FACT: The Civil War WAS @ Slavery and the Confederacy Was EVIL

[KILL KILL]

Anytime I meet someone who has a Rebel Flag or says shit like "the south will rise again" I automatically assume they are inbred and racist as hell.

They're usually not very bright. I'm actually heading down to Alabama tomorrow for a trip I take with some friends every year. We always run into "the South will rise again" folks.

They're sorely uneducated.

 

[Captain Davis]

"If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time save Slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy Slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that."- Abraham Lincoln

@luckyshot do you still think the northerners only wanted to fight because they wanted to free slaves?

If the south only seceded over slavery, why would they have seceded if Lincoln said he would've conceded on slavery to save the union....

Because it is a lie. If it was over slavery, the south would have agreed to the Corwin Agreement, but they didn't.

 

[Captain Davis]

They're usually not very bright. I'm actually heading down to Alabama tomorrow for a trip I take with some friends every year. We always run into "the South will rise again" folks.

They're sorely uneducated.

Stop by in Montgomery and say hello bud.

 

[KILL KILL]

Stop by in Montgomery and say hello bud.

Headed to Talladega. I hate NASCAR, but the days leading up to the race are the biggest party I've ever been to. Love that Southern hospitality.

 

[Captain Davis]

For everyone in here who believes that the civil war was fought to free the slaves or was fought because the north believed that slavery was morally wrong, post your proof.

I'll be waiting.

 

[Captain Davis]

Headed to Talladega. I hate NASCAR, but the days leading up to the race are the biggest party I've ever been to. Love that Southern hospitality.

I hate NASCAR too. Never been to a race at Talladega.

Talladega is an utterly shitty town.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

it is highly disengenous to suggest it was merely over states rights, unless of course by states rights you mean 'right to have slaves'....

If that weren't the case, South Carolina wouldn't have attempted to secede under Calhoun prior, and the entire fugitive slave law and Bloody Kansas events wouldn't have occurred. The Missouri Compromise wouldn't have been an issue 40 years prior, etc....They fought for the 3/5 compromise for a reason as well

Let's not get too crazy

edit: clearly there were other factors, i.e. the north was reaping mad profits off the textitles produced from southern cotton, the balance of power i.e. free/slave states in Congress, etc.....but at the very center of all of those: slaves

At the same pt, that isn't reflective of say the average southerner then, whom statistically did not own any slaves and I'm not sure we can state w/ certainty were even FOR it as an institution. Think about it, if you're an unskilled southern laborer, the more slaves there are the less chance you'll have to make a living

 

[luckyshot]

"If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time save Slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy Slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that."- Abraham Lincoln

@luckyshot do you still think the northerners only wanted to fight because they wanted to free slaves?

If the south only seceded over slavery, why would they have seceded if Lincoln said he would've conceded on slavery to save the union....

Those remarks from Lincoln are addressing his ideals. Hypothetically, he was placing the cause of union paramount and saying he wished it could be separated from slavery. However, he knew this could not be so in reality:

'"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new -- North as well as South."
http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/house.htm

The reason Lincoln knew this was the reality was because slavery WAS the number one issue that the majority of the people on both sides of the conflict cared about.

 

[Captain Davis]

Those remarks from Lincoln are addressing his ideals. Hypothetically, he was placing the cause of union paramount and saying he wished it could be separated from slavery. However, he knew this could not be so in reality:

'"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new -- North as well as South."
http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/house.htm

The reason Lincoln knew this was the reality was because slavery WAS the number one issue people cared about on both sides of the conflict.

I can post many of his other quotes that give his true feelings on the African race, but I'm going to save it for my debate.

Again show me proof that the war was over freeing the slaves or that it was over humanitarian reasons.

 

[Captain Davis]

it is highly disengenous to suggest it was merely over states rights, unless of course by states rights you mean 'right to have slaves'....

If that weren't the case, South Carolina wouldn't have attempted to secede under Calhoun prior, and the entire fugitive slave law and Bloody Kansas events wouldn't have occurred. The Missouri Compromise wouldn't have been an issue 40 years prior, etc....They fought for the 3/5 compromise for a reason as well

Let's not get too crazy

edit: clearly there were other factors, i.e. the north was reaping mad profits off the textitles produced from southern cotton, the balance of power i.e. free/slave states in Congress, etc.....but at the very center of all of those: slaves

At the same pt, that isn't reflective of say the average southerner then, whom statistically did not own any slaves and I'm not sure we can state w/ certainty were even FOR it as an institution. Think about it, if you're an unskilled southern laborer, the more slaves there are the less chance you'll have to make a living

It had everything to do with slavery, but nothing to do with slavery from a human suffrage standpoint.

It was totally about money and the westward expansion of commerce.

 

[Captain Davis]

Waiting...

 

[HunterSdVa29]

It had everything to do with slavery, but nothing to do with slavery from a human suffrage standpoint.

It was totally about money and the westward expansion of commerce.

those are completely fair pts, the problem is IMO the average person I've met that say supports the ol stars and bars isn't able to articulate what you just did

which leads others, i.e. non southerners, to assume the worst. I used to myself, until I moved to VA and saw firsthand that at least nowadays it really does have some Southern Pride attached to it that is hard to understand if you're not raised in that environment

 

[luckyshot]

Waiting...

Issues included States Rights and disagreements over tariffs but the greatest divide was on the issue of slavery, which was legal in the South but had gradually been banned by states north of the Mason-Dixon line. As the US acquired new territories in the west, bitter debates erupted over whether or not slavery would be permitted in those territories. Southerners feared it was only a matter of time before the addition of new non-slaveholding states but no new slaveholding states would give control of the government to abolitionists, and the institution of slavery would be outlawed completely.

http://www.historynet.com/secession

The proximate cause of the South's secession was the election of Abraham Lincoln with a Republican majority in 1860. However, in and of itself, secession was a major overreaction to this political setback.

Lincoln's election fed the perception that Southern interests were losing control of the federal government, and that this government would eventually suppress the institution of slavery or outlaw it altogether.

https://www.americanhistoryusa.com/great-mistake-why-did-south-secede-1860/

The South was committed to an agrarian way of life. It was a land where profitable and efficient plantations worked by slave labor produced cotton for the world market. It was also a land where a majority of its white population was made up of subsistence farmers who lived isolated lives on the edge of poverty and whose literacy rates were low compared with those in the more densely populated North.

The South nevertheless was beginning to industrialize, a factor that added to the social tensions surfacing during the 1850s between the haves–plantation owners and professional groups in the few urban centers–and the have-nots–an increasingly restive yeoman or small-farmer group. But the issue of black servitude provided cohesion for the white bloc and contributed greatly to a patriarchal system wherein the masses of the whites still looked to a planter-professional elite for political and social guidance.

http://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/secession

Congress tried end secession with the Cowin Amendent (which Lincoln supported). It was 100% about slavery... (eh, I mean "labor regulations" *cough* *cough*)

On March 2, 1861, two days before Lincoln's inauguration, the 36th Congress passed the Corwin Amendment and submitted it to the states for ratification as an amendment to the Constitution. Senator William H. Seward of New York introduced the amendment in the Senate and Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio introduced it in the House of Representatives. The text of the proposed amendment is as follows:

"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."

Note that, much like the rest of the language in the Constitution prior to the Civil War, the proposed amendment never uses the word "slavery," instead employing the euphemisms "domestic institutions" and "persons held to labor or service." The proposed amendment was designed to reassure the seceding slave states that the federal government would not interfere with their "peculiar institution."

If it had passed, it would have rendered unconstitutional any subsequent amendments restricting slavery, such as the 13th Amendment, which outlawed slavery throughout the nation. The Corwin Amendment passed the state legislatures in Ohio, Kentucky, Rhode Island and Maryland. Even Lincoln's own state of Illinois passed it, though the lawmakers who voted for it in Illinois were not actually the elected legislators but were delegates to a state constitutional convention.

The amendment failed to get the required approval of 3/4 of all state legislatures for a Constitutional Amendment,

http://www.ushistory.org/us/32e.asp

 

[Captain Davis]

those are completely fair pts, the problem is IMO the average person I've met that say supports the ol stars and bars isn't able to articulate what you just did

which leads others, i.e. non southerners, to assume the worst. I used to myself, until I moved to VA and saw firsthand that at least nowadays it really does have some Southern Pride attached to it that is hard to understand if you're not raised in that environment

But the infuriating thing is that non southerners get on their moral high horse, not knowing that northerners didn't care one bit about the slaves as humans.

They didn't want them there either. The northern economy just didn't need them like the south did.

Just read about the New York riots of 1863 and about how the northern people were not happy after 1863, because their men were supposedly dying over slaves.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

But the infuriating thing is that non southerners get on their moral high horse, not knowing that northerners didn't care one bit about the slaves as humans.

They didn't want them there either. The northern economy just didn't need them like the south did.

Just read about the New York riots of 1863 and about how the northern people were not happy after 1863, because their men were supposedly dying over slaves.

I think people forget it was the 1700/1800s....

like when they bring up shit against Andrew Jackson, well ya. Life was much different back then, particularly when it comes to 'social justice' and equal rights. The context of the times has to be taken into account when analyzing these situations, not using modern rose tinted lens

 

[Captain Davis]

http://www.historynet.com/secession

Congress tried to pass the Cowin Amendent (which Lincoln supported) which probably would have stopped seccession. It was 100% about slavery... (eh, I mean "labor regulations" *cough* *cough*)

http://www.ushistory.org/us/32e.asp

None of that says anything about the war being over freeing slaves because slavery was in humane.

 

[Captain Davis]

I think people forget it was the 1700/1800s....

like when they bring up shit against Andrew Jackson, well ya. Life was much different back then, particularly when it comes to 'social justice' and equal rights. The context of the times has to be taken into account when analyzing these situations, not using modern rose tinted lens

Exactly. Was slavery wrong? Of course, but it happened and the war was never intended to free slaves because it was morally wrong.

 

[luckyshot]

None of that says anything about the war being over freeing slaves because slavery was in humane.

What economic benefits did the North reap from the freeing of the slaves?

 

[Rational Poster]

For everyone in here who believes that the civil war was fought to free the slaves or was fought because the north believed that slavery was morally wrong, post your proof.

I'll be waiting.

I don't think anyone is arguing either of those points.

The South fighting to keep slaves doesn't mean the North was fighting to free them.

The South absolutely seceded to keep their slaves and the Union absolutely invaded the South to preserve the Union, but not to free the slaves.

Lincoln freed the slaves to further impede the Confederate war effort after they had gained the edge in the conflict and the Union had adopted a more scorched earth doctrine.

 

[Limbo Pete]

I'm hesitant to jump in here because I want to save up as much discussion as possible for the upcoming debate.
Tempting.