We also have numerous statements from him saying it was about slavery such as Speech of Jefferson Davis before the Mississippi Legislature, Nov. 16, 1858.
Either he was lying when he said it was about slavery, or he was lying when he said it wasn't. Since the slave holding states held on to their slaves until forced to free them, we can conclude he was telling the truth when he said it was about slavery.
They turned down slavery forever by express constitutional amendment....
Which could have been repealed by amendment, just as slavery itself was abolished, as territories became free states. The slave holding states knew this and didn't trust the North.
and that was the original 7 seceding states not the Upper South which seceded in response to Lincoln starting a war.
The act of war was committed by the slave holders against the humans they enslaved, I don't care how many crooks helped them.
I don't care what any PC Revisionist says otherwise because the actors at the time on both sides said it was not about slavery and the original 7 seceding states turned down the offer of slavery forever by express constitutional amendment. Both sides kept their slaves until the passage of the 13th amendment.
No revision is needed. The Confederacy had slaves, and their comments saying secession was over slavery were consistant with this. Anything else they said was poor PR.
Irrelevant.
The question of how many free states there were in 1861 is totally relevant to the question of whether abolition was popular.
Now I know you're an ignoramus. The North was using cheap immigrant labor. Working and living conditions in the early stages of the industrial revolution were squalid, dirty, unsanitary and unsafe.
That was a cheap trick. You snipped and completely ignored my follow up statement, which was "I know it was hard for the people who came over here by today's standards, but they saw it as a great opportunity worth risking their lives for."
There is a reason all those developments such as tort law, worker's comp, OSHA, Child Labor Laws, etc came about.
And rightfully so, but that doesn't change the fact that the Europeans came over here by choice, unlike the slaves that ended up in the slave holding states plantation.
Nope. He was telling the truth. There is no reason to think the political leaders at the time on both sides were not saying what they meant.
Speech of Jefferson Davis before the Mississippi Legislature, Nov. 16, 1858
Being sympathetic to a tyrant who starts a war and tramples on the constitution is just what I would expect from a Lefty.
You're right. That proves you are a lefty for being sympathetic to JD.
They had no role in preserving slavery. Slavery was not threatened in the US.
Speech of Jefferson Davis before the Mississippi Legislature, Nov. 16, 1858
As you said, there is no reason to think he wasn't saying what he meant.
Numerous? That is the only one you've shown. I've posted several that said the opposite.
Either he was lying when he said it was about slavery, or he was lying when he said it wasn't. Since the slave holding states held on to their slaves until forced to free them, we can conclude he was telling the truth when he said it was about slavery.
The slave holding states that remained in the union held onto their slaves until passage of the 13th amendment also. Davis supported and eventually gained approval to send and sent an ambassador to Britain and France with plenipotentiary power to agree to a treaty to abolish slavery. He was quite willing to see it end in order to gain independence. He was president of the CSA when the original 7 seceding states turned down the North's offer of slavery forever by express constitutional amendment. Cleary - as he stated numerous times - he did not believe secession or the war were "about" slavery.
Which could have been repealed by amendment, just as slavery itself was abolished, as territories became free states. The slave holding states knew this and didn't trust the North.
Yes it could have been. 15 states that still allowed slavery. Ergo, if they vote against it, 45 are needed to pass a constitutional amendment. 15+45 = 60. One hundred sixty years later we have....errr....50 states. Thus protection of slavery would have been IRREVOCABLE without the consent of the states that still allowed slavery. They could do basic math back then too.
The act of war was committed by the slave holders against the humans they enslaved, I don't care how many crooks helped them.
Acts of war are committed against nations - not against individuals.
No revision is needed. The Confederacy had slaves, and their comments saying secession was over slavery were consistant with this. Anything else they said was poor PR.,/p>
Revisionism was obviously needed to push this agenda. The "about slavery" narrative was not popular even in academia until 1960s Leftists engaged in their march through the institutions started pushing it in the 1980s. Both sides had slaves. The original 7 seceding states correctly pointed out that the Northern states had violated the fugitive slave clause of the constitution.
The question of how many free states there were in 1861 is totally relevant to the question of whether abolition was popular.
and how many supported abolishing slavery in the states that allowed it? Almost nobody.
And rightfully so, but that doesn't change the fact that the Europeans came over here by choice, unlike the slaves that ended up in the slave holding states plantation.
Some came by choice. Some had no other choice whether due to religious persecution, starvation, etc. The point is the conditions for those at the bottom of the social order in the North at this time were hardly better - and it could credibly be argued were indeed worse 0 than those at the bottom of the social order in the South at the time. An examination of the death rates makes the point clearly.
blah blah blah the same link I've posted a million times before which does not address the point.
there is no reason to believe that the politicians at the time like Lincoln did not mean exactly what they said.
You're right. That proves you are a lefty for being sympathetic to JD.
Davis didn't start a war. Davis didn't trample on people's constitutional rights. Lincoln did both of those. Leftist.
blah blah blah the same link I've posted a million times before which has nothing to do with the point.
Slavery was not threatened in the US. Abolitionists could not win elections anywhere.