quote:Of course economics was the reason. You think if Southern Planters had gained access to Automated Cotton Picker/Module Makers that could bring their harvest to market at half the cost, they'd have given a rat's arse about holding slaves?
Economic interests was a supporting factor that made up the actual reasons. . .but it wasn't the reason.
Cotton, and rice, and indigo
While the pace of industrialization picked up in the North in the 1850s, the agricultural economy of the slave South grew, if anything, more entrenched. In the decade before the Civil War cotton prices rose more than 50 percent, to 11.5 cents a pound. Booming cotton prices stimulated new western cultivation and actually checked modest initiatives in economic diversification of the previous decade. The U.S. cotton crop nearly doubled, from 2.1 million bales in 1850 to 3.8 million bales ten years later. Not surprisingly, given these figures, the southern economy remained overwhelmingly agricultural. Southern capitalists sank money into cotton rather than factories or land. More precisely, they invested in slaves; the average slave owner held almost two-thirds of his wealth in slaves in 1860, much less than he held in land. Economic historians have concluded that returns on capital in antebellum Southern manufacturing were reasonable and sometimes lucrative, but they simply failed to attract investors in any numbers. By 1860, while northeastern states such as Massachusetts and Pennsylvania had nearly $100 million each invested in manufacturing enterprises, even Virginia, the most industrialized of the Southern states, had invested less than $20 million, and the figure dropped below $5 million elsewhere in the South. A comparison of the value of goods manufactured in each region is similarly lopsided: more than $150 million each for Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, less than $30 million for Virginia, and less than $5 million for Alabama.
quote:Economics was the largest apologetic for slavery, to be sure. But it wasn't the only one.
You think if Southern Planters had gained access to Automated Cotton Picker/Module Makers that could bring their harvest to market at half the cost, they'd have given a rat's arse about holding slaves?
So the North fired on Fort Sumter?
On December 26, 1860, six days after South Carolina declared its secession, U.S. Army Major Robert Anderson abandoned the indefensible Fort Moultrie and secretly relocated the 1st U.S. Artillery to Fort Sumter without orders from Washington. Over the next few months repeated calls for evacuation of Fort Sumter from the government of South Carolina and then from Confederate Brigadier General P. G. T. Beauregard were ignored. Union attempts to resupply and reinforce the garrison were repulsed on January 9, 1861. The Military College of South Carolina prevented a hired steamer from transporting troops and supplies to Fort Sumter. President Lincoln ordered a fleet of ships, under the command of Gustavus V. Fox, to attempt entry into Charleston Harbor and supply Fort Sumter.
Sounds more like an invasion to me, n'est pas?
quote:How many times must I do this. . .?
Please do elaborate.
quote:I have no idea WTF you think you're saying, but if your past-tense reference to "apologetics" targets contemporary antebellum perceptions, I'd enjoy your elaboration on each or any aspect.
There were several apologetics for slavery and the subjugation of black African.
quote:Well hot shot, you lay it out and I'll try to keep up
I assume you capable of understanding at least some of them
Bull ficking shite.
The US was founded on the right to take leave from their governing authority. Funny how the north turned into King George all of a sudden, and diametrically opposed to its founding principles
I'm pretty sure all these events ocurred AFTER So Carolina left the Union.
Sounds more like an invasion to me, n'est pas?
quote:You disagree that tariffs and states rights were each contributory in part to decisions to go to war?
You disagree that tariffs and states rights were each contributory in part to decisions to go to war? Really? Perhaps you didn't read the response as carefully as you thought.
He was laughing at how far you'll go out of your way for refusing to concede slavery was THE reason the south fought. That's what apologists for the Confederacy do.
Therefore, to the Union, they were well within their rights to resupply their base.
Most slave owners were white. There were very few black slave owners. Don't try to justify slavery with this bs. Slavery was wrong and demeaning to a race of people. Lincoln knew slavery was wrong and he did the right thing. Slavery was not ending and would be around today if white people thought it was still good for America. Slavery had to be enforced just like integration.
Sheer political brilliance from Lincoln. Knowingly defying Beauregard's ultimatum and initiating a conflict while simultaneously casting your opponent as the aggressor.