- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
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 10:15 pm to Jack Daniel
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:15 pm to Jack Daniel
Seems pretty obvious it was about slavery.
.
What other states' rights were they seceding and fighting for?
They most likely got people in the South to go along with it by giving all sorts of slippery slope worst-case scenarios where America was going to take away their freedoms if they couldn't secede. Many people who actually fought the war may not have been fighting for slavery but the war itself was basically for slavery.
.
What other states' rights were they seceding and fighting for?
They most likely got people in the South to go along with it by giving all sorts of slippery slope worst-case scenarios where America was going to take away their freedoms if they couldn't secede. Many people who actually fought the war may not have been fighting for slavery but the war itself was basically for slavery.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 10:19 pm
1
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:17 pm to BeepNode
Simple answer to the OP's question is that non-slaveholding whites were often illiterate, poor and basically disenfranchised. They had no say in secession. I doubt a majority of them would have supported secession if polled.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 10:23 pm
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:18 pm to Jack Daniel
quote:.
In 1892 in the tiny village in Northeast Iowa, John Froelich (1849 -1933) invented the first successful gasoline-powered engine that could be driven backwards and forwards. The word “tractor” wasn't used in those days, but that's what it was. At that time, steam-powered engines were used to thresh wheat
Slavery was doomed to be not economical within five decades of the Civil War.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:22 pm to Jack Daniel
Abraham Lincoln in his own words said it wasn't about slavery.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:23 pm to Mithridates6
quote:
I doubt a majority of them would have supported secession if polled.
Disagree. Back then people thought of themselves as Louisianians, Mississippians, Alabamians, etc, NOT Americans. That changed after the war.
No state would've joined a union in the first place if they knew they wouldn't ever be allowed to leave.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 10:34 pm
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:25 pm to More&Les
So why are so many republicans mad about democrats wanting to take down democratic statues?
Voted for and will be voting MAGA again in 2020. Doesn’t change the fact some of you losers actually give a shite about the democratic slave owner statues.
Voted for and will be voting MAGA again in 2020. Doesn’t change the fact some of you losers actually give a shite about the democratic slave owner statues.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 10:26 pm
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:29 pm to notsince98
quote:
Abraham Lincoln in his own words said it wasn't about slavery.
LOL! Which words were those? Post the quote.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:31 pm to Jack Daniel
Here’s how you explain it.
All the causes of and reasons for the the Civil War fit in a 100 gallon tank. That tank had been filled with various taxation and legislation gallons over the years to the point that it was at 95 gallons. The issue of slavery was the last 10 gallons that made everything spill over and boom Fort Sumter.
All the causes of and reasons for the the Civil War fit in a 100 gallon tank. That tank had been filled with various taxation and legislation gallons over the years to the point that it was at 95 gallons. The issue of slavery was the last 10 gallons that made everything spill over and boom Fort Sumter.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:32 pm to parrothead
quote:
So why are so many republicans mad about democrats wanting to take down democratic statues?
Because the Left wants to erase and then rewrite history.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:34 pm to GeauxTrain
quote:
Because the Left wants to erase and then rewrite history.
Wouldn’t a book be a better source of information instead of a statue memorializing the democratic slave owners? Rewriting history? The losing side, the democratic slave owners, shouldn’t have statues.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 10:35 pm
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:37 pm to GeauxTrain
quote:
No state would've voted to form a union in the first place if they knew they wouldn't ever be allowed to leave.
Your party losing an election (bc you wouldn't make any concessions to northern Democrats and split the vote) isn't a valid reason for secession.
The CSA resorted to conscription first for good reason: non-slaveholding whites did not see good reason to fight for the planters. Regions of the South mostly populated by poor whites like the swamps of the gulf coast, the Ozarks and the Appalachians were full of Unionists who resisted Confederate conscription laws. ~100k whites from slaveholding states fought for the USA, I'm guessing the majority of those weren't slaveowners. Louisiana Jayhawkers LINK
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:51 pm to Jack Daniel
He wouldn’t.
This scene really sums it up except most union soldiers didn’t give a shite about slaves either
LIVe and let live
This scene really sums it up except most union soldiers didn’t give a shite about slaves either
LIVe and let live
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 10:54 pm
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:55 pm to Jack Daniel
The Cornerstone Speech, dude. Read it, study it, believe it. It is all you really need to know about the War between the States.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:56 pm to Jack Daniel
The civil war was fought over westward expansion and slaves made expansion quicker for the south. Freeing slaves was a political move by the north to slow expansion by southern states. Does anyone actually believe that you could have found over 600,000 white men willing to die for blacks in 1861?
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:58 pm to parrothead
When’s the last time you took a history class? For one your lucky if they teach kids about the civil war now. Secondly, if they do slavery is the root cause. Revisionist history has been shoving this narrative for a long time. I did not have a teacher really elaborate on all the causes and ins and outs of the war until a 300 level history class in college.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 10:59 pm to Jack Daniel
Slavery was a baseline part of the south. To attack it was to attack the very firmament of what it was to be southern. Whether you owned a slave or not. And if they were freed, well, you're going to have to compete with those dudes for work and be treated as equals. That was intolerable. It wasn't the only reason, but most roads lead right to it.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 11:01 pm to BamaScoop
100 percent. What’s even more ridiculous. The only slaves freed during the war was right before Lincoln’s second term. And it was only southern slaves. They still had northern slave states after the emancipation proclamation. The Spanish did the same thing in North America many years before. It was always about stopping the rail road through the south.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 11:04 pm
Posted on 6/16/20 at 11:01 pm to tigersownall
quote:
When’s the last time you took a history class? For one your lucky if they teach kids about the civil war now. Secondly, if they do slavery is the root cause.
K-12 history now is essentially:
1. Civil War was fought to free the slaves.
2. George Washington Carver invented peanut butter.
3. WW2 was fought to free the Jews
4. MLK was the greatest human being ever.
5. Obama
Posted on 6/16/20 at 11:03 pm to Jack Daniel
On the macro level the war was definitely fought over slavery.
On the micro level the war was fought by individuals for a wide variety of reasons, mostly state loyalty.
On the micro level the war was fought by individuals for a wide variety of reasons, mostly state loyalty.
Posted on 6/16/20 at 11:14 pm to Mithridates6
quote:
Slavery was bad for the average white person as well. Southern whites did much worse in literacy, nutrition, property, etc. Slavery only benefitted the fat cats who thrust the country into war when Lincoln wouldn't let them spread slavery everywhere
Read what you are saying. Lincoln wouldn’t let the people decide for themselves whether their new state would be a free or slave state. Read up on the Missouri compromise, and then the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
Once Pierce signed “popular sovereignty” into law with the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the north started preparing for war. They could not allow the new states to decide for themselves whether to be free or slave, because it would have destroyed the north’s majorities in Congress.
The south stood around and flapped their gums, while the north prepared for the war they knew was coming. Yes, the Civil War as about slavery, but it was actually about states rights concerning slavery, and the fact that the Yankees just decided to ignore their own Constitution, regarding the powers that the Constitution gives the federal government.
This post was edited on 6/16/20 at 11:15 pm
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News