States rights was the cause. Lincoln, and the north generally, didn't give a rats ass about the slaves. Hell, some northern states had laws on the books forbidding freemen to stay in their states longer than 30 days. And how about the New York riots where they targeted blacks and hung them from lamp post.
Slavery was the albatross around the necks of Southern independence but slavery wasn't the cause. States rights was the cause.
f the South seceded tomorrow because the South insisted on universal health care, I would say that they seceded for universal health care and any other excuse was a transparent rationalization and propaganda to persuade fools to support it.
That wasn't my question. Answer my question: If the South seceded tomorrow because the north insisted on universal health care, would you foolishly say that the South didn't want people to have health care?
I grew up in the south and my great grandfather fought for the South, presumably because of that nonsense.
It's too bad that your great grandfather isn't around to explain why he, and thousands of other Southerners, volunteered to fight for Southern Independence.
But it takes a special kind of stubborn denial and foolishness to believe in it after 150 years.
And it takes a special kind of stupidity and politically correct denial to embrace the left wing doctrine of revisionist history and biased propaganda.
State's rights to enslave people was the cause.
That wasn't my question.
Your question wasn't analogous or relevant so I gave you one that was.
It's too bad that your great grandfather isn't around to explain why he, and thousands of other Southerners, volunteered to fight for Southern Independence.
He lived in among a people blanketed by propaganda to cover their crimes against humanity. You have no excuse.
And it takes a special kind of stupidity and politically correct denial to embrace the left wing doctrine of revisionist history and biased propaganda.
You're right. I'm just too stupid and politically correct to embrace slavery.