shock me that they chose to then join the Confederacy, though. It would have been more in keeping with the Texas vibe to just redeclare itself a separate nation allied with the Confederacy.
"Texas. It's like a completely different country." People don't say that for nothing.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 12:17 pm to PikeBishop
quote:
"Texas. It's like a completely different country." People don't say that for nothing.
It's because of all the Mexicans.
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News