Your war was for "Money." In fact it was for Slave money.
While the slave money flowed, the North was content to receive it. When the money stopped, their *WRATH* became terrible. They went to war.
Posted on 06/23/2016 2:04:08 PM PDT by ColdOne
A measure to bar confederate flags from cemeteries run by the Department of Veterans Affairs was removed from legislation passed by the House early Thursday.
The flag ban was added to the VA funding bill in May by a vote of 265-159, with most Republicans voting against the ban. But Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) both supported the measure. Ryan was commended for allowing a vote on the controversial measure, but has since limited what amendments can be offered on the floor.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
The South did not go to war because of slavery. The South went to war because DC did not adhere to the Constitutional law of States Rights to sovereignty.
Nobody said the North couldn't survive without the South. What I said was that the North didn't want to let go of all that sweet sweet profit money they were making from slavery, which is what would have happened had the South been able to establish competing trade directly with Europe.
They also ended up having to borrow heavily and inflate the money in an effort to weather the financial shock of losing their cash cow.
Over time, their unofficial position became "If we can't have the profits from the work of slaves, ain't nobody gonna have those profits from the work of slaves."
And now we see what sort of evil bastards those New England robber barons (still the same today) were.
They've been selling (and publishing) a lie for 150 years.
It’s you selling the lie DegenerateLamp - and not a very clever one.
It went to war to preserve it's money, which necessarily required the South not to trade directly with Europe at lower tariffs and without protectionist laws.
On 3/18/1861, The Boston Transcript wrote:
“It does not require extraordinary sagacity to perceive that trade is perhaps the controlling motive operating to prevent the return of the seceding States to the Union. “Alleged grievances in regard to slavery were originally the causes for the separation of the cotton States; but it is apparent that the people of the principal seceding states are now for commercial independence. They dream that the centers of traffic can be changed from Northern to Southern ports. “The merchants of New Orleans, Charleston, and Savannah are possessed with the idea that New York, Boston, and Philadelphia may be shorn, in the future, of their mercantile greatness, by a revenue system verging upon free trade.“If the Southern Confederation is allowed to carry out a policy by which only a nominal duty is laid upon imports, no doubt the business of the chief Northern cities will be seriously injured thereby.”
All of that "preserving the Union" bullsh*t was just a smoke screen for their real reasons. The South was a cash cow, and the North wanted that money to keep coming their way. If the South was unproductive or relatively worthless territory, they would have said "fine. Leave." As they did with Cuba when we had it.
So yes, they killed 600,000 men in an evil effort to keep the money rolling in from slavery, they then *LIED* about the reasons they went to war so as to save face and misdirect people regarding the very evil thing that they did.
Rubes are still buying their propaganda.
Your war was for "Money." In fact it was for Slave money.
While the slave money flowed, the North was content to receive it. When the money stopped, their *WRATH* became terrible. They went to war.
So say The Diogenes version of the history of The Civil War.
You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. These two pieces of information clarify what was going on.
The South earned 72% of the money, but New York collected it.
Hey! No need to get insulting! I'm just as profanely strident as anyone!!!
but the South went to war to preserve slavery.
I agree, but only in part. The second and equally-important part is that they didn't want to be bossed around by the North. I guess we call it States Rights, but it boils down to not wanting to be told what to do.
And the funny thing is, slavery would have been obsolete very quickly anyways. A machine is lot more economical than a human slave.
There also seem to be a bunch of other more minor reasons, but the two I stated, you should agree with... if you are being as honest with yourself as I am with myself.
Please, you’re reaching. The South went to war to preserve an economic system based on the use of slave labor and defended that practice in drawing up it’s own constitution and by going to war.
So say the facts. You just do not like them because they prove how the greed of evil people manipulated men into fighting and dying for a lie.
New York was the center of Power in 1861, and it is still effectively the center of Power in 2016. (They run the biggest banks, brokerages, insurance, the markets, and most of the "News" Media.) It's a center of power because it has money. It was a center of power in 1861 because it had money.
New York state is the "Empire State", and New York city is the "Empire City." Did anyone ever stop and think that they ought to take that boast seriously?
No it did not. The South shut down the river through a collection of states. That was a major point.
Your liberal arts class may not make that known.
Everyone I worked with in Tennessee had no slaves in their history. It was a common labor for cotton but not much else.
The North honestly could care less. It was about creating a Government that you get today.
The money northern banks made on the slave trade flowed from the south to the north and back south again. I never defended bankers, Southern or Northern. I believe in the Union. In one great nation, The United States of America, my home and the greatest country on Earth. I believe slavery was and is evil and I firmly believe the South fought a war to preserve it.
I went to catholic schools, they were hardly liberal fifty years ago.
I ended up researching the slavery issue in the United States from the opposite end. (The Declaration of Independence is what kicked it off.) I was actually researching Vattel's influence on the Declaration, and I found both topics crashed together at the juncture of slavery, so I followed the slavery history for a bit.
The trend is apparent. If you start at 1776, you see slavery slowly being abolished in state after state. It had become "passe", and the "better people" were now frowning on it. It had become socially taboo, and even the Southern Aristocratic wealthy class was growing ashamed of it.
The problem was, their states were more able to turn a profit on it than were those Northern states. It was harder for the Southern states to give it up because so much of their economic activity depended on it.
The Northern states also had the option to go sell their slaves in the South, and thereby not lose the money they had invested in them. The South had no such option.
Never the less, the social onus against it was growing stronger, and the wealthy classes would eventually have succumbed to all that social pressure, (the way wealthy classes always do) and slavery would have eventually gone away there too, in the fullness of time.
I appreciate your honesty in understanding the value of being first in all things monetary, regardless of the time.
It is the true assessment of power.
To say the North in power gave a rats ass about slaves is ridiculous in every form.
And what you aren't grasping is the fact that the North fought a protectionist war to preserve the profits they made from it.
They were going to leave the slaves in bondage.
They only changed their mind when it had gone too far for them to get away with that.
I do not deride any schools as long as a consequence for your action is taught. 18 is soon and death much sooner than you think.
I do deride revisionist history. The civil war was not about slavery and never will be.
Guess you’ve never read the Confederate Constitution, have you?
You seem to not understand that it is your Government that taught you your history.
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.