Yep, Lincoln made it salvery to get the northern city folks to join up. No one in the north wanted to fight for states rights, or against it.
Yep, Lincoln made it salvery to get the northern city folks to join up. No one in the north wanted to fight for states rights, or against it.
The current generation has been brainwashed to believe it was only about slavery.
Revisionist history at its finest.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Ignorance can be overcome. Stupidity can't be.
Axxe55,
When "traditionalists" (like me, for example) who do REAL research into the period documents of TWBTS era, are RIDICULED, SHOUTED DOWN, IGNORED & called VULGAR (and often RACIST names = When I was in grad school one of the senior professors of the History Department routinely referred to me as that "F*****G Bl@nket@ss Injun".) names for posting the DOCUMENTED facts, if is virtually impossible to get the FACTS out to the general public.
(In my case, I'm DISMISSED as just a "genealogist", as if DOCUMENTED FACTS from any person/source are UNIMPORTANT to a search for TRUTH.)
yours, satx
It is possible that the northern leaders were fighting for something different from the southern leaders. The common soldier may have a different take from the leaders.
The states right in question at the time was slavery. Not gun rights, not property taxes, not banking regulations. It was slavery.
If slavery had never existed the Civil War would not have happened.
I learned about states rights & economic concerns in school. I've heard both sides. I've lived my whole life in the south. I cannot see any other reason for the war than slavery & ancillary issues tied to slavery.
The Democrats supported slavery. The Democrats started the actual hot war. The same Democrats we now fight against. They may have been our kinsmen but let's not let that cloud our judgement.
States rights rings as true as a woman's right to choose. It's an attempt to make the underlying evil sound more palatable.
Flame away. Sorry, not sorry.
It is possible that the northern leaders were fighting for something different from the southern leaders. The common soldier may have a different take from the leaders.
The states right in question at the time was slavery. Not gun rights, not property taxes, not banking regulations. It was slavery.
If slavery had never existed the Civil War would not have happened.
I learned about states rights & economic concerns in school. I've heard both sides. I've lived my whole life in the south. I cannot see any other reason for the war than slavery & ancillary issues tied to slavery.
The Democrats supported slavery. The Democrats started the actual hot war. The same Democrats we now fight against. They may have been our kinsmen but let's not let that cloud our judgement.
States rights rings as true as a woman's right to choose. It's an attempt to make the underlying evil sound more palatable.
Flame away. Sorry, not sorry.
You really do need to study more.
Slavery was the flashpoint and no one denies that, but the crucial issue was states rights. As SATX mentioned, southerners felt that the federal government was overstepping its bounds and feared this could spread to other matters.
75% of those fighting for the South did not own slaves. Stonewall and Lee opposed slavery. The South had an abolitionist general. Why would these people fight a war if it was only about slavery? Answer - they would not. It would be foolish to believe otherwise. SATX is accurate.
You really do not understand how the "union" was viewed in that day and time. And you have lots of company. Nor the important of states autonomy, within the (then) limited bounds of the Constitution. Why were the Federalist papers written as such length and with such effort? To convince states to give up full autonomy to form the United States. This formation was very much in doubt.
Lincoln's saber rattling precipitated the war. As Lee stated, he never thought he would see the day that the President would raise an army to invade his own country.
And if you want to be honest, the Democratic party that you mention is in reality the Republican party today. The conservative southern Democrats left the Democratic party for the Republican party years ago.
No, I don't need to study more.
Lee & Jackson wouldn't have had anything to fight about if slavery did not exist. If slavery had never existed and was never a state's rights question the war wouldn't have happened.
Name one other state's right issue that was anywhere close to starting a war.
None of use are responsible for slavery or the Civil War. It doesn't reflect on us to say slavery was wrong & the south was wrong. Not sure why people refuse to admit our ancestors were wrong.
Well, I'm not certain that the war was so firmly associated w/ Lincoln being anti-slavery until the Emancipation Proclamation, which incidently added several hundred thousand Negro troops to the Union Army's strength.Yep, Lincoln made it salvery to get the northern city folks to join up. No one in the north wanted to fight for states rights, or against it.