Posted on 07/20/2018 8:55:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
"If you like your slavery, you can keep your slavery."
His apologists never seem embarrassed by this fact, which they should be if they are asking people to swallow the claim that the war was about slavery.
The war was about the future of European trade, which was at that time dumping 200 million of Southern produced income on the City of New York, out of which Washington DC was taking most of their 64 million dollar share.
Both cities were getting wealthy from the Southern produced exports, and they were not going to let the South take that money away from them without a fight.
The New York Wealth and the Washington DC power structure launched that war to hang on to their POWER and MONEY.
This was the birth of the "deep state", "crony capitalist", "establishment", controlled by New York Liberals, which we have been fighting ever since, and which we are still fighting today.
Coming from the likes of you that’s high praise indeed.
The United Kingdom was perpetual too. Did this fact not register to you when you were typing that "Perpetual" thing?
The Declaration of Independence said that people had a right to be independent if they so chose to be. It didn't have an exception clause for nations that put the word "Perpetual" into their charter somewhere.
Besides, Lincoln was going to let the original seven states of the Confederacy leave if Virginia would assure him that they would stay. If Lincoln was going to let them leave, then what about your "Perpetual" argument? Care to try again?
You may be shocked to learn that I have little interest in your opinion. So far as I can tell, you are like a Hare Krishna cultist. You simply chant mantra, and offer little in the way of an intellectual rebuttal.
They didn't elect Lincoln, and so far as he behaved, he was the closest thing to a Monarch we've ever had. I dare say no other President so abused his powers as this man, but Woodrow Wilson locking up some 35 thousand political prisoners comes close. I suppose Roosevelt does too.
But the form of government is irrelevant to the right of independence. A lot of dictators claim they are a Republic or a Democracy, but they are in fact dictatorships.
Glad you think so. I expect to be giving you more such praise if you remain engaged in this discussion.
When ever liberals start venerating a Republican something stinks to high Heaven.
Bless your heart professor.
So no one in the South cast a vote for Lincoln? Is that what you’re saying?
Oh stop it. You are lying to yourself now. If you could be honest with yourself, you would admit that Slavery was going to remain in the Union indefinitely without secession.
Here is the hypocrisy of people like you. You claim that something which was *NOT* going to change, was the reason for starting a war that killed 750,000 people directly, and indirectly killed perhaps an additional 2 million.
There was no attempt by the Congress to abolish slavery. But you know what congress *did* do? They attempted to amend the constitution to PROTECT slavery, and you know what? It passed both houses of Congress, and five states voted *FOR* it, before they stopped trying to ratify the amendment to further protect slavery. Lincoln urged that this pro-slavery amendment be passed!
Just stop with your false "the Union was doing God's work and fighting for freedom!" bullsh*t.
In light of the facts, I would be embarrassed to keep claiming that the Washington DC power block was fighting to stop slavery. They were not. They were fighting to get back that slave produced money stream that was leaving them because of Southern independence.
Or would you prefer to believe that Washington DC was motivated by morals rather than greed? Cause if so, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I want to sell you.
He was like the Bernie Sanders of that era. A Kook extreme Liberal in the pockets of North Eastern big business. (except he was a lot smarter than Bernie Sanders.)
I’ll agree that South Carolina claimed that the United States no longer represented their interests. But what interests had the United States stopped representing? Well luckily the South Carolina traitors (whoops I mean secessionist) listed their grievances starting in Paragraph 15 of their declaration of secession.
“In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: “No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.”
This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.
The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
The ends for which the Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be “to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”
These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.
We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.
For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. 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.
This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.
On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.
The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.
Sectional interest and animosity will deepen the irritation, and all hope of remedy is rendered vain, by the fact that public opinion at the North has invested a great political error with the sanction of more erroneous religious belief.
We, therefore, the People of South Carolina, by our delegates in Convention assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, have solemnly declared that the Union heretofore existing between this State and the other States of North America, is dissolved, and that the State of South Carolina has resumed her position among the nations of the world, as a separate and independent State; with full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.
Adopted December 24, 1860”
So I will rephrase my question. What issue provoked South Carolina to secede from the Union?
Hint: The word your looking for is used about 18 times in their declaration of secession.
Well it certainly wasn't their interest in slavery that the US stopped supporting. They were falling all over themselves to send whatever reassurances they could that South Carolina could have all the slavery it wanted.
This guy makes a pretty good summation of South Carolina's interests that weren't being represented to their satisfaction. Here's an excerpt.
There is another evil in the condition of the Southern toward the Northern States, which our ancestors refused to bear toward Great Britain. Our ancestors not only taxed themselves, but all the taxes collected from them were expended among them. Had they submitted to the pretensions of the British Government, the taxes collected from them would have been expended on other parts of the British Empire. They were fully aware of the effect of such a policy in impoverishing the people from whom taxes are collected, and in enriching those who receive the benefit of their expenditure. To prevent the evils of such a policy was one of the motives which drove them on to revolution. Yet this British policy has been fully realized toward the Southern States by the Northern States. The people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern States, but after the taxes are collected three-fourths of them are expended at the North. This cause, with others connected with the operation of the General Government, has provincialized the cities of the South. Their growth is paralyzed, while they are the mere suburbs of Northern cities. The bases of the foreign commerce of the United States are the agricultural productions of the South; yet Southern cities do not carry it on. Our foreign trade is almost annihilated. In 1740 there were five shipyards in South Carolina to build ships to carry on our direct trade with Europe. Between 1740 and 1779 there were built in these yards twenty-five square-rigged vessels, beside a great number of sloops and schooners to carry on our coast and West India trade. In the half century immediately preceding the Revolution, from 1725 to 1775, the population of South Carolina increased seven-fold.
Millions? So there were slightly fewer than 4 million slaves in the Confederacy in 1861. Are you saying all the former slaves died of starvation and exposure? Half? Two thirds? What?
ping
But this sounds like a good topic for you to research. How many former slaves died from starvation and exposure in the aftermath of the civil war?
I've seen numbers all over the place, and some of the articles didn't distinguish whether or not the population in question was black or white.
I have a better idea. You are the one who claimed millions of former slaves died, you research it. Let us know what you find. Cite the actual article, not anonymous ones please.
I've seen numbers all over the place...
Numbers that you cannot provide a source for other than you read it someplace.
...and some of the articles didn't distinguish whether or not the population in question was black or white.
But you did. Millions of former slaves is your claim. Support for it please.
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.