- 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: Jeff Sessions Is Right About Cause of the Civil War.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:28 am to Chancellor
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:28 am to Chancellor
quote:
The cause of the Civil War
quote:
Cause | Definition of Cause by Merriam-Webster
LINK
Definition of cause for Students. 1 : a person or thing that brings about a result
It's actually simple, SC attacked a federal base; the Fed sent an army to crush SC.
This post was edited on 2/13/18 at 9:30 am
0
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:32 am to culsutiger
quote:
Or was slavery practiced primarily because of the economic benefit?
Economic benefit. Losing what amounts to cheap/free labor has been the impetus of numerous conflicts between the labor class and those who owned the factories during Industrialization in general.
quote:
was morality set aside for economic gain?
I'd say it was this, but it's also the answer that makes the South look terrible.
The way you've laid it out, it seems impossible to separate slavery and economics, and given that the South didn't want to lose a labor force which they could treat without regard for their humanness, it certainly doesn't make them look good, if that is indeed your line of argument.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:32 am to RollTide1987
quote:
The abolishment of slavery was not a war aim of the North in 1861.
Who said anything about a war aim? He said their main goal was to preserve the union. Do you really think they cared more about slaves than preservation of the union. If that's the case they sure as hell fricked up and underestimated the south and it's resolve didn't they? But that's not what happened. They knew exactly what and why they were doing.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:36 am to rooster108bm
quote:
Who said anything about a war aim?
I did.
In the post you responded to, I said that the North's desire to preserve the Union directly led to the confrontation at Fort Sumter in April 1861.
quote:
He said their main goal was to preserve the union.
And it was.
quote:
Do you really think they cared more about slaves than preservation of the union.
No.
quote:
If that's the case they sure as hell fricked up and underestimated the south and it's resolve didn't they?
I think both sides underestimated the resolve of the opposing side.
quote:
But that's not what happened. They knew exactly what and why they were doing.
Um....what?
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:39 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
it certainly doesn't make them look good, if that is indeed your line of argument.
Nothing can make slavery "look good". We can strive for an accurate portrayal though.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:41 am to culsutiger
Again, given how closely slavery and economics were tied, according to your argument, it makes the South look terrible, which is why I revisionists have attempted to make it so those issues were distinct and disparate rather than intertwined. None of this dispels the notion that slavery wasn't a primary cause either.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:42 am to Nado Jenkins83
quote:
The north didnt care about setting blacks free as much as crippling those who opposed the huge taxes on goods manufactured in the north from resources from the south.
It was about two competing economic systems and states rights but underpinning it all was the reliance on slavery to support the South's economy. It was over a couple of issue but slavery being the biggest.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:44 am to AlaTiger
quote:
Jeff Sessions Is Right About Cause of the Civil War.
Too bad he's still confused about which side won.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:45 am to crazy4lsu
OK. Are you expecting me to argue a case I'm not making?
Posted on 2/13/18 at 9:48 am to culsutiger
Of course not, but I was just stating the implications of your argument, what the optics are, and why I think people who defend the South want to avoid the implications of tying slavery and economics so closely together. Mainly because that argument makes the South look terrible, ignoble, and certainly on the wrong side in a moral sense, especially if they could set aside "morality for economic gain."
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:05 am to AlaTiger
Slavery was a deep division creator.
Abortion is too.
Abortion is too.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:06 am to 14&Counting
I wouldnt say "MOST"
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:07 am to AlaTiger
The left still fighting the Civil War 150 years later
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:09 am to AlaTiger
Can't believe it's 2018 and some still say "states rights" was the cause of the war.
Kudos to JS for at least being educated on the matter.
Kudos to JS for at least being educated on the matter.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:10 am to Mud_Till_May
quote:
The NCAA is modern day slavery.
Trolling or dumb?
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:17 am to AlaTiger
quote:
Slavery.
It was the obvious crux of the entire conflict.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:20 am to RollTide1987
quote:
In the post you responded to, I said that the North's desire to preserve the Union directly led to the confrontation at Fort Sumter in April 1861.
Wrong.
quote:
And it was.
No it wasn't. The main goal was to preserve revenue.
quote:
No
See above^^^.
quote:
I think both sides underestimated the resolve of the opposing side.
This we can agree on.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:23 am to TejasHorn
Exactly. He deserves credit here. His ability to understand a historic concept far exceeds the ability of many of the commenters on this board, which this thread demonstrares.
It is astounding, really. But, if Jefferson Davis himself were to come back from the dead and say, “Guys, it really was about defending slavery,” these people would not believe him, wonder who got to him in the afterlife, and would continue to promote their same tired view that secession and the war wasn’t really about slavery at the core.
No, the North did not fight to abolish slavery. But, the South did secede to defend slavery. And the war resulted, especially after Fort Sumter was bombarded.
It is astounding, really. But, if Jefferson Davis himself were to come back from the dead and say, “Guys, it really was about defending slavery,” these people would not believe him, wonder who got to him in the afterlife, and would continue to promote their same tired view that secession and the war wasn’t really about slavery at the core.
No, the North did not fight to abolish slavery. But, the South did secede to defend slavery. And the war resulted, especially after Fort Sumter was bombarded.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:26 am to Nado Jenkins83
quote:
I wouldnt say "MOST"
I would and to say otherwise is just being in denial. The South's economy was underpinned by slavery and it was the lynchpin of the economy. Yes it was about state's rights if one one of those rights was to maintain a slave economy. Lincoln probably would have allowed it to continue if it meant the avoidance of war and the South not agreed to expand it into new states.
Posted on 2/13/18 at 10:28 am to AlaTiger
quote:
No, the North did not fight to abolish slavery. But, the South did secede to defend slavery. And the war resulted, especially after Fort Sumter was bombarded.
Did the north have the constitutional right to do what they were trying to force the south to do? Did the south have the constitutional right to do what they did? That is the question you frickers all WANT TO IGNORE.
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News