Posted on 05/15/2019 12:48:32 PM PDT by EdnaMode
What “tyrannical overreach”?
The South's aims were independence and self determination, same as the Founders. If the South's aims weren't noble, than neither were the aims of the Founders.
They wanted to continue the institution of slavery...
Which would have continued had they remained in the Union. Staying in the Union meant permanent slavery. You are trying to pretend slavery and Union were somehow separate, when in fact they were completely intertwined. The South stays in the Union, so does slavery! How do you deal with that sort of cognitive dissonance?
and yes, that is really what the Civil War was about
And no, that's just what the "winners" have been repeating as propaganda ever since the war began. You can't make a serious claim that the war was about something that was going to continue indefinitely without secession, and was going to be greatly strengthened by Lincoln's efforts to get the Corwin Amendment passed.
People have been taught bullsh*t history, and just don't know any better then to repeat it.
Sorry, but you are wrong. Slavery was the stated reason for secession by multiple states To whit:
Georgia Secession Declaration (first Paragraph): “The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.”
Mississippi Secession Declaration (second sentence): Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery— the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.
South Carolina Secession Declaration: The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution.
I could go on, but it would be pointless. You can rail all you want about the South wanting to have independence and self determination, but the primary reason for that desire was so that they could continue to hold African slaves.
Not letting you off the hook here. Tell me how slavery gets abolished if the Southern states remain in the Union.
*YOU* explain how the Union would abolish slavery if the Southern states remained in it.
You are just regurgitating the crap you've heard all your life. Now i'm asking you to weigh the evidence.
How does the 35 states of the Union get rid of slavery in 1861?
Gee, Richmond was the capital of the Confederacy. Makes no sense.
Oh, wait, “sense”. My mistake.
You made very clear your position that slavery was not the primary cause of the civil war. I provided historical documentation refuting that position. The mechanics of how Slavery would or would not have been abolished absent a war is irrelevant.
What will make it stop?
That's because it isn't, and if you would just explain to me how it was going to go anywhere, you would understand that it isn't.
I provided historical documentation refuting that position.
You did not. You posted some of the four and only four states that mentioned it as a reason. The other 7 states did not claim slavery as a reason. History revisionists have made it a habit to cite those 4 as speaking for all 11 states of the Confederacy.
You want to refute my point that slavery was not the reason the North invaded the South? Explain how slavery would have disappeared from the Union in the 1860s. Or the 1870s. Or the 1890s.
In fact, just tell me when you think slavery would have disappeared from the United States of America if the Southern states had remained in the Union.
The mechanics of how Slavery would or would not have been abolished absent a war is irrelevant.
It is the core of the issue! You say the Southern states needed to be defeated because they supported slavery, so let's put the exact same shoe on the Union foot! How would the Union abolish slavery if the Southern states had stayed in the Union?
You are in favor of the Union are you not? Lincoln's goal was to "preserve the Union". I'm just asking you to speak honestly about how slavery was going anywhere with the Union preserved?
You want to believe two mutually exclusive things.
Really sticking with this narrative, aren’t you. Well I’ll give you credit for sticking to your principles.
So why did only 4 of the states claim slavery as cause for secession? Very simple. First off, lets give credit to the ones that did. They stated it boldly and unequivocally. There was ZERO doubt why they were leaving. The reason they were seceeding was slavery. So why were the other 7 states silent on the issue? A very simple reason in my humble opinion. The men who wrote those states’ secession documents felt shame. They knew slavery was the reason. But its hard to look yourself in the mirror and admit to your wife and church leaders that you want to leave the union for the purpose of keeping other human beings in bondage. So they cloaked their reasoning in all sorts of flowery language about “liberty” and “freedom”. But everyone knew the main reason. Its a bit like getting caught banging your secretary, and then resigning your job to “spend more time with your family.” Yeah, we know why you really left.
I’m as tired of this topic as you are, so I’ll get back to the original reason for the thread. Jefferson Davis was a lousy leader for a misguided and failed cause. The only reason he had a road named after him in the first place was because of a bunch of bitter enders who had difficulty accepting the fact that the South had lost the war, and wanted to stick it to the North by making a road named after the President of the CSA the first one you got on when you left Washington DC. So if they changed their mind and want to rename it now, I for one won’t lose any sleep over it.
My dream is to see one of those app-presidents placemats with a blank space for 2009-2016
Who cares? Why did the Union offer unlimited slavery in an effort to keep them? (It didn't work.)
I’m as tired of this topic as you are, so I’ll get back to the original reason for the thread.
I'm not tired of this topic at all. In fact I argue it every single day, and have for the last three years, when I was finally awakened to the fact that I had been lied to all my life about the Civil War. I used to believe the same thing that most people believe, and then I kept discovering things that didn't make sense, and I finally realized the only explanation that *DOES* make sense is the war was fought over power and money.
You think it was fought over slavery, but you absolutely won't explain how slavery would disappear if the South never left.
You see, you can't *make* the war be about slavery without swallowing some real whoppers! If the South stayed in the Union slavery would have been effectively permanent.
So you're mad at the South for leaving, and your mad at the South for having slavery, and you refuse to even grasp the fact that if the South had stayed, this would preserve slavery in the Union!
The war was fought over power and money?? THAT was your big revelation?? All wars are fought over power and money. Welcome to the real world.
As if they don’t have ideas already...*if* they’re smart enough to even know who he is.
/Mosby groupie
So you've given up the idea that the war was fought over slavery? Good. We have made progress.
The War was fought because the South going independent was going to shift 230 million dollars per year from the New York/Washington DC economy, to the New Orleans, Mobile, Charleston, etc economy, and the men of economic power in the North would not stand for this!
Furthermore, the losses to them would be even greater than just that 230 million per year. If you are interested in knowing about it, i'll point out how they would have lost far more money than that from the Southern states becoming independent.
I went to Jefferson Davis Jr Hi...
Stop making sense.
It triggers people.
Good thing we moved, else I would have gone to Nathan B. Forrest High School...
OMG.
Lynch worthy, that.
People do not like their dearly held beliefs challenged, especially the ones that make them believe they are the "good guys" . I've seen the most amazing examples of cognitive dissonance while arguing this topic for the last several years. People want to believe things that are contradictory in order to preserve their image of their heroes as the "good guys."
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.