re: Why did the Union not allow the Confederacy to secede without a war?

I think that the territories to the west were a bigger issue then what is discussed.The experience in Kansas in the 1850s probably loomed larger than is typically mentioned. There was lots of violence between pro slavery Southern sympathizers mostly from Missouri and settlers comprised of people moving west from the mid Atlantic, New England and recently arrived Irish and Germans.Neither side in that instance was going to just peacefully let the other side gain real advantage through peaceful politics.

Cotton was not the King that many thought. Cotton was quickly becoming like a late era Byzantine Emperor ruling over a shrinking empire.

The long article posted in this thread and the one we had just recently makes a strong case that the United States could never afford the economic damage that would be inflicted on the USA if the Southern Confederate States of America was allowed to continue to exist.

Armed invasion and destruction of the Confederate States of America was the only course of action that could save the United States of America from severe economic harm.

This might be the answer to your question regarding why the Union did not allow the Confederacy to secede without a war.

I don't know whether any contemporary historical original source documents support this theory. I don't know of any.

But there were many in the South who went to war mostly to preserve the Southern economic model, which included Slavery.

My analogy.
Did you see the movie War of the Roses?
Well the movie was really about the long build up to the climax, death/succession. A build up of incredible anger and violence.

The war was decades in the making and not a simple one word answer for its fnal starting point. It was not a scientific debate or a sporting competition but the worst kind of feud. A family going at each other. When one day slavery from the South came not just knocking on doors but busting them down. The Fugitive Slave Act. Upheld by a SCOTUS of mainly Southern justices. Allowing slavers to hunt and enter almost at will States of the North to capture anyone they deemed escaped property with little recourse. One of the most anti States rights ruling in US history. Bloody Kansas. Uncle Tom's Cabin. The most read book for fifty years next to the Bible. Patriotism. Greed. Lively hood. Fear. Some in the North and South wanted nothing to do with succession but like in the movie reason lost to madness.

The best argument I’ve ever read about succession was a guy saying that most southern states would have never joined the Union in the first place if they were going to be held to “an unbreakable union that they could never exit.” He backed it up with numerous statements by representatives of states that were debating on whether or not to join the Union if it meant that they could never leave the Union despite being abused by the federal government.

He likened it to a women entering into “an unbreakable marriage” where the woman could never, ever leave the marriage despite continual abuse and mistreatment by her abusive spouse.

And yet...they still fought to the death.

quote:

---

By 1864, that offer was irrelevant. The South was having its arse kicked and after Antietam, Gettysburg, Vicksburg and Chattanooga, the North was not even going to listen to anything other than, " We Surrender"

---

100%
It was purely a talking point.

Its like Hitler agreeing to give up Poland in late 1944.

quote:

---

If those secessionist violent activities had never happened, we can't know for sure, but, probably POTUS Lincoln would have called up troops to invade the South, just like he did in response to the violence.

---

It would've been the better strategic move to make Lincoln the aggressor. It might've been just the change needed for Britain and/or France willing to jump in at some point.

All because of $$$$$

The North started the War, a Blockade is an act of war, they blockaded Charleston South Car.