Replies

Through the normal Constitutional Political process, maintenance of slavery was the one thing that was undoubtedly and rigidly safe within the Union. It would appear as though the Radicals were the ones who used the war to circumvent the process.

It's a regret that there was not enough people in the South with your viewpoint in 1861 because we wouldn't have had this statement from the South Carolina declaration of causes for secession:

"A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction."

The words of the Confederates of 1861 plainly point to slavery as the central issue.

It's a regret that there was not enough people in the South with your viewpoint in 1861 because we wouldn't have had this statement from the South Carolina declaration of causes for secession:

I don't understand what you're trying to say. Clearly, the Radicals desired to upend the Constitution. The new president expressly stated that that sectional conflict would be carried forward (as you quoted in the 'house divided' line). The election, the makeup of the new congress, all factors pointed to political domination of the Southern states, and Lincoln himself confirmed that the power would be used against them.

Do you trust Lincoln's words to be correct? Then there were two alternatives, peaceful separation and bloody fratricidal war. The South made their choice, Admiral Lincoln made his.

for the 5-6% of northerners & southerners, who actually OWNED slaves, the continuation of slavery was VERY important.

otoh, for the rest of the country, it simply was NOT a major issue, no matter how much you may WISH it was.to quote a former professor at Grambling University, "less than 10,000 people, north or south, cared enough about slavery to fight even one skirmish, much less a major war, over "the plight of the slaves". they SHOULD have cared;they did NOT." (emphasis: MINE)

in point of fact, about 95% of the CSA's military forces had GROSS ASSETS of 25.oo USD per person. ours was a PEASANT ARMY/PEASANT UPRISING, led by a handful of professionals like LEE,JACKSON & a FEW others.(fwiw, the "Planter Aristocracy" all too often COLLOBORATED with the enemy. had we won our war for LIBERTY, the collaborators would have been NEXT on the "list of enemies of dixie freedom")

that is the UNvarnished TRUTH. (that is the MAIN reason our ancestors lost the war. peasant uprisings SELDOM succeed. the only one i can think off offhand that DID succeed was the uprising against the French/Japanese in Indochina 1940-54.)

free dixie,sw