Was the Civil War about Slavery?

Acton Institute, Prager University ^ | 8/11/2015 | Joe Carter

[iowamark]

What caused the Civil War? That seems like the sort of simple, straightforward question that any elementary school child should be able to answer. Yet many Americans—including, mostly, my fellow Southerners—claim that that the cause was economic or state’s rights or just about anything other than slavery.

But slavery was indisputably the primary cause, explains Colonel Ty Seidule, Professor of History at the United States Military Academy at West Point.

The abolition of slavery was the single greatest act of liberty-promotion in the history of America. Because of that fact, it’s natural for people who love freedom, love tradition, and love the South to want to believe that the continued enslavement of our neighbors could not have possibly been the motivation for succession. But we should love truth even more than liberty and heritage, which is why we should not only acknowledge the truth about the cause of the war but be thankful that the Confederacy lost and that freedom won.

[DiogenesLamp]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. You're 500 posts late to the party and most of what you just claimed has been debated and refuted long before now.

Well sure, if you call making a lot of exteraneous noise about side issues a "debate", but none of it refuted the main point.

The Declaration of Independence establishes a moral and legal right to leave a Nation that no longer serves the interests of it's People.

************************************************************

************************************************************

Years ago I read an interesting thing. Some Liberal anthropologist used to write about how loving monkeys were, and how they never fought or hurt each other.

She mentioned how a group of them had separated from the main troop, and were apparently establishing their own troop.

Then one day, the monkeys from the main troop attacked the smaller separate troop and slaughtered them. She was aghast, because she had always thought of these monkeys as peaceful and loving, but here they were, massacring their relatives because they had the temerity to leave the control of the Alpha monkey.

I guess some things don't really change, do they?

[DoodleDawg]

Well if you want to equate the Confederate leadership with a bunch of apes flinging their poop around then go right ahead.

[rockrr]

It’s really displaying its inner anarchist today...

[DiogenesLamp]

There is simply no doubt that, had he lived long enough, Lincoln would have supported the 14 Amendment, or something like it.

That is not necessarily true. Lincoln said some things so degrading to Blacks that it ought to make most Union Apologists blush, and perhaps even be a little ashamed.

So clearly he gets some of the credit for any good it's done.

And what good has it done? I have become so bombarded with examples of the bad things that it has done, that I haven't done much contemplation regarding the good things that it has done. What are they?

As for all those who have abused and twisted its language for their own nefarious purposes, none of that can be blamed on Lincoln, they must take responsibility for their own actions, and credit their own ideological forebears -- i.e., Marx, Lenin, Stalin, etc...

Because someone who's most famous speech cites the occasion of Independence "four score and seven years ago" in support of his efforts to stamp it out, is not the sort of fellow who twists meanings?

[DiogenesLamp]

Reading is hard. ;’)

Maybe for you guys, but the rest of us manage it fairly easily. We do hope you catch up at some point though.

[DiogenesLamp]

The South's fear of abolition was absolutely irrational. In 1860, abolitionists were a distinct minority of the Northern population, and the radical abolitionists even fewer in number. I separate the two, as the radicals demanded immediate abolition without compensation via legislation rather than a constitutional amendment; and the radicals demanded that the property of the slave owners be distributed to the freed slaves as compensation. Obviously, such a proposition was never going to pass, short of armed conflict.

And more or less, that is in fact what happened. Perhaps those Southern fears were not so misguided?

Decades ago I told one of my friends that Homosexuals would become a protected class and attempt to force homosexuality on everyone else. He thought I was nuts. About ten years ago he called me up and said "You were right. Absolutely spot on."

[DiogenesLamp]

You didn't read the posts, did you?

You are better off not reading them. As Mark Twain said of Newspapers:

"If you don't read the papers you are uninformed. If you do read the papers then you are misinformed."

Much of what these guys write is just misinformation interleaved with misdirection.

[PeaRidge]

NKP_Vet is right and you are wrong again.

The Ordinances of Secession, originally numbering 7 (eventually becoming 11) do not list any causes, a direct refutation of your characterization, and your often repeated argument.

All the Ordinances were the legislatively approved, legal language documents by which each of the seceded states severed their connection with the Federal Union. All were the result of officially approved state legislators, voting in state conventions, legislatures, or by popular referendum.

In addition to the aforementioned Official Ordinances produced by a total of 11 state legislatures or conventions, there were others of nominal importance: 2 rump state conventions, 1 territorial convention, and 2 Indian tribes that published one or more secession documents around the beginning of the war.

As also is known, the conventions of 4 of those 11 states adopted an additional “Declaration of Causes” as a nonbinding legislative resolution, and serving as public information.

Out of the 20 total declarations, ordinances, and other secession documents only 6 mentioned slavery in any context beyond geographical nomenclature (only 5 mention it at any length - the sixth is in a single brief clause).

Fourteen of those documents specify other causes, either in addition to slavery or without mentioning it at all.

So, what is the conclusion? Essentially about the only thing that is obvious is that your postings have been wrong.

[DiogenesLamp]

And your stance, which is Lincoln bad, Davis good; the North tricked the South into starting the war; and every ill that has befallen this coutry for the last 150 years is directly attributable to Abraham Lincoln, is not new. It's basically the stance Diogenese Lamp has been taking.

To the Contrary. I don't believe i've ever written a comment saying anything good about Jeff Davis. I make the point to assert that however bad was their government, however bad were their motives, none of this refutes the right to freedom and independence for those people who wish to assert such a right. I'm sure the British thought our government was pretty lame too.

I likewise do not assert that "EVERYTHING" bad that has befallen our country in the last 150 years is the consequence of Lincoln. I just assert that much which is bad can identifiably be traced back to Lincoln. Specifically any consequences of the fallout from the 14th amendment.

Again, I provide plenty of examples. "Gay Marriage", Abortion, Band on prayer in public schools, and of course, let us not forget "anchor babies", and while we're at it, we might as well toss in the non "natural born citizen" known as Obama.

[DoodleDawg]

Maybe for you guys, but the rest of us manage it fairly easily.

Low marks on comprehension though.

[DoodleDawg]

Much of what these guys write is just misinformation interleaved with misdirection.

A case of the pot calling the kettle black if ever there was one.

[DiogenesLamp]

Nor does it guarantee success,

It does in a nation that recognizes it's own laws and abides by them.

and it also doesn't make the rebelling side right and the remaining side wrong.

It does in a nation that recognizes it's own laws and abides by them.

[DoodleDawg]

It does in a nation that recognizes it's own laws and abides by them.

Especially the unwritten ones apparently.

[DiogenesLamp]

So tell me you meant that as a joke.

No, sadly enough, that is his level of understanding on the subject. You are in the same boat, you have the same lack of understanding as does he, but it is at a higher level of historical knowledge.

You do not have the correct philosophical underpinnings to appreciate the point you are discussing. You dont' grasp the bigger picture in all of this, and in that regard, you are exactly like someone who was unaware that Washington had slaver, or that indeed, all 13 colonies were slave states in 1776.

[DiogenesLamp]

None of us are at all pleased about our "strong central government". It is quickly growing stronger by the day. I blame that on the guy who shot Lincoln.

You blame Boothe for a "strong central government"? Rather than the guy that created such coast to coast massive upheaval, and birthed our modern FedZilla?

You know, when I was young, we were taught about Lincoln and the Civil war, and we were of course taught about how John Wilkes Boothe shot Lincoln. For whatever reason, they taught us what Boothe said as he shot Lincoln; "Sic Semper Tyrannis!" And when I first heard this, I giggled. It made no sense whatsoever.

What could Boothe have possibly meant by uttering such an absurd thing? He might as well have shouted "Brawny, The quicker picker upper!" for all the sense it made under the circumstances as they were described to me.

It was decades later that I learned that Boothe wasn't really shouting nonsense, it's just that I had been misled about what Lincoln had done and why.

Then it was not so funny.

[DiogenesLamp]

Your link does not appear to work.

[DiogenesLamp]

Well if you want to equate the Confederate leadership with a bunch of apes flinging their poop around then go right ahead.

So long as you accept Abe Lincoln as the Alpha monkey who ordered the slaughter.

[DiogenesLamp]

Especially the unwritten ones apparently.

Last I checked, the Declaration was fairly well written. It is the first Official document of the United States, and it constitutes the guiding principle of the nation.

Lincoln rebelled against it.

[PeaRidge]

With each state’s voting on the massive question of secession from the Union, their legislatures determined that a document should be published, outlining the reasoning and causes of their disunion. None of the original 7 and eventual 11 ordinances mentioned either the tariffs or slavery as a cause of their decision to leave the Union.

However, four states published their reasoning in individual nonbinding state decrees.

From these documents, it can be concluded that many different reasons brought these seven states to the same conclusion and action.

Although slavery was mentioned in all four documents as one cause, the following are excerpts from some of these secession documents, and show the diversity of motivations.

Georgia Secession Decree (January, 1861):

“(The Northern States) have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and refused to comply with their constitutional obligations to us in reference to our property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic.

“The people of Georgia, after a full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have declared with firmness that (the Northern States) shall not rule over them.”

Mississippi Secession Decree (January, 1861):

“(The North) has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.

“Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity (to secede).”

Texas Secession Decree (February, 1861)

“The controlling majority of the Federal Government, under various pretenses and disguises, has so administered the same as to exclude the citizens of the Southern States, unless under odious and unconstitutional restrictions, from all the immense territory owned in common by all the States on the Pacific Ocean, for the avowed purpose of acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions of Texas and her sister slaveholding States.”

Louisiana Secession Decree (January, 1861):
“The people of Louisiana are unwilling to endanger their liberties and property by submission to the despotism of a single tyrant, or the canting tyranny of pharisaical majorities (in the North).”
Mississippi Secession Decree (January, 1861):

“That they have elected a majority of electors for President and Vice-President on the ground that there exists an irreconcilable conflict between the two sections of the Confederacy in reference to their respective systems of labor and in pursuance of their hostility to us and our institutions, thus declaring to the civilized world that the powers of this government are to be used for the dishonor and overthrow of the Southern section of this great Confederacy.”

South Carolina Declaration of Causes of Secession:

“We affirm that these ends for which this government was instituted have been defeated, and the government itself has been destructive of them by the action of the (North).”

[rockrr]

It’s interesting that each and every one of those complaints euphemistically refer to the Peculiar Institution. Who knew?