The Civil War

Remove all ads!

A lot of people, including history teachers and history books, make the claim that the Civil War was caused directly because of slavery. They are wrong. The Civil War was actually over state's rights. Contrary to what a lot of people believe, many northerners owned slaves and wanted to continue to use slaves.
The southern states wanted to make their own decisions on slavery. When they decided to succeed from the Union, that is when Lincoln began sending troups in. To stop the southern states from making their own decisions.

 

It was about the model of state, whether US should be a confederation as initially were or a federation as they are now. The other reason was economy. Simple conflict of interest. As for slavery, workers in Northern factories weren't treated better than slaves except that they had legal protection and couldn't be punished carnally.

 

Finally, people that know the truth of the afair! Slavery didn't even become an issue until 1863 and when it did become a part men in the north were *not* was willing to enlist to fight.

 

True enough but I beleive economics played a factor their as well.The North at the time was far more industrialized and better prepared to survive without slaves.Where the South depended on this cheap labor(how appalling I am calling this evil institution cheap labor)to make the farms mor profitable.

 

It's not quite so cut and dry that slavery was not perhaps the KEY issue. Note I didn't say the driving or original issue. A number of historians have talked about how the other issues were held more important early in the war but they could all be negotiated and indeed were a few different times. However, while it wasn't the biggest issue to some, slavery was the one issue that could not be negotiated. It was in essence a small wedge but it was that wedge which produced the split. I'd say it's highly debatable the extent to which slavery was a driving force in the war and to dismiss it is a gross oversimplification. I'll try to dig through some of my old books in storage to find some of the relevant authors to cite (I'm actually from Alaska but did my undergrad in the state of Alabama. I was surprised to hear people talk so much about the war there still and so ended up getting ahold of 8 or 10 books to read on the subject. Different authors, all respected, have different views.)

 

Holy crap.

Maybe it's because I'm a yankee, maybe it's because I'm a New Yorker, maybe it's because I'm a liberal, maybe it's because I don't venture much into the Deep South, but I never thought I'd see a contemporary of mine write something like that [the topic post.] Honestly, I mean HONESTLY, do you believe what you wrote?!

The South's reliance on slavery grew manifold after Eli Whitney's invention of the cotton gin. The cotton gin allowed for the processing of cotton at a much faster rate. The only thing slowing down the intake of money was the labor aspect. Slavery became so profitable that nearly all southern industries except for agriculture slowed to a standstill. Once friction in Kansas and the border states warmed up, combined with the moral outrage of the North over slavery, slavery was pushed to the forefront as the most important issue of the time. Yes, states' rights were also an issue. But states' rights could have been negotiated. When the South SECEDED [not suceeded], it was because of slavery. Hence the Civil War.

P.S. The North won! Suckers.

 

Yes, I believe what I wrote there. I might exactly the same way ask you whether you actually believe what you wrote, but that would be pointless. If the rights of black people were so important I believe the matter would be solved accordingly after the war. During WWII Europeans, Brits included, were very surprised to see separate toilets (in field circumstances!) for black and white soldiers. Only late in WWII the first black officer in US army was nominated. Black people also have been voting only since 1964 as after the Civil War etc various states developed censuses of reading/writing, domicile, fees for voting, knowing the Constitution etc. As a result ex. in 20th century Luisiana, where the division was fifty fifty, 90% white citizens were voting and 1-2% blacks only. Democracy in US started in 1964 this way, however even nowadays you could find signs like 'no negroes allowed' at a city's entrance. So hail our teachers and guides in democracy!

Another thing is that CS were going to deal with slavery on their own. General Lee was against slavery himself, but decided that on the whole he's for the South. What Yankees were aiming for was de facto supremacy, enforcing their own industry over exporting raw materials to Europe, changing the model of state from initial confederation into present federation as well as the most traditional conflict between agriculture and industry that descends from ancient the ancient struggle between farmers and herdsmen.

 

*ahem*
It was not a confederation after the Articles of Confederation were replaced with the Constitution. The federal government was most definitely superior to the states BEFORE the Civil War.

I do hope you mean that back in 1964 you could find those signs. NOWADAYS, however...well, if you meant there is still segregation in the US of A, I pity you. More specifically, I pity the state of your nation's educational system--and coming from an American, that says a lot