Was the Civil War about Slavery?

Acton Institute, Prager University ^ | 8/11/2015 | Joe Carter

[iowamark]

What caused the Civil War? That seems like the sort of simple, straightforward question that any elementary school child should be able to answer. Yet many Americans—including, mostly, my fellow Southerners—claim that that the cause was economic or state’s rights or just about anything other than slavery.

But slavery was indisputably the primary cause, explains Colonel Ty Seidule, Professor of History at the United States Military Academy at West Point.

The abolition of slavery was the single greatest act of liberty-promotion in the history of America. Because of that fact, it’s natural for people who love freedom, love tradition, and love the South to want to believe that the continued enslavement of our neighbors could not have possibly been the motivation for succession. But we should love truth even more than liberty and heritage, which is why we should not only acknowledge the truth about the cause of the war but be thankful that the Confederacy lost and that freedom won.

[BroJoeK]

miss marmelstein: "But that is not the same as viciously attacking the opinions of people here who had great grandfathers die in this war and wish to honor their memory by flying flags and laying wreaths at Confederate War memorials."

Despite what you may have heard (and where was that?), everyone posting on Free Republic, recognizes and honors the unbelievable courage, military skills, tenacity and good behavior of soldiers on both sides in the US Civil War.
In that, those young men set high examples which our military hopes to follow to this day.

And there is huge sympathy and love for Southern culture, music, food and even the Lost Cause, all over the country.
Let me give you a personal example:

Two weeks ago I drove from Pennsylvania to New Orleans, through seven Southern states, over 1,000 miles each way, and in all that that trip did not see a single Confederate Battle Flag.
No, I'm not saying there aren't any, just that I didn't see them.

On the other hand, when I drive through small towns and villages of central Pennsylvania, I see US and Confederate flags flying side-by-side in maybe a third of them.
So we love the South, we love our rebels and we love the old Union, not so much the new progressive-liberal-socialist Democrat Big Government one...

[rockrr]

“Lincoln’s fault” - for when it’s too egregious to blame Bush

[miss marmelstein]

If you don’t think that using the past to cast guilt on the present is not occurring, you live in more of a fantasy land that I could ever imagine. Why did Ben Afflick not want his slave owner ancestors revealed during a show about ancestry? In 1960, it would have been met with a shrug, in 2015, he would have received hate mail and death threats, been called a cracker and possibly - just possibly - denied work. It is called Cultural Marxism and is alive and well. Just because you don’t know about it doesn’t mean it is not occurring.

The truth IS the truth but statistics are something else. As I said in my last post, I don’t give a damn if 93% of southerners owned slaves. I leave the bean-counting to you.

[miss marmelstein]

I was merely pointing out how heated the rhetoric gets here with several freepers engaging in real south-hatred. It’s off-putting to me. One of them, Sherman Logan, was recently banned.

[rockrr]

Let’s look at your example (of Afflick). Who is doing the smearing? Not FReepers. Certainly not me. Yes it is occurring but what I saw was the left attacking their own. I don’t care if Afflick’s ancestors owned slaves - at one time slavery was legal.

Would you be so kind as to define “cultural marxism” - you’ve levied that charge several times and I want to understand it better.

[rockrr]

Sherman Logan never once engaged in "south-hatred".

[Tau Food]

Evidently your judgement on the merits of a secession/independence movement depend upon the success or failure of that movement. Had the Founding Fathers been defeated they would be having the same abuse heaped on their heads that is now reserved for the Confederates.

I discussed three rebellions: 1) the Jacobite Uprising (unsuccessful), 2) the American colonial rebellion (successful), and 3) the American "secessionist" rebellion (unsuccessful).

The first one was about religion (Catholic/Protestant) and the politics of Scotland/Great Britain. My ancestors fought for the losing side, but I can't really tell you now that history has shown that one side was more just than the other.

The second one (our American war for independence) concerned whether the American colonies were to be governed by a king on the other side of the Atlantic. Setting aside the monarchy issue, I think a good argument can be made that it made sense for Americans to govern themselves. Remember, it took weeks just to communicate a message across the Atlantic. The colonies had matured to a degree that they could govern themselves and so I think that rebellion made a lot of sense from a purely logistical point of view.

The third rebellion concerned the American "secessionists" desire for independence from the USA. The "secessionists" claimed that "secession" was absolutely necessary to preserve slavery (and they were probably right about that). Slavery had had a long track record in this world, but the desire to preserve slavery was running against the tides of history. For those who owned slaves, the prospective loss of their investment in human beings naturally clouded their judgement. At the time, slaves as an asset class may have been the most valuable asset class in the world. (At least, that is what the "secessionists" claimed.)

I don't judge the merits of these three rebellions by who won or who lost. In terms of history, I don't think it now matters much to most of the world whether George II or Bonnie Prince Charlie won (and, again,my family was on the losing side of that struggle). In truth, the Stuarts were just as rotten as their enemies.

I do think that the world benefited from the success of the American colonies. I don't think it made sense for Great Britain to try to govern prosperous colonies on the other side of an ocean. And, I think that the American colonists went on to create the greatest nation in the history of the world. I think the USA has done much good. So, that is why I am glad that the colonies won that struggle.

I don't think that our world would have benefited from the preservation of slavery for any length of time. I am sorry that so many people had to die and I am even sorry that some slaveholders lost what was genuinely a huge investment, but it was time for slavery to go. So, I'm glad that the "secessionists" lost their rebellion.

Well I’ve heard more than a few Americans think it didn’t turn out so great. A powerful centralized national government impervious to outside correction is part of Lincoln’s legacy. States are now mere administrative districts of the federal Leviathan.

There are not many of you who believe that the wrong side won our Civil War. The USA is popular in every section this country. The South is every bit as patriotic as any other section.

You have no real reason to believe that a CSA wouldn't have grown into a powerful, bloated bureaucracy on its own. As shown by Wallet Hub (a financial website), red states are more financially dependent on the Federal government than blue states. Overall, the Federal government is being used to transfer financial resources from blue states to red states. When it comes to using a big, central government as an ATM, the South is at the front of the line.

Southern states were also at the front of the line when it came to ratifying the 16th Amendment (our federal income tax). Alabama was the first state to ratify that amendment, Kentucky was second, South Carolina was third, Mississippi was fifth, Oklahoma was sixth, Maryland was seventh, Georgia was eighth and Texas was ninth. And, despite all this, you somehow conclude that the people of the South don't like big, centralized government?

You live in a dream world, friend. The South is as responsible as any section of this country for the fact that we have a monstrous central government in Washington, DC.

[miss marmelstein]

I was directly responding to your silly post that the past can never reflect on the present - when that is absurd on the face of it. Since I caught you up short, you are now defaulting to the claim that you were only speaking about freepers - who, according to you, are above that kind of attack. I don’t think so.

I’m not doing your homework for you. Cultural Marxism is probably available on Wikipedia.

Sherman Logan was nasty and deserved to be banned. That he was banned over abortion and not southern-bashing was just dumb luck, I guess, on his part.

[Tau Food]

Of course, anyone can call himself a slave. I'd like a dollar for every time i've heard husbands or wives call themselves slaves.

But, we're the luckiest people in the world to live in the USA. Do you see any of these "slaves" leaving?

That's just people feeling sorry for themselves. I picture them over their keyboards, "How long, O Lord? Will you forget me forever?" (Psalm 13)

[rockrr]

I was directly responding to your silly post that the past can never reflect on the present...

I never said that. Read it again.

Since I caught you up short, you are now defaulting to the claim that you were only speaking about freepers - who, according to you, are above that kind of attack. I don’t think so.

The context of my remarks is clear - but your comprehension is found wanting. I can't help you with that.

Sherman Logan was nasty and deserved to be banned.

Opinions vary.

[miss marmelstein]

Perhaps you could learn to write more clearly so that your readers can understand what you are saying.

[DoodleDawg]

Don't know if this is true everywhere but the remastered Ken Burns Civil War documentary is on tonight and every night this week on my PBS station.

[HandyDandy]

Can we do a live-thread for all of that week? Maybe a drinking game?

[rockrr]

Normal people have no problems with my writing.

[CatherineofAragon]

Well, I don’t know what the purpose of the Stone Mountain graphic was, unless you agree with some leftists that it shouldn’t be there.

I don’t want to be misunderstood. I’m a Southerner, born and raised, and I agree with wardaddy that our region is conservatism’s last holdout. Most folks without an axe to grind understand that.

You mention mythology...the biggest myth I’m seeing is the flowery, florid concept of young Southerners being taught about the Lost Cause “with their mother’s milk.” What the hell do you think goes on down here? Do you envision parents sitting with their children on their knees-—on the veranda, am I right?-—regaling them with tales of devoted Mammys and glorious battles from 150-plus years ago?

God, what a stereotypical fantasy.

It’s a simple fact that the left has chosen to go after Southern history and culture because it’s the lowest-hanging fruit. Useful idiots on the right, thinking they’re being all inclusive and racially open-minded, go along with them, not realizing that monuments to Washington and Jefferson will come next. The nature of the left should not be misunderstood...it is ravenous, and it will not stop until all reminders of our evil white history have been removed.

I just don’t see the point of fighting the Civil War over and over. The Revolutionary War has always been my personal interest, but...that’s just me.

[miss marmelstein]

Normal people skip your writing.

[miss marmelstein]

Wow! You said it so much better than I could. I was about to respond to that nutty post but you intervened. Apparently it’s we northerners, midwesterners and westerners who buy into the magnolia ‘n mint juleps far more than actual southerners.

What’s yore mammy servin’ you for lunch, Miz Catherine? You know a little gal like you can’t be seen eatin’ in fron’ of the gempmums - they most nevah marry a gal that eats a lot!

[rockrr]

Too funny! I’ll take that both as a confirmation of my statement and as a self-indictment!

[Tau Food]

I’m a Southerner, born and raised, and I agree with wardaddy that our region is conservatism’s last holdout.

When it comes to some of the social and cultural issues, I think that the South has shown great leadership in trying to preserve some of our most important traditional values. Specifically, I am thinking about their efforts to confine the concept of marriage to its traditional definition and their efforts to protect the lives of unborn children.

However, I can't say that the South has done a better job at avoiding high divorce rates. And, as I indicated in post 987, when it comes to financial matters, it is just a myth that the South is more supportive of a small, central government. Mississippi is the state with the highest percentage of population on food stamps and 9 of the top 10 are in Southern parts of the country.

It's true that Southern politicians are right up front in complaining about welfare, etc., but they always make sure that their constituents somehow wind up with more than their share. So, how should we judge them - by what they say or by what they do?

There are many good people in all parts of this country who feel that the Federal government has become too large. I just hope that there is enough of us to make a difference.

[miss marmelstein]

Actually, you just condemned yourself in that last post. Now go listen to Michael Medved. I hear the new slave-owner count is up to 120%.