Replies

So, I asked Why did the South secede? You answered by saying “If a man has Freedom of Speech, what opinions are so bad that he can be denied the right to speak them”. How, in any reasonable universe is this poor excuse for a Zen koan an answer? I would like you to respond, in clear English, Why did the South secede. It’s a simple question, and deserves a simple answer.

Money. I think i've answered this a dozen times. Why did the North invade? Money. Why did the South secede? Money.

It was all about who was going to control the slave produced money. Both the North and the South wanted that money, and that is exactly what the war was about.

Money. Money. Money.

I don’t see why I should pay attention to those four states instead of the other 7 states. Since when do four states represent a majority in a coalition of 11?”

So, I will turn it back on you. Why can you ignore these four states?

Well firstly because they are a minority, and secondly because I don't really accept what people say at face value. You may find this hard to believe, but people will lie about their real motives for doing something, especially in politics.

All else is just blather and noise. Money is the reason slavery existed in the first place, and money is the reason why the South wanted to leave, and Money is the reason why the North was intent on stopping them.

The First f***ing thing the North did was to throw up a Naval blockade all around the South. Hello? The whole F***ing war was mostly *LAND BATTLES* and the blockade did very little to affect the military portion of the war.

The blockade was totally about economics. It was not done for military reasons, it was done for financial reasons.

They claimed it? They did more than claimed it. They flat out stated it.

Sure, that small minority of states claimed it, but as I said people lie. Slavery was in absolutely no danger from remaining in the Union. The only change was going to be where the slave produced money ended up. With those states in the Union, the bulk of the slave production money ended up in New York and Washington DC. With independence, the bulk of that money would end up in New Orleans, Charleston, Mobile, and other southern port cities.

if slavery wasn’t the real reason why would they state it in their official documents?

Why would that teeny tiny minority of relatively unimportant states mention it in their official documents? To throw people off in figuring out the financial screwing the North was going to get when the South handled it's own trade with Europe without the US laws driving all of it's profits through New York and Washington DC.

One of the Northern newspapers figured it out.

"while the Southern states had claimed to secede over the slavery issue, now the mask has been thrown off and it is apparent that the people of the principal seceding states are now for commercial independence. They dream that the centres of traffic can be changed from Northern to Southern ports....by a revenue system verging on free trade...."
18 March 1861, the Boston Transcript

Economics tells the true story, and what the financial numbers clearly show is that the South was going to make a fortune off of being independent, and the North was going to lose an @$$load of money to the South. All else is just blather and noise. Money is the reason slavery existed in the first place, and money is the reason why the South wanted to leave, and Money is the reason why the North was intent on stopping them. The First f***ing thing the North did was to throw up a Naval blockade all around the South. Hello? The whole F***ing war was mostly *LAND BATTLES* and the blockade did very little to affect the military portion of the war. The blockade was totally about economics. It was not done for military reasons, it was done for financial reasons.

3 of the 4 states that even listed causes listed causes other than protection of slavery EVEN THOUGH THESE CAUSES WERE NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL (yes I am including Rhett's address as part of South Carolina's declaration since it was attached to it and sent out along with it).

South Carolina and Georgia talk extensively about economic grievances and Texas mentions that along with the malicious refusal to provide border security as was supposed to be required.

What do countries fight about? Overwhelmingly money. What do individuals fight about? Often money. Of course politicians will always try to couch it in terms of some supposedly noble purpose. Its never a good thing to tell a family their loved one gave his life for money or their son got half of his face blown off and will live the rest of his life a cripple for money....no matter how true it is. The North offered slavery effectively forever by express constitutional amendment. The US Congress passed a resolution stating that they were not fighting over slavery. Indeed, they still had slavery. Lincoln said many times he had no intention to interfere with slavery. Once it became a bloodbath, oh why THEN....magically....years later....against their express earlier statements....it became "all about slavery". Anybody who is not hopelessly naive or a rabid political ideologue can see right through that.