English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

southerners, and a few other people say it was not because of slavery since all the u.s. had slaves at the time.they contend that lincoln only freed the slaves IN THE SOUTH. not the northern states slaves.so they would run away and join the north in there attack against the southern people.

2006-10-02 12:02:44 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

13 answers

The North was exploiting the South.
The North were the rich and powerful industry.
The South were mostly farmers.
The North put tariffs on cotton to fill their own pockets.
There were also ex-slaves that fought against the North.
It was really the "War of Northern Agression".

2006-10-02 12:10:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The primary cause of the Civil War was slavery. It was the catalyst that split the Northern states from the Southern states.

However, slavery alone wasn't the only cause. In the North, industrialization was taking over and they saw the new territories as places to expand business and access resources. In the South, they saw the new territories as places to gain land and set up future plantations.

Culturally, the North and South were heading in two directions. The Northerners were becoming big government industrialists and the Southerners were agrarian aristocrats who wanted a small and unobtrusive government.

The issue of slavery brought about two primary conflicts:

1) Slavery was immoral on human rights grounds and it was a scar for a free and democratic society to have slavery.

2) Slaves were property. What right did the government have to impose its will on the people and take away their property. (Slaves were property.)

So, in essence slavery was the key issue. There is really a lot more to it than that, but it all starts with slavery.

2006-10-02 12:16:00 · answer #2 · answered by dgrhm 5 · 0 1

The popular myth is that the civil war was fought to abolish slavery. In fact, the civil war had more to do with states' rights and the U.S. economy. The slavery aspect was brought in as an emotional motivator. Many slave owners really got screwed by this. Some of them treated their slaves as family members. The slave owners that we all hear about are the ones who abused their slaves. It was the use of these stories that motivated people to fight for freedom. Emancipation was a biproduct. Was it worth it? In the long run, I would say yes. Although I think that the slaves would have eventually been freed anyway as our nation grew. For the sake of the slaves who had been abused, the sooner they were freed, the better.

2006-10-02 12:21:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Many of the factors that caused the Civil War were economic. The colonies has started printing their own money which made the central bankers of europe very angry because they couldn't get control of America's currency like they had for 100s of years in Europe. They put the squeeze on the south whose economy depended on exporting cotton to Europe. When the south tried to break free from the other colonies, they tried to trick Lincoln into taking money to fund the War, but he was smart enough to print more of his own money which he didn't have to pay 30% interest on like the central bankers wanted. That's why he was shot.

Shame his death was for nothing, because the bankers tricked Congress into passing the Federal Reserve Act in 1913.

2006-10-02 12:37:47 · answer #4 · answered by Jared H 3 · 0 0

Nice birdsnake. I like it. A liberal who hates the rich northerner, but wouldn't dare assert that they support slavery.

Seems pretty obvious what the civil war was about: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. I might also remind birdsnake that the South started the war, not the north.

2006-10-02 12:13:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

actually? States Rights. the starting up position of the conflict got here right down to who could come to a call particular regulations. the federal authorities or the state governments. The state governments that chop up from the were considered as committing treason again the union. a lot of human beings believe it develop into slavery yet that develop into only a canopy as a lot as earnings public help, type of like WMD's in Iraq. the authentic political reason develop into states rights.

2016-12-04 03:46:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

American Civil War (1861–1865) was a sectional conflict in the United States of America between the federal government (the "Union") and 11 Southern slave states that declared their secession and formed the Confederate States of America, led by President Jefferson Davis. The Union, led by President Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party, which opposed expansion of slavery, rejected any right of secession. Fighting began April 12, 1861 when Confederate forces attacked a Federal fort at the Battle of Fort Sumter.

In the first year, the Union asserted control of the border states and established a naval blockade as both sides raised large armies. In 1862 the large, bloody battles began. After the Battle of Antietam in September 1862, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation made the freeing of the slaves a war goal, despite opposition from Copperheads who supported slavery and secession. Emancipation ensured that Britain and France would not intervene to help the Confederacy. In addition, the goal also allowed the Union to recruit African-Americans for reinforcements; a resource that the Confederacy did not dare exploit until it was too late. War Democrats reluctantly accepted emancipation as part of total war needed to save the Union. In the East, Robert Edward Lee rolled up a series of Confederate victories over the Army of the Potomac, but his best general, Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson, was killed at the Battle of Chancellorsville in May 1863. Lee's invasion of the North was repulsed at the Battle of Gettysburg in Pennsylvania in July 1863; he barely managed to escape back to Virginia. In the West, the Union Navy captured the port of New Orleans in 1862, and Ulysses S. Grant seized control of the Mississippi River by capturing Vicksburg, Mississippi in July 1863, thus splitting the Confederacy.

By 1864, long-term Union advantages in geography, manpower, industry, finance, political organization and transportation were overwhelming the Confederacy. Grant fought a number of bloody battles with Lee in Virginia in the summer of 1864. Lee won in a tactical sense but lost strategically, as he could not replace his casualties and was forced to retreat into trenches around his capital, Richmond, Virginia. Meanwhile, William Tecumseh Sherman captured Atlanta, Georgia. Sherman's March to the Sea destroyed a hundred-mile-wide swath of Georgia. In 1865, the Confederacy collapsed after Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House and the slaves were freed.

The full restoration of the Union was the work of a highly contentious postwar era known as Reconstruction. The war produced more than 970,000 casualties (3% of the population), including approximately 620,000 soldier deaths - two-thirds by disease. The causes of the war, the reasons for its outcome, and even the name of the war itself are subjects of lingering controversy even today. The main results of the war were the restoration and strengthening of the Union, and the end of slavery in the United States.

2006-10-02 12:28:49 · answer #7 · answered by Jean R 3 · 0 0

The "Civil War" was a dispute of States Rights vs. Federal Government Power.

2006-10-02 12:08:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It was not about slavery per say. It was politics. Who will control the government? North vs South. Not pro-slavery vs anti-slavery.

2006-10-02 12:17:33 · answer #9 · answered by nikki 3 · 0 0

It was George Bush's fault he started it.

2006-10-02 12:18:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers