Posted on 01/19/2011 11:35:34 AM PST by kosciusko51
One hundred and fifty years after the Civil War began, we're still fighting it -- or at least fighting over its history. I've polled thousands of high school history teachers and spoken about the war to audiences across the country, and there is little agreement even on why the South seceded. Was it over slavery? States' rights? Tariffs and taxes?
As the nation begins to commemorate the anniversaries of the war's various battles -- from Fort Sumter to Appomattox -- let's first dispense with some of the more prevalent myths about why it all began.
1. The South seceded over states' rights.
Confederate states did claim the right to secede, but no state claimed to be seceding for that right. In fact, Confederates opposed states' rights -- that is, the right of Northern states not to support slavery.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Not to re-fight the war 150 years later, but the Confederacy fought mostly on its home turf, and higher casualties are almost always found among those on offense rather than defense.
“Fear that Washington would violate Dred Scott did.”
Specifically in the South, I mean.
(ps - did you do some traveling in the East?)
Oh brother.....did you win the war? That is all that matters. Don’t try to change history. Saying I sound like Obama does not change facts.
“But his words are not my words.”
I was addressing the author. Happened to be posted to you because you posted the article.
Well, if the Washington Post prints it, it must be true... but that aside, what too many people COMPLETELY overlook is that the South didn’t go to war over anything... it declared independence from the North, for whatever reasons people wish to argue, and only FOUGHT BACK when occupied or otherwise made war upon by the North! That’s a distinction that cannot be stressed enough. It was a war of independence, same as the 13 colonies separating from Britain. Second, and just as important, is why the North started the war in the first place. Anyone who thinks it was to wipe out slavery flunks American history outright. It was entirely about “preserving the union,” much the same way Turkey wanted to preserve their “union” when the Balkan states began agitating for independence. Honest Abe himself said that if he could preserve the union by freeing all of the slaves, some of the slaves, or none of the slaves... he would do it. Holding the nascent empire together was the only thing that mattered in the end.
The reason the States seceded was States Rights and the Morill Tax.
Like Democratic politicians of this very day and age, the issue was brought to false importance by Lincoln as a way to gain support for his over-the-top, slash and burn, scorched earth policy against American citizens who were fairly exercising their Constitutional rights. Lincoln stated the reason he could not allow secession was that the government simply could not survive on its own resources in the North. “The Great Emancipator” only became inured of the defense of freeing the slaves as a political ploy.
Here are some of Lincoln’s comments on African-Americans before it became politically expedient for him to change them.
Abraham Lincoln Quote
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”
African-Americans have been allowing themselves to be bought and sold by politicians ever since.
http://www.ashevilletribune.com/archives/censored-truths/Morrill%20Tariff.html
Understood. Sorry for the confusion.
The Confederate states’ secession documents are fairly straightforward in identifying the single biggest cause.
Neither side in the war was right; both sides fought for evil reasons.
I hate to say this but some in my family owned slaves. They were very expensive. I saw the will/inventory of one relative dated 1850 something. Had about 5 as I recall listed on the will/inventory. $350 was about the average price. Back then that was a lot of cash!
They didn’t have slave insurance back then.
They listed everything on the will, right down to how many spoons they had!
....and that is the reason why the real lyrics of the Battle Hymn of the Republic, sung as they marched to war, was
".....as He died to make men holy, let us die to make men hug."
Huh? I’m not ignoring anything, and it’s rude of you to suggest so. I’m pointing out that the guy’s little writing quirks FURTHER demonstrate his bias. Jeeze, what a weirdo you are.
Point 3 and Point 5 are just ridiculous. Poor whites across the South didn’t go to bad at nite with dreams of owning slaves. Most of them just were happy to have a meal on the table at supper time and a bed to sleep in. Obvious since he doesn’t provide even anecdotal evidence to support his claim. To say that there was no secessionist sentiment due to the perception of the North imposing it’s will on the South is ridiculous.
The cotton gin and other mechanical implements would have taken slavery down fast. Slaves may have been free labor, but they weren’t free to buy, house, or feed. Peak agricultural employment in America was 1900, I would expect mostly from the fact we we still expanding as a nation. In established areas farmers were already mechanizing and people were already starting to move to factories. There was already unrest in the late 1800’s due to overproduction, squeezed profits, and falling ag wages.
Like all things, the Civil War and the reasons behind it were complex. The stated meaning didn’t mean there were ulterior motives. This guy doesn’t want to admit that to fit his agenda, and with his little did about the Bush tax cuts, I think you can tell where that agenda lies.
Somewhere out there in all the confusion is always a voice of truth. Thank You.
That’s like saying World War II wasn’t about fascism, it was about Hawaii. Lincoln’s primary goal may have been preserving the union, but the context was revolved around slavery.
“WHAT?????????????????????????”
Duh. They lost. That’s all that matters.
The South seceded because of the States Rights issue...absolutely.
But Slavery was WRONG!!!!!
Now, someone PLEASE defend the practice of human bondage....and not the issue of a states right to secede.
Sorry but it doesn't follow that fighting on Southern territory means the Confederate army must adopt defensive battlefield tactics. Lee usually operated in offensive mode to make up for his smaller numbers. The tactics of the day mostly consisted of lining up and blasting away at each other anyway (until Petersburg). Fighting on home ground did mean that the Confederate troops were more motivated however and that was a factor in the disproportionate casualty rate. FYI the South also took 50,000 more prisoners than the Yankees did.
The South is gonna rise again. It has in spirit with the Tea Party. It is an independent spirit that is spread throughout our nation and it scares the commie loving, big government left to death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.