[FLT-bird]

Most of the Lost Causers make this argument, and they all get the numbers wrong to some degree.

Most of the PC Revisionsists try to deny this reality. The facts are obviously not with them.

In this case FLT-bird lumps together the 7 Declarations before Fort Sumter with the 4 after Fort Sumter plus the two from Missouri & Kentucky. But we should delete the 4+2=6 after Fort Sumter, since those were very different circumstances.

uhhh no. We absolutely should not do that. He said "the South" as you PC Revisionists often do. That refers to all 12 states that seceded. I've pointed out several did not issue declarations of causes. I've pointed out several seceded only after Lincoln chose to start a war to impose government rule on people who did not consent to it. Those states are part of "the South" too. You can't just ignore them because its inconvenient for your argument.

Now, of the 7 Declarations of Secession before Fort Sumter, Two gave us no reasons whatever -- Florida and Louisiana. One, Alabama, listed slavery as the only reason in its Declaration.

Alabama did not issue a declaration of causes.

Four other states published lengthy "Declarations of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession...from the Federal Union"

Correct. 4 states issued declarations of causes.

Finally, there were two other widely published explanations in early 1861, by Robert Rhett (CSA Congressman) and Alexander Stephens (the Confederate VP). All of those who gave reasons listed slavery as a primary reason or as the only reason.

This is just false. There were many people who offered various explanations. The Southern states were democratic after all. Different people had different opinions which they were free to express. Rhett's was the most famous and widely circulated. It was attached to and was sent out with South Carolina's declaration of causes. Rhett went on at great length to explain the primary cause was economic. The Southern states were being economically exploited by sectional partisan legislation just as the 13 colonies had been by Britain a couple generations earlier.

Here is my analysis of the pre-Fort Sumter secessions*: Reasons for Secession S. Carolina Mississippi Georgia Texas Rbt. Rhett A. Stephens AVERAGE OF 6 Historical context 41% 20% 23% 21% 20% 20% 24% Slavery 20% 73% 56% 54% 35% 50% 48% States' Rights 37% 3% 4% 15% 15% 10% 14% Lincoln's election 2% 4% 4% 4% 5% 0% 3% Economic issues** 0 0 15% 0% 25% 20% 10% Military protection 0 0 0 6% 0% 0% 1% * Alabama listed only slavery in its "whereas" reasons for secession. ** Economic issues includes tariffs, "fishing smacks" and alleged favortism to Northerners in Federal spending.

Your "analysis". ROTFLMAO!!!

[BroJoeK]

FLT-bird: "uhhh no. We absolutely should not do that.
He said "the South" as you PC Revisionists often do.
That refers to all 12 states that seceded."

I know it takes a bit of work, you have to go back over 4 levels of posts, from 234->230->211->179->178 to find the original exchange on this subject.
Here it is:

FLT-bird: "Its important that we not allow political dogma to distort history."

TwelveOfTwenty: "You mean like President Lincoln didn't want to abolish slavery even though that's what he did?
Or the secession wasn't about slavery even though at least four of their articles of secession spelled that out?
That's revisionism."

Notice the term "the South" is not mentioned here.
So if we search for where that term "the South" is used, we find it dozens of times in lengthy quotes by FLT-bird, but only rarely by TwelveOfTwenty as in, "abolitionists in the South", though never in reference to Confederate "Reasons for Secession" documents.

FLT-bird: "I've pointed out several did not issue declarations of causes.
I've pointed out several seceded only after Lincoln chose to start a war to impose government rule on people who did not consent to it.
Those states are part of "the South" too.
You can't just ignore them because its inconvenient for your argument."

In case you've forgotten, the question here is: why did some Southern states declare secession?
So right away we have to admit: not all declared for the same exact reasons, and some gave no reasons.
Of particular note is, the set of reasons before Fort Sumter is remarkably different from those after it.
Those after Fort Sumter focused on coercion, oppression and injustice by the Federal government.
But those before Fort Sumter had different reasons, and those focused first & foremost on slavery.

Of the seven states seceding before Fort Sumter two gave no reasons (Florida and Louisiana), one (Alabama) included its reason (slavery) as a "whereas" in its Ordinance, and four (SC, MS, GA & TX) gave lengthy reasons.
Those reasons have been analyzed in detail and resulted in the accurate chart which you pretend is laughable (because it tells the truth you loathe).
Finally, we have the detailed explanations of Robert Rhett and Alexander Stephens, both of which were widely published and accepted at the time as real.

So, including Alabama's, five states gave us formal reasons for secession and the best you might say is that three of the five include reasons other than slavery.
But not one omits slavery and all dwell on it at great length, even if it's not the first issue they address.

So the conclusion must be that slavery was certainly on the minds of every Democrat Fire Eater secessionist, and indeed, that without slavery (as in 1830) secession could never be sold to a majority of patriotic Southern voters.

FLT-bird: "Alabama did not issue a declaration of causes."

Alabama included this "whereas" in its Ordinance of Secession:

"Whereas, the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin to the offices of president and vice-president of the United States of America, by a sectional party, avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions..."

As you well know, "domestic institutions" is code of "slavery".

FLT-bird: "This is just false...
Rhett went on at great length to explain the primary cause was economic.
The Southern states were being economically exploited by sectional partisan legislation just as the 13 colonies had been by Britain a couple generations earlier."

In fact, Rhett does discuss (and lie about) tariffs & spending, and he also discusses slavery at great length.
So, in his first specific, Rhett claims:

"The people of the South have been taxed by duties on imports not for revenue, but for an object inconsistent with revenue -- to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the productions of their mines and manufactures."

But all such taxes before secession in 1861 were passed by Southerners under mostly Democrat Presidents like Madison, Jackson, Polk & Buchanan, never by Republicans.
Further, they promoted the interests of all "mines & manufactures", North, South, East & West.

Next Rhett further complains:

"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."

That's a flat-out lie, only possibly true if by "the North" you mean every state north of South Carolina!

And then after such non-serious complaints, about half-way through, Rhett gets to the real reason: slavery, and on that one subject he devotes the last half of his argument.

Reasons for Secession	S. Carolina	Mississippi	Georgia	Texas	Rbt. Rhett	A. Stephens	AVERAGE OF 6
Historical context	41%	20%	23%	21%	20%	20%	24%
Slavery	20%	73%	56%	54%	35%	50%	48%
States' Rights	37%	3%	4%	15%	15%	10%	14%
Lincoln's election	2%	4%	4%	4%	5%	0%	3%
Economic issues**	0	0	15%	0%	25%	20%	10%
Military protection	0	0	0	6%	0%	0%	1%

* Alabama listed only slavery in its "whereas" reasons for secession.

** Economic issues include protective tariffs, "fishing smacks" and alleged favoritism to Northerners in Federal spending.