re: Haley declines to say slavery was cause of Civil War

quote:

---

huge factor, not the sole cause

---

Everything about the U.S. civil war always stems back to slavery.

I’ve tried this for years to point out a way for to say it wasn’t about slavery but it was. If you read the CSA government’s documents it’s clear as day.

quote:

---

Free States were more than able to present a bill to Congress to abolish slavery. We had unconstitutional banks and unconstitutional tariffs, so why not just make a law banning it?

---

Probably trying to avoid a war. There was no compromise. Slave states wanted to preserve and extend slavery and it was non-negotiable.

quote:

---

States rights to secede from what was perceived an irreconcilably unbeneficial union.

---

Because they wanted to keep slaves

Slavery was very obviously not the cause of the Civil War.

quote:

---

eta: to understand the nuances of the War for Southern Independence, you must understand the cultural differences between the North and the South and how it has been there since before the American War for Independence.

---

I do.

And every point you make still points back to slavery being the point of contention.

Once again I’m not demonizing the south and praising the north. It just is what it is.

ETA: a lot of people sound like RINOs in the truest sense in this thread.

quote:

---

Because they wanted to keep slaves

---

Was that Constitutional IAW with documents constructing the union?

Why was the question even at issue?

Good for her

quote:

---

You act as if every person in every slave state wanted slavery to continue. You are so wrong.

---

I’ve never “acted” that way or said that. You’re perceiving this as an attack on your cultural heritage but that’s not what I’m doing.

quote:

---

What’s funny about Louisiana is it was New Orleans that rejected the union.

---

Okay, and? All of that is a side issue and not an argument against the statement that slavery was the root cause of the U.S. civil war

Seriously, how can anyone not know the Civil War was over Slavery.

The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists who opposed the Kansas–Nebraska Act, which allowed for the potential expansion of chattel slavery into the western territories of Kansas and Nebraska.

quote:

---

And every point you make still points back to slavery being the point of contention.

---

So when the North wanted to secede after the Louisiana purchase because all of these States were going to be new agrarian minded people, not mercantile people like the North, they convened and it was scuttled.

Or like when the North was severely hampered by the naval blockades prohibiting trading with the British during the war of 1812 and they convened at the Hartford convention to present the prospect of secession.

Both of those were over slavery? Or MONEY?

The nullification of 1830 and the Tariff of Abominations was over slavery?

The South's cotton and sugar exportation was larger than the North's entire GDP. The South was where the money was and not just for plantation owners.

But you're telling me if the North would have treated the South like Spain or France and recognized them as an independent nation, we still would have had a war over slavery?

If that's the case, why haven't we waged war against every nation on Earth that recognizes the institution of slavery in the name of freeing all slaves?