Posted by
Message
kywildcatfanone
Kentucky Fan
Wildcat Country!
Member since Oct 2012
70618 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

but a lot of those that didn't own slaves just couldn't afford them, but would have liked to one day.




pvilleguru
Atlanta United Fan
Member since Jun 2009
55422 posts
 Online 

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
shite. It's the #1 excuse people use when trying to say why their family didn't have slaves. "They were too poor to own slaves." That's a weak arse excuse. So the only reason they didn't have slaves was because they couldn't afford it? That's not much better than actually owning slaves.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
22
MoarKilometers
Florida Atlantic Fan
Member since Apr 2015
8562 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

Yes, the number of families that owned slaves were less than 50%, but a lot of those that didn't own slaves just couldn't afford them, but would have liked to one day.

It was slightly less than 1 in 3 people being slave owners. Clearly the rich/powerful dominated that 32%. Who knew 160 years ago the rich and powerful used to wealth and money to run amok. There's a reason the south had a draft long before the north, because the other 68% had reason to fight for something they didn't own.


NYCAuburn
Auburn Fan
TD Platinum Membership/SECr Sheriff
Member since Feb 2011
53372 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

1. "But political leaders in the South said themselves that the war was over slavery" -- Yes, some did. Others emphasized the importance of state sovereignty. Regardless, this isn't really a good measure for determining the actual causes of war.


Have you every read the articles of secession?


The war was over secession, secession was because of slavery and blacks/Africans being “inferior”
This post was edited on 6/23 at 6:34 pm


reedus23
St. Louis
Member since Sep 2011
25222 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
Can't believe this thread continues. From that great state that continues to pay tribute to the grand old days, we get our answer:

quote:

A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.

In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world.


If you don't believe them, then you needn't look further than the first sentences out of Georgia's mouths:

quote:

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.


Carrying on the narrative, South Carolina, among 17 references to some form of the word slave, said:

quote:

The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy


And of course, as Texas puts it while referencing some form of slave over 20 times:

quote:

They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.


And note how Virginia doesn't cast it as oppression against "State's Rights States" but rather:

quote:

and the Federal Government, having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern Slaveholding States.


Alabama at least were gentlemen about it and referred to slavery as a "domestic Institution":

quote:

Whereas, the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin to the offices of president and vice-president of the United States of America, by a sectional party, avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions and to the peace and security of the people of the State of Alabama


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
20
scionofadrunk
Tennessee Fan
Williamson County, TN
Member since Mar 2020
1621 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

Was the civil war over slavery?

Short answer:

yes


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
20
Krampus
Texas A&M Fan
Member since Nov 2018
705 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
Yes the Civil War was about slavery.

Thankfully Grant, Sherman, and Lincoln had the brains and the balls to beat the hell out of the traitorous slavery-loving south and it's loser leadership.

Then, for some reason, the south built statues to the most famous losers making them like proud victorious winners and convinced themselves they were "preserving history" by doing so.

And here we are today. Fighting each other over statues of losers.


Tmcgin
LSU Fan
BATON ROUGE
Member since Jun 2010
1420 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
No Slavery-No war....end of story
Read the Texas succession declaration


The Sultan of Swine
Arkansas Fan
Member since Nov 2010
4362 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
No secession - no war. Slavery might have been stamped out over time politically, but the federal government was not going to take out slavery by force.


Krampus
Texas A&M Fan
Member since Nov 2018
705 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
No slavery - no secession.

Sorry you're bad at thinking through multiple tiers of causation, but focusing on secession as the root cause without exploring why secession happened in the first place is absurd, and on the level of cognitive evaluation I'd expect from a 1st grader.


The Sultan of Swine
Arkansas Fan
Member since Nov 2010
4362 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
Lol, I talked about multiple causes and the root cause in the first post of this thread. I never said secession is the root.

"No slavery - no secession" is probably true since slavery was the whole reason for the South's economic structure.

My point is that the South didn't have to secede to keep slavery.
This post was edited on 6/24 at 11:53 am


pvilleguru
Atlanta United Fan
Member since Jun 2009
55422 posts
 Online 

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

My point is that the South didn't have to secede to keep slavery.
But they did so anyway.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
20
BobLeeDagger
Army Fan
In Your Head
Member since May 2016
5032 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

States rights.



This post was edited on 6/24 at 12:43 pm


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
00
NYCAuburn
Auburn Fan
TD Platinum Membership/SECr Sheriff
Member since Feb 2011
53372 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

My point is that the South didn't have to secede to keep slavery.



Thats your opinion after the fact, not what they thought and why they seceded


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
40
turnpiketiger
LSU Fan
Texas by way of Acadiana.
Member since May 2020
605 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

States rights.


... to do what exactly? Just curious I think we all forgot.
This post was edited on 6/24 at 11:20 pm


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
00
Bigbens42
Auburn Fan
Trussvegas
Member since Nov 2013
1896 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

My point is that the South didn't have to secede to keep slavery.



The casus belli of the south couldn't be more obvious, man.

To those who do know the history of this country the southern reaction is no surprise at all. In 1858 Lincoln held a series of debates with Stephen Douglas in Illinois. Both men were vying for a senate seat at a time when the state legislatures appointed senators, therefore they were each campaigning for their respective parties in the hope to taking control of the legislature and securing the appointment. Lincoln spoke on behalf of the new Republican party and Douglas on behalf of the Democrats. Lincoln effectively torpedoed Douglas' eventual bid for the presidency although Douglas was appointed to the open senate seat. It was precisely because Lincoln forced Douglas to come out against slavery in the Lincoln-Douglas debates that the former vice president John Breckenridge split the Democratic party in the 1860 election. He provided pro-slavery Democrats a candidate in preference to Douglas. Douglas beat Breckenridge in the popular vote, but Breckenridge carried all of the southern states and therefore took more votes in the electoral college. The effect, of course, was to throw the election to Lincoln and the Republican party.

So the response of the south is obvious. The election of Lincoln lead them to believe that the institution of slavery would be abolished, never mind that Lincoln had no such power and never mind that had their congressional delegations remained in place the constitution could not have been amended. Therefore they violated the constitution by forming a confederacy, raising troops and levying war. They were not in the least subtle about it. They did so before Lincoln was even sworn in. James Chestnut, the senior senator from South Carolina, lead the state delegation out of the congress immediately after Lincoln's election and even before the state had passed a secession ordinance. The reaction of most of the rest of the states which would form the Confederacy was the same. Chestnut went back to South Carolina and immediately began organizing the siege of the federal installations in the harbor. He became a military aide to President Davis during the war and his wife's diary is one of the most important primary source documents for life in Richmond and the Carolina back country during the war.
This post was edited on 6/25 at 6:46 pm


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
20
G The Tiger Fan
LSU Fan
Member since Apr 2015
67456 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
Well, Lincoln started the war. He wasn't an abolitionist. So I don't see how it could have been over slavery.


NYCAuburn
Auburn Fan
TD Platinum Membership/SECr Sheriff
Member since Feb 2011
53372 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

So I don't see how it could have been over slavery.




Replies (0)
Replies (0)
51
Krampus
Texas A&M Fan
Member since Nov 2018
705 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
quote:

Well, Lincoln started the war.


The Citadel says "hi".


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
10
InGAButLoveBama
Member since Jan 2018
651 posts

re: Was the civil war over slavery?
It wasn't just border states that had slavery in the Union. Slavery was still legal in NJ in 1864.


first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4next pagelast page

Back to top

logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter