Whoever wrote this article needs to refer to the southern states’ Articles of Secession if he doesn’t think the Civil War was about slavery. Bizarre revisionism.
Ya I’m not sure why people on FR say the Civil War wasn’t about slavery.
Yes, it was. 100%. If the North hadn’t wanted to get rid of slavery, the South would never have seceded.
I was going to respond to the article, but then I read this comment and realized there was no need.
Lincoln stated the war wasn’t about slavery. Many, many times.
Looks like even 19 year FReepers can be pulled in by fake news.
A lesson to us all.
Exactly
The Confederate Constitution also prohibited laws that interfered with someone’s “right” to own slaves and prohibited its states from interfering in the ownership of slaves or restricting slavery.
Read the South’s articles of confederation—nearly every line and paragraph concerns slavery.
Then why did Lincoln offer the slave states an amendment to the Constitution that would guarantee slavery where it legally existed?
Regarding the article, Dakota War of 1862. Lincoln saved 265. The conflict went on until Wounded Knee.
It is bizarre revisionism. They way you describe it being about slavery, one would never guess that Slavery would have remained legal in the Union if the South hadn't left.
How can you say it was a fight over slavery when both sides had legal slavery? The Union didn't even give up slavery until December of 1865; Six months after it had been eliminated in the South.
If the Union launched a war to destroy slavery, they should have started in Maryland, where they already had their armies.
Stop the revisionist history.