- 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
Was the Civil War Fought Because of Slavery? It Depends on Which Side You View
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:32 pm
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:32 pm
The Union’s core goal from 1861 was preserving the United States as one nation—Lincoln stated repeatedly that he would accept slavery remaining where it existed if it meant avoiding secession and war.
The Confederacy seceded explicitly to protect slavery as an institution (see the various statement of causes). However, emancipation only became official Union policy in 1863 (with the Emancipation Proclamation) as a wartime measure to weaken the South, recruit Black soldiers, and shift war aims toward abolition.
It was, perhaps, a profound moral outcome, but not the initial driver for most Union politicians, including Lincoln.
Many politicians distill down the Civil War to slavery and only slavery. It’s not that simple.
In a way, only the South fought for slavery.
The Confederacy seceded explicitly to protect slavery as an institution (see the various statement of causes). However, emancipation only became official Union policy in 1863 (with the Emancipation Proclamation) as a wartime measure to weaken the South, recruit Black soldiers, and shift war aims toward abolition.
It was, perhaps, a profound moral outcome, but not the initial driver for most Union politicians, including Lincoln.
Many politicians distill down the Civil War to slavery and only slavery. It’s not that simple.
In a way, only the South fought for slavery.
78
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:38 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
For the South, yes.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:41 pm to RFK
quote:
and shift war aims toward abolition.
Abolition meant a lot of different things, to a lot of different people.
Very few were in favor of simple abolishment, in the way that we typically think of it. Very few supported a "stroke of the pen declaration" type of abolishment.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:43 pm to RFK
For the South it was slavery.
For the North it was keeping the Union together because letting the South leave meant losing money.
So it was over money on both sides.
For the North it was keeping the Union together because letting the South leave meant losing money.
So it was over money on both sides.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:43 pm to RFK
quote:
Many politicians distill down the Civil War to slavery and only slavery. It’s not that simple.
It was about state's rights.... to own slaves.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:44 pm to RFK
quote:yes, next question
Was the Civil War Fought Because of Slavery?
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:46 pm to RFK
Depends on how you want to define "because of slavery". Was it fought to try and end/free slaves? Absolutely not.
Was it fought because the North was using slavery as a way to implement sanctions essentially on southern products to help try and keep the South from growing too strong and independent, among other issues around states rights? Absolutely.
Was it fought because the North was using slavery as a way to implement sanctions essentially on southern products to help try and keep the South from growing too strong and independent, among other issues around states rights? Absolutely.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:47 pm to dchog
quote:
For the North it was keeping the Union together because letting the South leave meant losing money.
The trading and exporters in the North were making big bucks from Southern agricultural products produced from slave labor. They weren't having a moral crisis over it.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:47 pm to dchog
Yes, Abraham Lincoln supported the idea of deporting freed slaves to other countries as a solution to the issue of slavery. He proposed colonization plans that included relocating African Americans to places like Liberia and Haiti
Posted on 5/4/26 at 12:50 pm to RFK
States rights. 95% of the south couldn't afford slaves. Why would the rank and file give a damn if it wasn't something bigger than that. More about economic slavery than actual slavery.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 1:01 pm to RFK
Secession was 100% a direct result of the institution of slavery. All you have to do is read the words of the men who voted on secession if you want definitive proof. The Civil War does not happen without secession, and secession does not happen without slavery. So the answer is yes. The Civil War was fought because of slavery.
Now it is also true that many men within the Confederate army didn't own slaves and most of them weren't themselves fighting to preserve slavery. However, the politicians who ran the Confederate government were most certainly fighting to preserve slavery. It was a massive, moneymaking enterprise that was worth hundreds of billions of dollars in today's dollars to the Southern economy.
Now it is also true that many men within the Confederate army didn't own slaves and most of them weren't themselves fighting to preserve slavery. However, the politicians who ran the Confederate government were most certainly fighting to preserve slavery. It was a massive, moneymaking enterprise that was worth hundreds of billions of dollars in today's dollars to the Southern economy.
This post was edited on 5/4/26 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 5/4/26 at 1:02 pm to Larry_Hotdogs
quote:
States rights.
The states' rights to do what?
Posted on 5/4/26 at 1:02 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
The trading and exporters in the North were making big bucks from Southern agricultural products produced from slave labor. They weren't having a moral crisis over it.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 1:02 pm to RFK
The South's reasoning was politics and economics; the economics of labor. There were many, many free blacks who also owned slaves, because that was the needed labor of the day.
The North was desire to maintain the union and cheap material from the South to be used in their factories.
The North was desire to maintain the union and cheap material from the South to be used in their factories.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 1:04 pm to RFK
quote:
An estimated 50 million people are living in modern slavery worldwide, according to 2022 global estimates. This includes roughly 28 million in forced labor and 22 million in forced marriages. This figure marks a significant increase from previous reports, with roughly 1 in 200 people globally living in slavery.
And still happening.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 1:08 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
quote:
States rights.
The states' rights to do what?
To govern themselves as they saw fit.
Posted on 5/4/26 at 1:08 pm to RFK
The Civil War was about 20 years away from being avoided. The British had just started the industrial revolution. The U.S. would have caught on by the 1880s with mechanized agriculture that was much more efficient and cheaper than slavery.
This post was edited on 5/4/26 at 1:10 pm
Page 1 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News