TheRealMafoo said:
ManusJustus said:
TheRealMafoo said:
ManusJustus said:
TheRealMafoo said:
ManusJustus said:
TheRealMafoo said:
ManusJustus said:
|
hobbit said:
lol what? the civil war was started because Lincoln wanted to use the power of the President to take away states rights. The southern states jumped the gun and started a war instead of fighting it in court. And yes in The usa we follow the constitution, just wait until the health care case gets to the Supreme Court to see this. If a majority ever got big enough that they could replace the constitution then you will see the usa break apart again.
|
No, it was all about slavery...
|
Only 8% of the population owned slaves, but almost everyone was willing to die for the cause.
Tell me how this is all about slavery again?
|
Slaves partially counted towards political representation and tax allocation. For instance, if South Carolina had 2 million whites and 1 million blacks, they were represented as having 2.66 million people in Congress. Take away slavery and the South loses big time politically.
|
???
Take away Slavery, and you would have 3 million people counted. How is that worse? It's not like the million people working in the fields, who most got paid by the way, would just leave. Most of them would still do the jobs they were doing.
|
Yeah, but then black people would be voting and be given the rights of full citizens. Not exactly what Southern Whites desired at the time, be they slave owner or not.
|
Free black men of the day could not vote anyway. Black men did not get the right to vote until 1870, long after the war was over and all black men were free.
|
The North wanted black men to vote, but they couldn't do that with the South being overrepresented in government. Granting them that privelage in 5 years after the end of war isn't a 'long time.' In fact, that is a very short period of time.
Of course, you got your way in the end. Blacks were counted as full citizens but were barred from voting and participating in government by Southern society. I guess the North appointing black politicans was more of a slap in the face than long-term, positive change.
|
??
I got my way in the end? I am not white, so not sure how it's my way. I am simply saying the war was not over slavery. It was over states rights. The state right that was the spark that started it, was slavery.
It's like if today the US federal government told people they could not get medication if they didn't visit the US.Gov website once a month. If that caused a war, in 150 years people would be saying the war was over healthcare. It wouldn't be. It would just be the last straw in a sea of government takeover.
Same thing happened here.
|
Believe what you will, but thats simply not true. Slavery was the cause of the civil war. Slavery caused economic problems between the industrialized North and agriculture South, Slavery caused social problems between the city oriented, progressive North and the rural oriented, conservative South, Slavery caused the South to push for more state rights since the North's growing population threatened the ability of the South to control federal government (even with their slaves being represented), and so forth.
Making the Civil War about state rights and not about slavery is Southern revisionist history and an attempt to give the Confederacy a more honorable and respectable image, worthy of being proud of.
