Started By
Message

re: Here’s my problem with the idea of the civil war was fought over slavery

Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:25 pm to
Posted by Bow dude72
Member since Mar 2017
2717 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:25 pm to
I agree with this the war was fought over taxation abolishing slavery was thrown into the war.
Posted by Jack Daniel
Gold member
Member since Feb 2013
29361 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:27 pm to
Huh?
Posted by Asharad
Tiamat
Member since Dec 2010
6344 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:28 pm to
quote:

Those numbers are impossible. The country had about 38 million people at the time, most in the north. Of that population about 3 million were black, it’s impossible that 33% of 35 million people (11.5 million) could own 3 million people much less once you split the north and south populations. I agree with most of your post but that number isn’t right.
Slaves outnumbered free men in South Carolina. 1861 census

ETA: and Mississippi.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 8:34 pm
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70791 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:28 pm to
Even still that many people can’t each own a slave and when you factor in plantations that number shrinks even more. It’s just not possible.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70791 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:30 pm to
This isn’t hard 33% of 38 million people can’t each own, and I’m taking a liberals estimate here, 3.9 to 4.6 million people. And again factor in plantations that owned hundreds in some cases and you’ll see almost nobody owned them. Maybe a handful of families per area if that.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 8:33 pm
Posted by Asharad
Tiamat
Member since Dec 2010
6344 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:32 pm to
quote:

Here’s my problem with the idea of the civil war was fought over slavery
From the Alabama Ordinance of Secession, January 1861:

" it is the desire and purpose of the people of Alabama to meet the slaveholding States of the South, who may approve such purpose, in order to frame a provisional as well as permanent Government upon the principles of the Constitution of the United States"
Posted by PetroBabich
Donetsk Oblast
Member since Apr 2017
5140 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:33 pm to
It wouldn't be the first or last time in history the rich duped the poor into fighting for their cause.
Posted by Ham And Glass
Member since Nov 2016
1717 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:33 pm to
I believe that every single state featured it in their speeches of secession
Posted by Mithridates6
Member since Oct 2019
8220 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:33 pm to
Case study: Winston County, Alabama was populated mostly by poor whites who owned few, if any slaves. They did not vote for secession (poor whites had no say in the matter really). When the slave oligarchs who ran the Confederacy tried to conscript them, they joined the Union army and fought for the stars and stripes in the 1st Alabama Cavalry. It is now the most pro-Trump county in the country
quote:

“All they want is to git you to go fight for their infernal negroes,” said one poor farmer during the war, of the slaveholding class, “and after you do their fightin’ you may kiss their hine parts for all they care.”
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 8:34 pm
Posted by Ping Pong
LSU and UVA alum
Member since Aug 2014
6253 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:35 pm to
Its more complicated than most would like to admit. Once Lincoln ordered the union troops to not surrender Fort Sumter, the war began over the southern states’ right to leave the union. However, the reason for war changed after the Battle of Antietam in which the Union claimed victory (it was more of a stalemate, but the Southern troops retreated back to Virginia). After the battle, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed Slaves in Southern States. This was a bold move that carried many risks, but it eventually paid off for him. He planned this executive order early on, but he waited for a victory in a large battle to issue it. Signing the EP was a political move which had the goal of making the war about slavery. He hoped it would prevent foreign countries from recognizing the Confederacy and providing support (Britain and France) as it would be less likely they would support a country that was fighting to keep slavery. Signing the EP also resulted in some Union troops refusing to fight to free enslaved blacks. These were mostly union troops from the Midwest. The Confederacy also used the EP as propaganda in the south to support the war effort, as most southerners were appalled by the idea of freeing the slaves. This was a double edged sword. It was highly effective propaganda but using it made the Confederacy admit the war was now about the issue of slavery.
Posted by AUstar
Member since Dec 2012
19623 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:35 pm to
Dude check the census records. They don't lie. About 1 in 4 white adult males owned at least one slave in the slave holding states.

I've looked at these records while doing genealogy. Turns out my ancestors owned slaves (and they weren't rich, just middle class). I scanned the counties in question and just eyeballing it, 1 in 4 looks right.
Posted by loogaroo
Welsh
Member since Dec 2005
42434 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:36 pm to
quote:

That's false. About 20-25% of white males owned slaves


But what’s getting lost is how they were treated and not all slave owners were racist.
Posted by keks tadpole
Yellow Leaf Creek
Member since Feb 2017
8690 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:36 pm to
We didn't break Germany or Japan into new US States or colonies after we beat them?
Posted by Asharad
Tiamat
Member since Dec 2010
6344 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:39 pm to
What blows my mind is that in some counties, the population was 90% slave.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70791 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:41 pm to
“Slaves outnumbered free men in South Carolina”


And weren’t South Carolina and Mississippi the only southern states where this happened?

Virginia had 1.1 million at the time to 400k slaves for example.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 8:44 pm
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
95668 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:42 pm to
There is a paradox about the period and the conflict. Of course, slavery was the catalyst the drove both sides to war. Only the blind deny it.

On the other hand, only the foolish suggest it was the sole and proximate cause. It was just a proxy for a wide raft of differences between the regions. It is good that slavery ended. It is terrible that so many had to die for it to end.

Americans were and are masters of compromise, but could not reach one on that issue.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 8:44 pm
Posted by Bow08tie
Louisiana
Member since Oct 2011
4563 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:43 pm to
And wealthy Northeners owned slaves as well...you left out that glaring detail
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70791 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:45 pm to
You’re not only ignoring almost all of the data but the presence of plantations as well.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 8:46 pm
Posted by Asharad
Tiamat
Member since Dec 2010
6344 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:48 pm to
quote:

Virginia
The Virginia secession ordinance also pointed to slavery as the key driver.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 8:49 pm
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70791 posts
Posted on 6/16/20 at 8:49 pm to
So moving the goalpost and invert then stats. I see you working.
Jump to page
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 10
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 10Next pagelast page

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

FacebookXInstagram