Posted on 08/12/2020 2:31:56 PM PDT by Jonty30
As with everything, it is complex. But no, the abolitionist movement contained many God-fearing Christians who cared deeply about the slaves, and their education, and their transition to earning wages, etc.
The movement also contained many freethinkers and socialists and other radicals...but many of them “cared for” the slaves in their own way, as well.
All of the factors you mention can be found, of course, as we would expect.
But no, it’s not correct that abolitionists didn’t care.
It would also be incorrect to say that all Southern slave owners didn’t care. As with everything, it is complex.
The frustrating part about this idiotic monument tear down movement is that it does nothing to advance humane understanding of well, the human condition. It does nothing to memorialize the heroic fight for freedom among slaves who never really went along with the whole thing, and who when freed, handled themselves magnificently in very difficult circumstances. And it certainly doesn’t respect the nuances of opinions among “slave owners” like George Washington...and yes, even Jefferson.
As well as the nuances of men like Lincoln. And others, for example, Sam Houston....
This is a pressing question for a Canadian, why?
Nobody is arguing for slavery, just the reason for its abolition. I see the same manipulations of good people who argue for open borders and those of our elites who see open borders as nothing more than a means to keep people down while make billions of dollars for themselves. Those at the top typically do not care about human lives at all. For them it’s merely a means to stay on top of everybody else.
I like learning US history. I’m not a fan of my own Quebec run country.
It also would lead to more, and richer, consumers to sell to.
It wasn’t just the cheap labor.
(Also there was the issue of the declining contribution of the South to the Fed government while the South maintained effectively equal representation there.)
Very similar to the situation in China 20 years ago.
Of course Western investors were much kinder to China.
You attended Canadian public school eh?
Please go and do some actual historical research - you didn’t get any real info.
You do realize how the poor white farmers were viewed by the oligarchy southern aristocrats do you not?
They were viewed as white trash worthy as cannon fodder.
Take a long look at the confederate congresses declarations allowing the aristocrats to be able to get out of fighting for their own cause.
Typical of democrat cowardly lying scum.
Except you’re completely wrong. There was a deep “radical” abolitionist segment in the republican party, which considered it their religious moral duty to free the slaves.
Others in the North wanted to end the rebellion.
Your attempt to make up reasons from your own mind has nothing to do with historic reality.
Adding: at least two Christian denominations split off from the parent denominations due to opposition to slavery.
One of those denominations founded Hillsdale College: Freewill Baptists and the other was The Wesleyan Church from the Methodists. There were probably more such splinters.
Not economic reasons, in other words
You’re a dunce, and likely another one of the many moronic marxist democrats that tries to infiltrate and cause hate and discontent amongst Conservatives and Deplorables. We can spot you moron’s a mile away.
Only a liberal democrat would come up with crap like that to erase their own RACIST history.
Now... I seriously doubt you are a liberal democrat, so I have to ask you where you got that from?
You’re making up something that YOU think “makes sense” but you know nothing of historic reality.
“Those at the top” included powerful republican senators who demanded an end to slavery as their biblical duty.
Further, the South started the war by seceding, it was not in the hands of “Northern industrialists”.
You need to learn things, not sit around in a bull session making up what “must have been true”. It wasn’t.
“ My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”
- President Abraham Lincoln, August 22, 1862, in response to Horace Greeley’s editorial, “A Prayer of Twenty Millions,” which had called for immediate emancipation of slaves
Lincoln also opposed slavery on moral grounds.
You do a terrible disservice to the very strong abolitionist movement in the pre-civil war North. Look it up on google. It was one of the principal movements that supported the war as a war to end slavery.
That said, not all northerners were primarily motivated to ending slavery.
What unified the North to fight secession was geopolitics. Control of the Mississippi river system to the gulf was extraordinarily valuable and divided nations controlling one part or another would have brought European powers into CONUS and endless trouble.
Ohio and Illinois and the rest of the midwestern breadbasket and industrial plant would have had lost inexpensive access to world markets should another nation control New Orleans.
But there were plenty of powerful northerners who did not want to win the war or eliminate slavery (See Gen. McClellan, who ran the Army of the Potomac for years.)
Your cheap labor argument doesn’t hold much water, imo.
Keep reading and learning.
It is one of history’s greatest stories.
three fifths of a person...
Or in plain language-enumeration.
BTW, The Queen had to dance a very thin line over the issue. Personally, she did not like the south for it cause, which was the continuation of slavery.
But, they (UK) wanted cotton, and as a result of the ignorance of the southern aristocrats, they sped up their demise by causing that war since the UK started their own cotton plantations across the globe.
Democrats are like that. Greedy, selfish, stupid and immoral.
Stop listening to leftwing media.
Do you see that you no longer have a discussion on this site? You just get attacked. Everybody knows everything, and everyone else is just stupid.
Here is quote form President Sleazebag.
My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.
Abraham Lincoln
Wrong. Obviously. There were many people & many motives but the precipitating events included an unwillingness for new slave owning states to join the Union. The South was unwilling to phase out slavery. Many laws were passed to prevent slave ships from coming to America.
The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 is a United States federal law that provided that no new slaves were permitted to be imported into the United States. It took effect on January 1, 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution. Slaves were still smuggled in through territories like TX & FL before they became states. THE United States struggled to curtail and end slavery. Eventually that issue was one of the main impetus for the Civil War.
A categorical uni-dimensional statement like yours betrays a person with an agenda.
https://www.nps.gov/liho/planyourvisit/upload/cw_slavery_site_bulletin.pdf
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.