Set revisionism aside, set aside all the legal haggling, what the Constitution said, the Federalist Papers, all the secession issues and answer this:
Wouldn’t slavery have ended someday?
In SC, 1/3 of the residents owned 2/3 of the residents, how would political power ever have changed hands peacefully?
Wouldn’t there always been some accumulated civil strife/political aggravation that led to war?
The Civil War was inevitable. The Confederacy could never have won, given its disadvantage of resources, manpower, and war materiel.
The end result would have been the same, no way to permanently avoid it.
What is the point of continuing to advocate what was always a losing cause?
What’s done is done.
...and so it goes, D.C. continues it’s heavy hand on the states even to this very day.
Oh how I wonder how things would have been if our capital were Richmond.
It certainly would. When it was determined to be no longer economically profitable, suddenly people would declare they had been persuaded by moral arguments against it!
The Civil War was inevitable. The Confederacy could never have won, given its disadvantage of resources, manpower, and war materiel.
If Lincoln had stopped at the same percentages of loss as King George III, they could have won. Had George III been as determined as Lincoln, The Colonies couldn't have won independence either. To say the South couldn't have won is easy in the hindsight of Lincolns absolute determination, but at the time, nobody would have guessed that he was willing to sacrifice so much blood and treasure to subjugate other people, and many thought the states wouldn't sit by and allow him to do it.
The end result would have been the same, no way to permanently avoid it.
Slavery could have ended peaceably as it did in most of the world. But talking about the ending of slavery is irrelevant. When the war began, there was no interest by any side in ending slavery.
The notion that the war had to do with ending slavery is after the fact propaganda meant to justify all the destruction and loss of life.
When the war began, it was about control of the Slave produced money, and both sides wanted the slaves to continue making that money. The fight was over who was going to collected it, either New York and Washington DC, or the Southern states where it was produced.
I think that if the southern states hadn’t rebelled slavery might have lasted well into the 20th century. The slave states could have blocked any amendments to end slavery up to that point. The south had already started using slaves in the few factories that they had. I could see that expanding.
As horrible as the war was I find the idea of slavery existing in the United States into the 20th century much much worse. Slavery always made a mockery of our Declaration of Independence. And if you read the notes and letters of many of the founding fathers you can see that they knew this also and hoped that slavery would eventually end at some point.
“What is the point of continuing to advocate what was always a losing cause?”
Yes, we all know about the awful toll of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Still, we persist. Some of us are not quite ready to junk the principles contained in the Declaration of Independence, or the wisdom of the Constitution.
And with the Federal Register now at an unfeasibly large two million pages it is just about time to say “no” to the Feral government in the District of Corruption.
That’s the point. And yes, it is controversial.