What was the civil war fought over?

What was the civil war fought over?

  • Total voters
    0
#1
golfballs

golfballs

Mostly Peaceful Poster
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
75,414
Likes
57,668
#1
States rights or Slavery? If you think it was states rights, but the right as issue was slavery, then obviously you vote for the latter.
 
#5
#5
Trick poll..
It was fought over state rights basically concerning slavery.
 
#6
#6
This following is definitive. This is the stated reason given by Congress for initiating the War of Northern Agression: On July 22, 1861, the US Congress issued a "Joint Resolution on the War" :

Resolved: . . . That this war is not being prosecuted upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those states, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and all laws made in pursuance thereof and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality and rights of the several states unimpaired; and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease.

Remember, the South had no reasons to fight the war. The South did not want the war. The South just wanted to be left alone. The war was fought because the North chose to invade.


In an August 22, 1862 letter to New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley Lincoln said:

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it 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 some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union.

Lincoln said in a letter to Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase:

"The original proclamation has no...legal justification, except as a military measure."

Secretary of State William Seward said,

"We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free. "

Lincoln is not the good guy he is made out to be. Abraham Lincoln, Debate with Stephen Douglas, Sept. 18, 1858, in Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings, 1832-1858 (New York: Library of America, 1989), pp. 636-637.

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.
 
#9
#9
The Civil War was fought over slavery. The North was pissed that the slaves did not want to be yankees.
 
#10
#10
As one who is in the field of historical study, I can affirm that the Civil Was was definitely initiated over slavery. I could write a 30 page treatise explaining why and I probably should confess that I'm originally from Wisconsin with ancestors who fought for the Union. However, the concept that "states rights" was the overriding theme of the Civil War is a false notion put forth by Lost Cause romanticists, the fraudulent Dunning School theories of the early 20th century and former Confederate politicians in full C.Y.A. mode.

Some false flags have been thrown about, including the oft cited quotes from above by Lincoln (who was definitely opposed to slavery). Those quotes reflect an astute politician in Lincoln who realized that the priority was to preserve the union and keep the border states in the fold. Lincoln has numerous correspondences regarding his true feelings on slavery, but was also a masterful politician that knew ending slavery wasn't possible in the initial stages of the war.

That said, the reason there was a Civil War was due to the South seceding, so, if you want to know the true reasoning for the war, look to their justifications. You'll find a clear intention of leaving the USA in order to preserve slavery right in the declarations of secession and in the exact words of people such as Vice President Alexander Stephens, who point blank said the Confederacy was created for this reason.

Another oft cited argument pertains to the average Southern soldier not caring one bit about slavery because he was just a poor soldier fighting the invaders, which is false as well. The planter class had done an excellent job of filling the poorer class of whites in the South with the fear that emancipation would threaten their economic existence through a flood of cheap labor. This fear of lower class whites was frequently evident following the Civil War and through the Civil Rights Movement.

It's amazing the amount of falsehoods that are easily accepted in the South regarding this era, although I know there is a natural inclination to want to look positively on our own ancestors' past. Hell, there are still Deep South professors that promote the Lost Cause, War of Northern Agression nonsense. As an American, I can attest to the embarrassment of something like the treatment of the Native Americans. Yet, it still undeniably happened and should be acknowledged without the usual "Gone with the Wind"-type propaganda.

I should also say the North wasn't nearly as clean as their conscience tries to tell them. You could start with the New York Draft Riots, but that's a whole different diatribe.
 
Last edited:
#11
#11
Both North and South used State's Rights and federal power as support for their position. The South used the SCOTUS' Dred Scott ruling as a support for slavery. The North tried to use state law to avoid the fugitive slave laws. It goes on and on. Things haven't changed much. The modern State's Rights party wants states to have more power except for several suggested amendments to the Constitution to eliminate things such as abortion and definition of marriage. The modern party of federal authority wants to use State's Rights to achieve medical marijuana and in some cases the right to die.

Then and now, politicians will use State's Rights and federal power as they see fit to achieve their agenda.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#12
#12
Unimane said:
As one who is in the field of historical study, I can affirm that the Civil Was was definitely initiated over slavery. I could write a 30 page treatise explaining why and I probably should confess that I'm originally from Wisconsin with ancestors who fought for the Union. However, the concept that "states rights" was the overriding theme of the Civil War is a false notion put forth by Lost Cause romanticists, the fraudulent Dunning School theories of the early 20th century and former Confederate politicians in full C.Y.A. mode.

Some false flags have been thrown about, including the oft cited quotes from above by Lincoln (who was definitely opposed to slavery). Those quotes reflect an astute politician in Lincoln who realized that the priority was to preserve the union and keep the border states in the fold. Lincoln has numerous correspondences regarding his true feelings on slavery, but was also a masterful politician that knew ending slavery wasn't possible in the initial stages of the war.

That said, the reason there was a Civil War was due to the South seceding, so, if you want to know the true reasoning for the war, look to their justifications. You'll find a clear intention of leaving the USA in order to preserve slavery right in the declarations of secession and in the exact words of people such as Vice President Alexander Stephens, who point blank said the Confederacy was created for this reason.

Another oft cited argument pertains to the average Southern soldier not caring one bit about slavery because he was just a poor soldier fighting the invaders, which is false as well. The planter class had done an excellent job of filling the poorer class of whites in the South with the fear that emancipation would threaten their economic existence through a flood of cheap labor. This fear of lower class whites was frequently evident following the Civil War and through the Civil Rights Movement.

It's amazing the amount of falsehoods that are easily accepted in the South regarding this era, although I know there is a natural inclination to want to look positively on our own ancestors' past. Hell, there are still Deep South professors that promote the Lost Cause, War of Northern Agression nonsense. As an American, I can attest to the embarrassment of something like the treatment of the Native Americans. Yet, it still undeniably happened and should be acknowledged without the usual "Gone with the Wind"-type propaganda.

I should also say the North wasn't nearly as clean as their conscience tries to tell them. You could start with the New York Draft Riots, but that's a whole different diatribe.
Click to expand...

What are your credentials? Just curious. The way that is worded it seems you are either humbly disguising a Phd, or you worked at Colonial Williamsburg for a summer and are attempting to soup up the resume.
 
#13
#13
Bottom line, without the fugitive slave laws, slavery never becomes a very divisive issue. Slavery was institutionalized at the Federal level. Slavery would have been unsustainable once individual states started banning slavery.
 
#14
#14
nbakerld said:
What are your credentials? Just curious. The way that is worded it seems you are either humbly disguising a Phd, or you worked at Colonial Williamsburg for a summer and are attempting to soup up the resume.
Click to expand...

Just got a bunch of weird looks because I laughed pretty hard at that last line.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#15
#15
It is a flawed poll.....the war was fought over states rights the issue was the expansion of slavery west
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#16
#16
nbakerld said:
Bottom line, without the fugitive slave laws, slavery never becomes a very divisive issue. Slavery was institutionalized at the Federal level. Slavery would have been unsustainable once individual states started banning slavery.
Click to expand...

really now, I guess that whole 50 year battle in congress was overrated
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#21
#21
Some of you claiming that slavery was the sole reason for secession may want to reread the chapter on Jackson's presidency and the Nullification Crisis.
 
#25
#25
Land.... It was fought over land people. We were expanding west and the south wanted their share but legislators from the north weren't having it.

The southern states wanted to keep slavery in the new "southern west"
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top