Civil War was about Slavery. Video inside

44nutman

The Original Nut of Sherdog
@Gold
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
22,731
Reaction score
23,876


Can we stop with the fiction that the Civil War was not about slavery.
It was and always will be about slavery.
The main point, is the south was an agriculture economy. They needed slavery in order to keep making money. The rich plantation owners did not want slavery to go away, because it would cut into the bottom line.
The statues belong in a museum, not on public property.
 
It wasn't just about slavery, it was about the 10th amendment...you know "Muh states rights" that the left thinks is racist when it suits them. Look if you guys want to tear down monuments of Democrats, go ahead but stop rewriting history.
 
It wasn't just about slavery, it was about the 10th amendment...you know "Muh states rights" that the left thinks is racist when it suits them. Look if you guys want to tear down monuments of Democrats, go ahead but stop rewriting history.
So you disagree with the expert, based on you political affiliation tells you that is the new spin.
The US soldier laid out facts and you counter with states rights bullshit.
I guess the US soldier is rewriting history when he is quoting history.
BTW the source of the video is Prager U, which is a conservative site.
 
So you disagree with the expert, based on you political affiliation tells you that is the new spin.
The US soldier laid out facts and you counter with states rights bullshit.
I guess the US soldier is rewriting history when he is quoting history.
BTW the source of the video is Prager U, which is a conservative site.


What i'm saying is that its easy to sweep the civil war to be about nothing but slavery. That way you don't have to have an intellectual discussion about the arguments pro/con with the confederacy. minimizing the conflict to 'only slavery' rewrites history and doesn't provide a full context for both sides of the war but as we have seen with the massive censorship raids recently, many don't want dialogue, they want conformity


Tearing down history and rewriting the conflict...
 
I'm not rehashing this here, but I'll leave this...

Without slavery, there would have been no Civil War

But not one soldier picked up a rifle in 1861 to free any slave.
 
It wasn't just about slavery, it was about the 10th amendment...you know "Muh states rights"

people dont kill each other and fight to the death over abstract ideas like "state's rights." there is a specific "right" that they were concerned about. all you need to do is look at the state congressional documents that ALL of them wrote up, usually titled something like "reasons for secession." they explain exactly what was going on lol.

that the left thinks is racist when it suits them.

errr. what?

Look if you guys want to tear down monuments of Democrats, go ahead

what?

but stop rewriting history.

lol. are ukrainians "rewriting history" if they tear down a stalin statue? no. theyre just saying "we dont want that shit here anymore....it isnt a part of our history, or a person, that we care to glorify.
 
people dont kill each other and fight to the death over abstract ideas like "state's rights." there is a specific "right" that they were concerned about. all you need to do is look at the state congressional documents that ALL of them wrote up, usually titled something like "reasons for secession." they explain exactly what was going on lol.

.



So the south only fought for slavery and the north only fought to keep slaves free?? You realize how stupid that simplification is?
 
It wasn't just about slavery, it was about the 10th amendment...you know "Muh states rights" that the left thinks is racist when it suits them. Look if you guys want to tear down monuments of Democrats, go ahead but stop rewriting history.

States rights to own slaves. The is fact, you can read the articles of secession and declarations of causes issued by each state.
 
The Civil War was not exclusively about slavery. Yet slavery was a factor just as states rights and tax money were factors. Each went hand-in-hand with the other.
 
I'm not rehashing this here, but I'll leave this...

Without slavery, there would have been no Civil War

But not one soldier picked up a rifle in 1861 to free any slave.

It was political power. The north is seen as heroes and that is BS. They even tried to amend the constitution to permanently protect slavery in the south to try to stop states from seceding.
 
I know it may be hard to deal with the truth but every war is fought over money or resources, no war is fought over human rights. The Allies actually knew the Jewish were in concentration camps and did not care. Clinton knew there was a genocide in Rwanda but did not care. War is the most dreadful invention ever created, it costs millions of lives and infinite suffering, so war starters then create something called propaganda when it is over to explain all the senseless loss. Do you really think that the same people that wiped out the Native Americans cared about freeing their free slave workers that helped process all their goods and made for cheaper products?

There are also many fraudulent videos like the ones shared now, as the deep state is trying to bring race to the forefront to drive a wedge in between the people. It was not until 1958 that the motion of slavery even having anything to do with the reasons for the civil war were being brought up and it was all politically motivated by social engineers. Ironically now, the same thing is going on today, but not north and south but right vs left:

The left says "we are fighting to purge racism"

The right says "WTF are you talking about? We just want our first amendment rights"

The deep state string pullers just smile, as they agitate both sides with the lying MSM and blatantly trying to rewrite history and consent manufacture.

Here is what Lincoln said about slavery and black. Sorry, bruv....you've been taken for a walk, son.

:(

1. On the expansion of slavery:

Lincoln said:
There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races ... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas ...
2. On shipping blacks back to Africa:

Lincoln said:
In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years ago, "It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation, and deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degrees, as that the evil will wear off insensibly; and in their places be, pari passu [on an equal basis], filled up by free white laborers."
3. On outlawing slavery in the south (before the rebellion).

Lincoln 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.
4. On equality:

Lincoln said:
I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.
5. On inter-racial marriage:

Lincoln said:
Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.


We can't change the future without truly understanding our past, even if it is emotionally inconvenient and not what we want to hear.

Here is the documentation:

http://www.bartleby.com/251/pages/page358.html

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/speech-on-the-dred-scott-decision/

http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres31.html

http://mason.gmu.edu/~zschrag/hist120spring05/lincoln_ottawa.htm

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/a/alajournals/0599998.0006.003?view=text&seq=40
 
Last edited:
It wasn't just about slavery, it was about the 10th amendment...you know "Muh states rights" that the left thinks is racist when it suits them. Look if you guys want to tear down monuments of Democrats, go ahead but stop rewriting history.

You're right, it was about States Rights to own slaves. Slavery was the backbone of the economy for the south and removing slavery would destroy the ruling class.

When you look at the root cause it all points back to slavery and the seceding states not wanting to give that up.
 
So the south only fought for slavery and the north only fought to keep slaves free?? You realize how stupid that simplification is?

is that what i said?

the south mainly fought for slavery. their entire economy was dependent upon it. most whites didnt own slaves, but they feared free black labor, should the slaves be free'd. and racism was a real factor for the whites on the lower rungs of society too.

the north fought for all sorts of reasons.
 
I know it may be hard to deal with the truth but every war is fought over money or resources, no war is fought over human rights. The Allies actually knew the Jewish were in concentration camps and did not care. Clinton knew there was a genocide in Rwanda bug did not care. War is the most dreadful invention ever created, it costs millions of lives and infinite suffering, so war starters then create something called propaganda when it is over to explain all the senseless loss. Do you really think that the same people tjat wiped out the Native Americans cared about freeing their free workers?

There are also many fraudulent videos like the ones shared now, as the deep state is trying to bring race to the forefront to drive a wedge in between the people. It was not until 1958 that the motion of slavery even having anything to do with the reasons for the civil war were being brought up and it was all politically motivated by social engineers. Ironically now, the same thing is going on today, but not north and south but right vs left:

The left says "we are fighting to purge racism"

The right says "WTF are you talking about? We just want our first amendment rights"

The deep state the string pullers just smile, as they agitate both sides with the lying MSM and blatantly trying to rewrite history and consent manufacture.

Here is what Lincoln said about slavery and black. Sorry, bruv....you've been taken for a walk :(

1. On the expansion of slavery:

Lincoln said:
There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races ... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas ...
2. On shipping blacks back to Africa:

Lincoln said:
In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years ago, "It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation, and deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degrees, as that the evil will wear off insensibly; and in their places be, pari passu [on an equal basis], filled up by free white laborers."
3. On outlawing slavery in the south (before the rebellion).

Lincoln 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.
4. On equality:

Lincoln said:
I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.
5. On inter-racial marriage:

Lincoln said:
Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.


We can't change the future without truly understanding our past, even if it is emotionally inconvenient and not what we want to hear.

Here is the documentation:

http://www.bartleby.com/251/pages/page358.html

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/speech-on-the-dred-scott-decision/

http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres31.html

http://mason.gmu.edu/~zschrag/hist120spring05/lincoln_ottawa.htm

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/a/alajournals/0599998.0006.003?view=text&seq=40
I have all of this and some in my research. As well as the views of many of the Union generals, Union soldiers, Northern people, Northern laws, and testimonials from former slaves, but...

And when we read "slavery", and it's wording in the Confederate Ordinances of Secession, it's important to know the history behind it.

Yes, the majority of it was based on slavery, but there were no good guys on either side. It was all about greed. It was never about slaves as people.

There were pockets of true abolitionists on both sides of the Mason-Dixon, but they didn't carry any political weight.
 
The statue of Lincoln at the Lincoln Memorial could be torn down because in the Emancipation Proclamation Lincoln maintained slavery in areas occupied by THE UNION. He also entertained plans to ship black slaves back to Africa.
 
is that what i said?

the south mainly fought for slavery. their entire economy was dependent upon it. most whites didnt own slaves, but they feared free black labor, should the slaves be free'd. and racism was a real factor for the whites on the lower rungs of society too.

the north fought for all sorts of reasons.
The North had those same needs and fears. Look it up.

The North depended on slave labor to support its economy too. That's why the taxed the shit out of the South. If you pay attention, Lincoln never intended to outlaw slavery where it existed. New York City was close to seceding with the South in 1860.

State laws in the North outlawed blacks from settling there. The New York Riots of 1863 were from angry Irish immigrants who feared competition for work from newly freed slaves. Northern states threatened to pull their soldiers from the fight after the EP, because they weren't going to fight to free slaves.

Lincoln only enacted the EP in the Confederate states to cause chaos and get some soldiers out of the deal.

Don't fool yourself into thinking the North was virtuous by any means.
 
The North had those same needs and fears. Look it up.

The North depended on slave labor to support its economy too. That's why the taxed the shit out of the South. If you pay attention, Lincoln never intended to outlaw slavery where it existed. New York City was close to seceding with the South in 1860.

State laws in the North outlawed blacks from settling there. The New York Riots of 1863 were from angry Irish immigrants who feared competition for work from newly freed slaves. Northern states threatened to pull their soldiers from the fight after the EP, because they weren't going to fight to free slaves.

Lincoln only enacted the EP in the Confederate states to cause chaos and get some soldiers out of the deal.

Don't fool yourself into thinking the North was virtuous by any means.

yea the south was a source of cheap raw materials for northern factories.

and most northerners would be raging racists by today's standards.

but....i do think lincoln's opinion of slavery changed over the years. and the south always knew that their peculiar institution wasnt entirely safe under lincoln, thats why many seceded simply because he won the election. but more importantly, as youve already pointed out, they were worried what would happen in the fed politically, if western states were admitted to the union as free states.
 
It wasn't just about slavery, it was about the 10th amendment...you know "Muh states rights" that the left thinks is racist when it suits them. Look if you guys want to tear down monuments of Democrats, go ahead but stop rewriting history.

Bullshit.

The South didn't give a flying fuck about state's rights when they rammed their repulsive "peculiar institution" down the throats of the free states with the Fugitive Slave Act.
 
It wasn't just about slavery, it was about the 10th amendment...you know "Muh states rights" that the left thinks is racist when it suits them. Look if you guys want to tear down monuments of Democrats, go ahead but stop rewriting history.
<18><18><18><18><18>
 
Back
Top