Initially only one state seceded- South Carolina. But that’s nitpicking. They all bugged out to preserve slavery because Johnny Reb couldn’t handle Lincoln’s election.
Lincoln didn’t call for volunteers until April 15, 1861. AFTER the attack on Fort Sumpter. What’s your point? That a few stragglers of the Confederacy didn’t have the balls to get froggy before big bad Abe hurt their tender little feelings?
“Does not the US Declaration of Independence declare it is a God given right for states to have independence if they want it?”
Did the Southern States not have representation in government as did the colonies? Did they try to bring suit in federal court to dissolve the Union? In any case, the topic is irrelevant in regards to the motivation for secession. Which of course was to preserve slavery.
“The US was going to preserve slavery indefinitely,”
Really? Ever heard of the 13th Amendment? In 1861 there were more free states than slave. Fail!
The Corwin Amendment. That’s rich. A desperate attempt to prevent the Civil War when it was obvious that war was coming. I suppose Great Britain never opposed Hitler because Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement. Absurd.
And all the South Carolina militia that were mobilized and the artillery positioned to threaten Fort Moultrie wasn’t hostile? I know, heads Jeff Davis wins, tails Lincoln loses.
“ The ultimate goal of the war was to force subjugation on states that had dared defy the corruptocracy running Washington DC for the betterment of the Northeastern elites who are still running it today.”
You’re nuts, plain and simple.
You keep repeating that assertion because that's what you have been taught to believe all your life. I was taught to believe that too, but I started questioning that theory when I started noticing bits and pieces of history that didn't make any sense in the context of what they had told me to believe. (Like the Corwin Amendment.)
Did the Southern States not have representation in government as did the colonies?
The declaration does not declare that "representation" is sufficient to ban people from exercising the God given right to have independence. It says that people can have independence if they want it.
Representation does a people no good if it cannot protect them from the majority which wishes to exploit them. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner, and the sheep's "representation" will do it no good at all.
“The US was going to preserve slavery indefinitely,”
Really? Ever heard of the 13th Amendment?
Yes, I have heard of the original 13th amendment. It proposed to extend protection of slavery in the US forever. It passed both houses of congress with mostly Republican support, and was ratified by five Northern states. Lincoln's secretary of state William Seward assured everyone that it would be ratified by New York as well, and then all the satellite states would have fallen in line.
This amendment was intended to preserve slavery in the United States of America. Lincoln continuously stated that he had no power to abolish slavery, and therefore slavery would have continued in the United States of America for at least another half century, even without the passage of the Corwin Amendment.
A desperate attempt to prevent the Civil War when it was obvious that war was coming.
There was no war proposed at the time the Corwin Amendment passed both houses of Congress mainly with Republican votes and 5 northern states ratified it. Therefore your claim that it was intended to prevent "war" is incorrect. It's intent was to convince the Southern states not to secede.
Funny, no one tried the line that "You can't secede because that's illegal!" routine on them. They tried to persuade them not to secede with this Amendment, but it didn't work. War wasn't in the cards until Lincoln decided he was going to start one with his war fleet.
And all the South Carolina militia that were mobilized and the artillery positioned to threaten Fort Moultrie wasn’t hostile?
Artillery wasn't brought up to threaten Anderson until *AFTER* Anderson committed several belligerent and violent acts against the confederates. *THEN* they brought up artillery.
If you read Abner Doubleday's account of the events, he says the locals cat called and mocked them, but offered no real confrontation or threat.
...that had dared defy the corruptocracy running Washington DC for the betterment of the Northeastern elites who are still running it today.
You’re nuts, plain and simple.
Primary source of all news liars is New York. The January 6th protests were an "Insurrection!" People being held in solitary confinement for six months on phony trumped up charges. Joe Biden got the most votes of any president in American history. Black people are constantly being murdered by the police.
Have you even been watching the news for the last several months?
If you haven't figured out where these lies are coming from, and why they are coming, then you don't have a grasp of what is going on nowadays.
Leaving the Corwin Amendment completely out of the picture, in 1860 there were 33 states. 15 of those states were slave states. To abolish slavery would have required a constitutional amendment. A constitutional amendment requires 3/4ths of all the states to pass it.
In a Union of 33 states, it would require 25 states to vote in favor of an amendment to pass it.
33-15 = 18 states in favor of abolishing slavery. The amendment fails massively.
But wait! There's more!
In order to override the votes of 15 states, we would have to have a union in which 15 states represents 25% of the vote. It would require a Union of 60 states with 45 states voting to abolish slavery, while the 15 voted to keep it.
We still do not yet have a Union of 60 states. We only have 50. It was therefore literally impossible to legally abolish slavery in the United States.
So when I tell you that slavery would have continued indefinitely in the United States, I am telling you the truth, not some made up bullsh*t that makes me feel good because I like the way it sounds.
So long as the Southern states remained in the United States, slavery would have been fully preserved by the laws of the United States.
If necessary, I can show you the math again, but it's pretty simple, and I think you can understand it.