[CodeToad]

“The South wanted to continue in slavery. “

Sure, but so did some northern States. In fact, Jim Crow laws were alive and well in the North. Even Lincoln sought to keep freed slaves out of Illinois. The Northern States may have been a few years ahead of the southern States in ridding themselves of slavery, but they were not of clean hands by any means. That, and it wouldn’t have been long before slavery was a goner in the south, too.

[rockrr]

Sure, but so did some northern States

Every northern state either had abolished slavery or had a defined path to emancipation.

In fact, Jim Crow laws were alive and well in the North.

Jim Crow laws were uniquely southern. The north did have black codes that bore some similarity.

That, and it wouldn’t have been long before slavery was a goner in the south, too.

Not when you permanently enshrine the Particular Institution into your constitution and the cornfederates did.

[SkyDancer]

If it was going to be a goner in the South why did the South hold on to segregation? The DixieCrats came up with the KKK to first intimidate Catholics and Jews then branched out to murder blacks. Then along came that separate but equal nonsense. All under Democrats. If the CW or as I call it the war of secession didn't happen, slavery would have continued much longer in the South.

The CW has been over for 150 years and people are still fighting it; on both sides they push their arguments. The media yells that Bengazi is old news. More knowledgeable historians have pummled the CW for years. I'm out of it.