Started By
Message

re: Civil War... States Rights or Slavery

Posted on 8/31/22 at 1:39 pm to
Posted by nwacajun
St louis
Member since Dec 2008
1537 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 1:39 pm to
Same issue
Posted by Yaz 8
Member since Jun 2020
1146 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 1:47 pm to
The question really is should a sovereign state that voluntarily joined a union of such states be allowed to leave said union when it no longer represented its interest .The reasons for the war are really not important, it could have been about anything. That the states were forced back at gunpoint is a travesty and goes against the intent of the very founding of the union.
Posted by AlxTgr
Kyre Banorg
Member since Oct 2003
81955 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 1:50 pm to
quote:

The question really is should a sovereign state that voluntarily joined a union of such states be allowed to leave said union when it no longer represented its interest .The reasons for the war are really not important, it could have been about anything. That the states were forced back at gunpoint is a travesty and goes against the intent of the very founding of the union.


Posted by notsince98
KC, MO
Member since Oct 2012
18157 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 1:57 pm to
Why not just read Lincoln's personal letters from the time? Makes it very clear.
Posted by notsince98
KC, MO
Member since Oct 2012
18157 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 1:59 pm to
quote:

The question really is should a sovereign state that voluntarily joined a union of such states be allowed to leave said union when it no longer represented its interest .The reasons for the war are really not important, it could have been about anything. That the states were forced back at gunpoint is a travesty and goes against the intent of the very founding of the union.


Not only that but if the Union's stance was that the southerners had no right to secede and had to be part of the USA, then they are admitting they murdered American citizens and you wont find anything in the constitution to support those actions on american soil.
Posted by UFMatt
In Traitor Joe Biden's US
Member since Oct 2010
11585 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 2:06 pm to
Both
Posted by BFIV
Virginia
Member since Apr 2012
7799 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 2:14 pm to
Lincoln wanted to send all blacks to Liberia. This is well documented. Lincoln also had this to say in one of his debates with Douglas in 1858: During his famous debates with Sen. Stephen Douglas, Lincoln explained to the crowd: “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 … 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 from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a 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.”

Lincoln is not one of my heroes. He was a racist and a tyrant who trampled upon the Constitution with impunity during his term. Historians tend to overlook this aspect of "Honest Abe".
Posted by Havoc
Member since Nov 2015
29035 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 2:30 pm to
If it was just slavery then why did slavery continue in the North?
Posted by Havoc
Member since Nov 2015
29035 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 2:35 pm to
An interesting footnote is that freed slaves created their own nation in Africa, and soon thereafter enslaved the local population. Mmm slavery bad white ppl.
Posted by Havoc
Member since Nov 2015
29035 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 2:41 pm to
quote:

The question really is should a sovereign state that voluntarily joined a union of such states be allowed to leave said union when it no longer represented its interest .The reasons for the war are really not important, it could have been about anything. That the states were forced back at gunpoint is a travesty and goes against the intent of the very founding of the union.

Like being in the Mafia.
Posted by RCDfan1950
United States
Member since Feb 2007
35171 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 2:49 pm to
We’ll, if the Left wins the coming war I guess that they will hire a Sculptor to change Lincoln into the Obama Monument. How could they per this? I think the whole of Humanity is about to learn a lesson about holding on to the past for pay back. Either Merit is a valid measure of Worldly and Spiritual affluence or it is unjust. Mother Nature and Religion affirms Merit, it for the Mercy of Jesus. What a show!
Posted by dafif
Member since Jan 2019
5700 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:12 pm to
quote:

Bull shite. It was about slavery, and then what could be used to support that.


You are legit retarded and have a lack of cognitive thinking skills

Wow
This post was edited on 8/31/22 at 3:14 pm
Posted by AUauditor
Georgia
Member since Sep 2004
1115 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:19 pm to

Slavery to support economics related to
- landowners knowing that they would lose significant land value with ability to produce crops on a large scale and

- non-slaveowners knowing that freeing slaves for unskilled (and some skilled jobs). significantly increases competition for jobs, resulting in less opportunity and reduced wages (see today's illigal immigration crisis).

States Rights was predominately about deciding the above.
Posted by AUauditor
Georgia
Member since Sep 2004
1115 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:23 pm to
Thanks - added to my book list.
Posted by AUauditor
Georgia
Member since Sep 2004
1115 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:26 pm to
quote:

Most of my Confederate kin wanted to be left the frick alone. They didn't join the fighting until the damn yankees started sniffing around Louisiana.


Same in the hills of north Georgia...my great grandfather and two brothers joined in the last year of the war as the Yankees approached. They were too poor to go and fight a war; they were trying to grow crops amongst rocks.
Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
67778 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:28 pm to
States rights to allow slavery.

Posted by Pandy Fackler
Member since Jun 2018
14729 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:29 pm to
quote:

Brazil says you are full of shite. Check out their history with the institution.


Fine, Brazil says I'm full of shite.

It doesn't change the fact however that the Confederacy wanted so badly to hold onto slavery that they were willing to secede and go to to war over it.

With this in mind, it's conceivable that without war, the south would've maintained their breeding stocks and held onto slavery as a means of labor for at least 40 more years or longer.
Posted by AUauditor
Georgia
Member since Sep 2004
1115 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:32 pm to
quote:

The war itself happened due to the disagreement over fort Sumter and whether or not it was “union” or “confederate”.


If it were not for Sumpter, it would have happened elsewhere. Lincoln just needed a cause to get the North to rally on, because fighting to free slaves was not going to result in many joining the army.

The South wanted to be left alone; however, both the rich (protect land values and livlihood) and poor (avoid more competition for unskilled work, depressing wages more) had economic reasons to protect Slavery as an institution and that along with much better officers led to South dominating at the beginning of the war.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
263309 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:33 pm to
Both
Posted by ThatTahoeOverThere
Member since Nov 2021
3689 posts
Posted on 8/31/22 at 3:35 pm to
Neither.

Money
first pageprev pagePage 7 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram