What's new
By:
Filters

What was the cause of the American Civil War?

DMG said:
It is also true that Lincoln gave very few fucks for the slaves.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely not true. I don't even LIKE people who say Lincoln was the greatest Prez, because Washington was by far the greatest President, and one of the greatest political leaders in History.

But Lincoln was a staunch Abolitionist and he rose to the Presidency on 3 speeches he made, and published and spread widely, providing the moral and legal oppositional foundation against Slavery.

Lincoln quite literally have Abolition a voice, and became Prez because of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraha..._Peoria_speech
 
Paragon said:
Pre-secession -
  • Missouri Compromise 1819 - purely about maintaining a balance in congress. Not about slavery, but because of slavery.
Click to expand...


  • So, about slavery.

    Paragon said:
    Establishes that slavery is cool in the south. No one is actually concerned about slavery itself, they are concerned about industry north and farming south and who controls congress
    Click to expand...

    Correct. Voting-wise, nobody in the North wants to become the shithole that the South is BECAUSE of slavery.

    Paragon said:
    [*]Tariff of 1928 - strictly meant to prop up northern industry but also caused southern agriculture to suffer because it relied on exports that were now being taxed as a result
    Click to expand...

    Oh booo hooo the mean Northerners messed with our money!

    Mercantilist Britain and France were already looking elsewhere for their Cotton, and the value of cotton was so depressed by 1861 that neither of them declared for the Confederacy. The South's main cash crop was largely worthless anyway, meanwhile the North had built an Industrial Empire which dwarfed the Southern agrarian economy.

    Slavery, Feudalism, and Cotton were already on their way out and slavery probably would have ended on it's own... decades later, when Plantation Owners were eating sawdust because 1 billion Egyptians and Indians were producing loads of cheap cotton.

    Why do you think Egyptian Cotton is so popular? It's a superior product cultivated in the French and British controlled middle East, as well as India.

    Why do you think Gandhi was spinning that cotton every day? Because he wanted Indian cotton to stay in India and be manufactured into textiles there.

    Southern Agrarian Cotton was a shit crop, and it's not the North's fault that the South had staked its future on a shitty economic model: Slavery

    Paragon said:
    [*]Nullification Crisis - 1830s - South Carolina vs the U.S. which created The Force Bill was a precursor to the State's Rights issue, by 1860 South Carolina was the only state to have a majority slave population
    [*]Northerners want to secede - 1840s - many newspapers called for northern secession and some votes were actually taken
    [*]Wilmot Proviso - 1846 - wanted to ban slavery in territories acquired after the Mexican-American war - the debates of such and votes in the House led to southern reps to realize the disparity between north industry and south agriculture is still a huge issue.
    [*]Compromise of 1850 - admitted California as free, but enacted the law Fugitive Slave Act - this was the everyone agreeing that any slaves caught anywhere, free state or not, should be returned. Yep, those "free states" were really concerned with slavery
    [*]Kansas-Nebraska act - 1854 - pissed off northerners who literally lost their Whigs causing northern states to consider seceding because slavery was above the imaginary line and nulled the Missouri Compromise. this also is the supposed start of the Republican Party. This is where bleeding Kansas comes from as abolitionist stirred up and killed, much like Antifa today
    Click to expand...

    You're delusional and that's a lie.

    many of whom strongly supported Southern ideologies and emigrated to Kansas specifically to assist the expansion of slavery. Pro-slavery immigrants settled towns including Leavenworth and Atchison. The administration of President Franklin Pierce appointed territorial officials in Kansas aligned with its own pro-slavery views and, heeding rumors that the frontier was being overwhelmed by Northerners, thousands of non-resident slavery proponents soon entered Kansas with the goal of influencing local politics.
    Click to expand...

    Paragon said:
    [*]Dred Scott - 1857 - The United States Supreme Court probably lights the match to the upcoming Civil War
    [*]Abolitionist support violence against southern states and attack. - likes of John Brown
    .
    Click to expand...

    John Brown accomplished nothing but scared the Southerners pretty bad, meanwhile they were waging a Terrorist Guerilla War in Kansas.
 
Truckedup said:
I know that to understand slavery can be difficult for us now....But the Europeans felt they had a god given right to take what they wanted ,kill anyone who stood in their way and had a clear conscience about enslaving others...
. The Spanish discovered the Indians made poor slaves. They constantly tried to run away or kill themselves. The Africans were easier to hold as slaves, sorta like chickens..
. All the info posed may be the truth but by 1850 any person defending the use of slaves was a scum bag...
Click to expand...

Kinda true.

Mexico was a Feudalism and the winning of the Southwest is like a precursor to defeating the Confederacy: It's about killing Feudalism and bringing in the new American model of Individual Enterprise. So Mexico is still full of Serfs, Paeans, and Peasants, and our leaders are trying to bring them here and make Serfs out of all of us.

That is the fundamental argument that every American worker SHOULD be making: Don't make us Mexico and the Confederacy again.

All the info posed may be the truth but by 1850 any person defending the use of slaves was a scum bag...
Click to expand...

On so many levels.

Anyone arguing FOR the Confederacy is literally arguing to turn everyone into a goddamn Peasant who can't start a business against Slave Wages. You're a SCUM if you defend the South.
 
IH-SSII said:
Clearly he had the BEST interest in mind of the country as a whole. I was taught he abolished slavery primarily as a weapon of War against the South, to weaken it during and after the war, not necessarily as the right thing to do.
Click to expand...

It was both, very clearly. There is NO ambiguity about this.

DURING the war, he's going to do ANYTHING to win and preserve the Union, maybe even keep slaves. But he wanted to cripple the South.

ALSO
ALSO
ALSO

Lincoln was an Abolitionist and became President BECAUSE of his Abolitionist viewpoints:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraha..._Peoria_speech
 
evernoob said:
That is absolutely not true. I don't even LIKE people who say Lincoln was the greatest Prez, because Washington was by far the greatest President, and one of the greatest political leaders in History.

But Lincoln was a staunch Abolitionist and he rose to the Presidency on 3 speeches he made, and published and spread widely, providing the moral and legal oppositional foundation against Slavery.

Lincoln quite literally have Abolition a voice, and became Prez because of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraha..._Peoria_speech
Click to expand...

Yet he wanted to send the freed slaves back to Africa or to South America.
 
If anyone taught me anything about it, I don't remember what it was so it wasn't 'learned'. It was probably wrong anyway.
 
DMG said:
Yet he wanted to send the freed slaves back to Africa or to South America.
Click to expand...

It's true, he said that Blacks and Whites were not equal and would not countenance an America where they were equal. Repatriation probably was the best, most fair, and humane solution. Which is why that whole:

We built America!

Thing is so pushed among NORTHERN liberals and leftists today.

They know.
 
Broncokyle88 said:
A court case that was filed during the “reconstruction”. There’s no way the court could possibly be biased, and justifying the actions that the federal government just took.
Click to expand...

Your opinion is meaningless. That ruling has the force of law and your opinion has nothing of the sort. That ruling stands, and SCOTUS gets to make those decisions, not you.
 
From the horse's mouth. The "Cornerstone Speech", by Alexander Stephens, vicepresident of the confederacy.

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/p...erstone-speech

“The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us, the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution."

“[Our] foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.”

Savannah Republican, March 21, 1861
 
Last edited:
Broncokyle88 said:
Yep, the Supreme Court is completely infallible. They never overturn any of there own decisions. Just because they decided something that doesn’t mean it’s right. Plessy v Ferguson, Dred Scott, etc. My opinion may be meaningless to you, but it’s assholes like me who hold and voice different interpretations of the constitution that get cases brought before the Supreme Court, and that get them brought up again when the court has ruled incorrectly in the past.

You can just sit there quietly, accepting all of their choices, and reminiscing about that summer you spent with your beloved Ruth bader Ginsberg when you were both in your early 20s. I’m going to keep voicing my beliefs that a large federal government absolutely does not have anyone’s best interest in mind
Click to expand...

Dred Scott..... SCOTUS opinion
 
Here is your answer:

It's the Founding Fathers' fault and the Constitution they created generated EVERYTHING that led to the Civil War.
 
I was fully intending to blame the Radical Republicans because even though South Carolina held a secession convention in 1852, other southern states convinced them to hang on. When the Radical Republicans spoke about their control of the Moderate Lincoln, South Carolina saw the writing on the wall. The threats from the Radical Republicans didn't help.
 
3/5ths compromise. When the Constitution established that a slave counted as 3/5ths of a person, slave states had more Reps in Congress just due to the number of slaves. From the get-go the whole keeping the balance between slave and free states was born from this. Nullification was born from this. Hell, when SCOTUS said that slaves weren't actual people, South Carolina was scared they were losing Reps among other things.

The battle between industry north and agricultural south, likely would not have been anywhere near what it was.

The Constitution and SCOTUS were the cause of the Civil War
 
Broncokyle88 said:
And the union had all the right in the world to decided that for states still in the union. The problem is that the southern states were not. They left. They took their ball and went home. They started their own country. The civil war was an invasion by a foreign power in order to exploit it for economic benefit. Its only called the civil war because that’s how the victors chose to paint it, them selves as heroes instead of conquerers. It’s like if vs came over here and tried to take us back over to pbb by force. If you want to bitch about revisionist history, that’s the number 1 place to start. An invasion by a foreign army is painted as infighting, and the rulers of the day painted forever as heroes in the history books. But remember, the conquistadors were bad when they did this exact same shit. And Lincoln gets a round of applause for it
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah. And the south will rise again. The only reason the south could ever rise again is because so many northerners have moved there.

The south was full of inbred morons who were too lazy to do their own work, so they enslaved an even less educated people without the capability to fight back.

Slave owners and any who support them were vile disgusting trash who should have hung at the end of the ropes they terrified innocent people with.
 
Broncokyle88 said:
...

You can just sit there quietly, accepting all of their choices, and reminiscing about that summer you spent with your beloved Ruth bader Ginsberg when you were both in your early 20s. I’m going to keep voicing my beliefs that a large federal government absolutely does not have anyone’s best interest in mind
Click to expand...

In the interest of facts and things... all that shit about him and Ginsburg was debunked on the other board. There was a lot of truths and lies mixed up in his democratic propaganda.

First, Gary was like sixty then. He was training Midshipmen and ROTC candidates at Fort Sill.

Second, Ruth said no. It's how she got the nickname "Kiki", a nickname Gary had given her for being "a kicky baby". [978-1501145247]

Third, was somethimg about Dred Scott but I can't remember...
 
Stuck said:
Blah blah blah. And the south will rise again. The only reason the south could ever rise again is because so many northerners have moved there.

The south was full of inbred morons who were too lazy to do their own work, so they enslaved an even less educated people without the capability to fight back.

Slave owners and any who support them were vile disgusting trash who should have hung at the end of the ropes they terrified innocent people with.
Click to expand...

Weak troll, brah
 
Paragon said:
3/5ths compromise. When the Constitution established that a slave counted as 3/5ths of a person, slave states had more Reps in Congress just due to the number of slaves. From the get-go the whole keeping the balance between slave and free states was born from this. Nullification was born from this. Hell, when SCOTUS said that slaves weren't actual people, South Carolina was scared they were losing Reps among other things.

The battle between industry north and agricultural south, likely would not have been anywhere near what it was.

The Constitution and SCOTUS were the cause of the Civil War
Click to expand...

How could one balance individual property rights with actually being an individual so soon after being ruled by god himself?
 
Mikel said:
The war started because of secession.
The South seceded to protect slavery.


In the late 19th century there was a massive revisionist campaign in the south to redraw the cause of the war away from slavery, because even they realized slavery was a very shitty reason for all that devastation.

People should look at contemporary documents, which make it exceedingly clear that it was about protecting slavery, which the South saw as being encroached upon by the Northern states and the federal government.
Click to expand...

Lost cause narrative....
 
I didn't read through everything, so forgive me if someone DID bring this up, but it seems that most are missing what the Civil War was really about and instead are focusing on the things that the people in control sold the masses on, before, during and after (even more than a century after). Open your eyes and look at what other things were passed in Congress that coincided with the wars this nation has fought. Wars are excuses to get legislature passed that would normally not survive public scrutiny. (In current events see "Department of Homeland Security").

One of the easiest to do is to follow the money, in the end it's always about the money. Prior to the Civil war, President Jackson successfully killed off the Second Bank of the United States, but money always finds a way back. The Mexican-American war in 1846 allowed "them" to test the waters with the creation of the United States Treasury system which helped fund that war. The Civil War was just another way for them to re-establish a central banking system as the Federal Gov't needed a way to pay for the war: the 1st, 2nd & 3rd Legal Tender acts were steps along the way, but the goal was the National Bank Act (1863, 1864 and 1865), funny how that final National Bank Act of 1865 coincided with the end of the Civil War...

https://coinweek.com/education/the-c...al-bank-notes/
 
Paragon said:
just killed people, that's all he did
Click to expand...

Right, and the US Army showed up under Colonel Lee and TCB.

So any idea that John Brown was some excuse to betray the Republic is absurd. Yet you made that argument.

The South started the Civil War by trying to extend slavery, and engaging in a Terrorist campaign in Kansas.

The Union OTOH tried to keep the US together as the promise of the future, i.e. not just the 4 million slaves, but the mass of American whites who would find economic success on the new States, instead of the Dead South as in slave States.

That's always forgotten. Unless anyone is the 1st born Son of the 1st born Son all the way back to Antebellum days, you should hate the Confederacy.

European Feudalism, for men of lesser ability and soft hands.

Imagine leaving your wife on a mud-farm to go fight for that :shaking:
 
Even though I'm from the North, even though I think slavery is horrible, I do understand when states feel the Federal govt is so overstepping its limits that they must leave...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh