GOP candidate: Civil war wasn’t about slavery

The Hill ^ | June 25th, 2018 | Lisa Hagen

[Mariner]

Republican Senate nominee Corey Stewart said that he doesn’t believe that the Civil War was fought over the issue of slavery, arguing that it was mostly about states’ rights.

In a Monday interview with Hill.TV’s “Rising,” Stewart, who recently won the GOP nomination in the Virginia Senate race, said that not all parts of Virginia’s history are “pretty.”

But he said he doesn’t associate slavery with the war.

“I don’t at all. If you look at the history, that’s not what it meant at all, and I don’t believe that the Civil War was ultimately fought over the issue of slavery,” Stewart said.

When “Rising” co-host Krystal Ball pressed him again if the Civil War was “significantly” fought over slavery, Stewart said some of them talked about slavery, but added that most soldiers never owned slaves and “they didn’t fight to preserve the institution of slavery.”

“We have to put ourselves in the shoes of the people who were fighting at that time and from their perspective, they saw it as a federal intrusion of the state,” he said.

Stewart also said he doesn’t support a Richmond elementary school named after a Confederate general deciding to rename it after former President Obama.

[jeffersondem]

“How about plain old common sense, but looking at your posts you appear to be very deficient in that area.”

When the North benefited bigly from slavery, the North was for slavery.

When the North came to believe their economic and political competitors could benefit more from slavery than they could, the North opposed slavery.

Is this what you mean by moral “plain old common sense?”

[DoodleDawg]

When the North benefited bigly from slavery, the North was for slavery.

When the North came to believe their economic and political competitors could benefit more from slavery than they could, the North opposed slavery.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

[rustbucket]

I would put a link here but I don’t know how to link in html.

Link to the FR HTML Sandbox.

The sandbox will explain how to do a lot of neat things in HTML. Scroll down to where it says how to create a link.

[OIFVeteran]

Thanks, I’ll take a look at that.

[gandalftb]

Well here we are pushing 600 posts on a subject well discussed by both sides, politely and well referenced, my compliments.

It is easy to get lost on such a complicated subject.

Some ideas seem very clear and have the benefit of “traction”. They seem to be obvious.

Slavery would have always ended.

In SC, 1/3 owned 2/3.

That 2/3, when freed would have become full citizens. Congress would have seen to that, too many future voters and political power to ignore.

As full citizens, the 2/3, former slaves would have the right to buy guns, compete for jobs, earn money, spend at businesses they liked, elect the next sheriff, governor, mayor, representatives, etc.

Those choices certainly would be highly objectionable to the minority white population with guns.

It is reasonable that the 1/3 white ruling class knew full well what abolition meant at the time.

There would have been war, unavoidable.

The Confederacy would never make more than modest and early gains until the economic might of the Federal government destroyed the resistance and won.

None of todays discussion can change those central ideas.

[BroJoeK]

Mariner: "While slavery has been the single dumbed down reason given, but the civil war was far more than just about abolition."

The reason it's "the single dumbed down reason given" is it's the single biggest reason given, if not the only reason given, in Deep South "Reasons for Secession" documents.
So the difference between real history and Lost Cause myth is that real historians take the 1861 secessionists at the own words, whereas mythologizers insist that wasn't the "real reason" and concoct other issues they claim were more important.

[DiogenesLamp]

Slavery would have always ended.

In SC, 1/3 owned 2/3.

That 2/3, when freed would have become full citizens.

Here I have to interject a "maybe." In the 1850s, there was more sentiment to send them back to Africa than to accept them as full Citizens. Lincoln was actually an officer in an Illinois organization which was dedicated to sending blacks to Africa and South America. Anyplace so long as they weren't in Illinois.

Illinois had laws prohibiting the settlement of blacks, and remember, this is a Northern state we are talking about. A lot of states didn't want blacks in their state, and passed laws to prevent it.

So I don't see it as axiomatic that what you suggest would have happened. It might have happened, but it could have gone another way too.

Since a lot of your subsequent speculation hinges on this point, i'm not sure it is worthwhile to point out what I consider to be some less than certain assumptions in the rest of your message.

[DiogenesLamp]

When they attempted to resupply a federal fort...

I just wanted to acquaint you with the cargo ship "USS Pawnee."

Here's another angle.

Lots of room for cargo, the guns hardly get in the way at all.

.

.

.

Here is a picture of another cargo ship they sent called "Thomas Freeborn."

Here is a scene from the deck of the Cargo ship "USS Pocahontas.

.

.

.

I don't know why those confederates were getting upset. It was just a bunch of supply ships setting up at the entrance to Charleston harbor.

There were five more "Cargo Ships" sent on this "resupply" mission, of which I think only one wasn't carrying cannon. (at that time. It was armed later.)

Unfortunately we can only find what pictures we can find, but we can get the armament and crew stats of the other "Cargo" ships from records.

[Bull Snipe]

“Here is a picture of another cargo ship they sent called “Thomas Freeborn”
You know damned good and well, the last photo is of a tug boat that did not participate in the Sumter resupply effort. You identified it to me as an 1863 photograph a couple of threads ago.
Nothing in the Navy ORs indicate that any of the civilian ships chartered for the Sumter resupply effort were armed.

[Bull Snipe]

more drivel, USS Pawnee is not a cargo ship. She was a warship of the United States Navy. You know that, why post falsehoods.

[rockrr]

Nope.

[rockrr]

138

[DiogenesLamp]

You know damned good and well, the last photo is of a tug boat that did not participate in the Sumter resupply effort.

I am fully aware that the Thomas Freeborn did not participate in the Sumter intimidation effort. It was sent to participate, but it didn't arrive.

What is relevant is the fact it was sent. Confederate spies in New York would have sent word that it was coming, and the military planners in Charleston would have assumed it was going to arrive.

I want to take this moment to point out something that I have long known, but I suspect many people do not.

People act on what they *believe*.

What they believe isn't always correct, but they will formulate their plans based on what they believe is going to happen.

A reasonable assumption is that there were people who knew the nature of all the US ships that frequented ports where they lived or worked. The characteristics of the Thomas Freeborn would have been ascertained to the best of the ability of the Confederate spies and sympathizers, and that information would have been conveyed to the Southern authorities, along with the knowledge that it had been sent.

Nothing in the Navy ORs indicate that any of the civilian ships chartered for the Sumter resupply effort were armed.

I believe the "Uncle Ben" was the only one that wasn't armed, and it was armed a year or so later. The other two tug boats were armed, and the "Baltic" carried two hundred riflemen and who knows how many US Sailors.

Believe me, if I could have found pictures of the Powhatan's guns, and the Harriet Lane's guns, and the Yankee's guns, I would have posted them. I can only post what I can find, and one of what I found was "Thomas Freeborn."

[DiogenesLamp]

more drivel, USS Pawnee is not a cargo ship. She was a warship of the United States Navy. You know that, why post falsehoods.

The USS Pawnee was a warship? Well that can't be right, because OIFVeteran told me it was a "resupply" mission. Nobody would send a bunch of warships on a "resupply" mission, would they?

Why warships aren't very suitable for carrying cargo or supplies at all!

Are you sure it's a warship? What about the Cargo ships "Pocahontas", "Yankee", "Powhatan", and "Harriet Lane"? Surely those aren't warships too?

Why I can't believe someone would send warships instead of supply ships on a supply mission! Boy, those guys in Washington DC were just making all kinds of mistakes! They should have gotten someone else to run the shipyards, because you have to be some kind of fool to send warships on a cargo mission.

Maybe that's why it took so many of them to carry the cargo? If they had just sent ships designed for cargo, like "Star of the West", they might have only needed one.

At least the Baltic had those two hundred riflemen, and those hundreds of sailors to help them unload all that cargo they put on those warships.

:)

[Bull Snipe]

Warships were necessary because on the last resupply effort to fort Sumter by the Star of the West. She was fired on by a Confederate battery at the entrance to Charleston harbor.

[Bull Snipe]

Where is your proof that the two tugs were armed.
Every school child knows that A USS is probably armed.
Why do you make an issue of it. They were war ships.
Thomas Freeborn was armed after she was purchased by the U.S. Navy in May of 1861. She was not armed for the Sumter expedition.

[DiogenesLamp]

Warships were necessary because on the last resupply effort to fort Sumter by the Star of the West. She was fired on by a Confederate battery at the entrance to Charleston harbor.

They were necessary to do what? What is it that Warships were going to do?

I am listening with rapt attention here.

[Bull Snipe]

You know that they were authorized to use force if the resupply mission was resisted by Confederate authorities.

[Hot Tabasco]

Whooo boy. Batten down the hatches, the battle is about to begin.

States Rights vs. slavery.........This has going on forever as long as I've been here........

It's like dried out cow patties, why add water to dead poop unless you want to smell it again? And over time, it will just become dried out cow patties again..........

At this point in time, it ain't even worth discussing anymore.........

[MarineBrat]

You may love and bless the giant fed, but most around here don’t. And none of us appreciate disparaging WWII veterans.