And when Lincoln did issue the emancipation proclimation, it only covered the secceded Southern States, NOT the North or the slaves in the North. And the proclimation was done in the latter part of the war, when the North was losing.
The war was about states' rights. More states' rights would give us a smaller, less over-reaching federal government.
Slavery, as an institution was on it's way out in the South, And, no, everyone didn't get machinery overnight - but you don't teach and entire class of people to read, write, and handle money overnight either. Turning people (whatever their race) out of the only homes and way of life they knew with NO abilty to manage in the outside world is just wrong. The transition from slavery would have happened, and it could have been done in such a way as not to immediately create a starving underclass. But no, the North marched in, set them free and walked away from them.
“But no, the North marched in, set them free and walked away from them. “
Let’s not forget the Jim Crowe laws started in the North as the North tried to keep freed slaves from entering their State. Even Lincoln fought for laws to protect his home State of Illinois from allowing in freed slaves.
Funny thing about liberals and freeing things. My wife’s grandfather had a mink farm. When he died a bunch of liberals bought the place and set the little rascals free. They all died from starvation and being run over by cars on the roads.
You got the first part right but not the second. The south won several decisive battles early on but I don't think that anyone could claim a clear winner in 1863.
The war was about states' rights. More states' rights would give us a smaller, less over-reaching federal government.
The only "states right" that was at play was the souths desire to expand the slave trade beyond their existing state borders.
Slavery, as an institution was on it's way out in the South...
No it wasn't and the slavocracy blew up a nation in order to see to it.