Why do slavery apologists continue to insist the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery?

Question

and that it was in fact all about taxes and state rights???

I have official statements from southern states saying it was indeed about slavery.
---------------
DECLARATION OF SECESSION, MISSISSIPPI
"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course."

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/csa/missec.htm

DECLARATION OF SECESSION, GEORGIA
"The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic."
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/csa/geosec.htm

DECLARATION OF SECESSION, TEXAS
"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of ***** slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and ***** races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a ***** slave remains in these States."

"We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/csa/texsec.htm

Answer 1

I don't know alot of them believed it was about the economy, and slavery was just a front.

Answer 2

Southerners(antifederalist) aristocratic lifestyle, entitled to property, and economic stronghold upon a region of the Union that might see more prospering times(westward expansion) simply fought for that which they became use to and seen justifiable. Fighting for independence was nothing new or old in a newly found Republic. The Institution of slavery was not just a right of passage but the way of the world as far as southerners were concerned and the northern region was out of touch with the world, people and the economy. Yes, the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery alone but it had to do with the future of the Union as it develops with or without servitude; voluntary or involuntary. In short, the Confederates did not correctly analyze or predict the impact of the industrial revolution, union logistics, and the inhuman conditions of the worst enslavement of humans in the history of mankind. The Southern (antifederalist) rebellious Confederate actions were narrow selfish racist calculated moves without the Big Picture of Progress.

Answer 3

The Southern States used the argument of States Rights as a means of seceding from the Union to protect what they felt was their right to the institution of slavery. The Union did not fight back for the sole purpose of abolishing slavery, it was to protect and preserve the United States - and to keep all states unified. Go a little farther, and read up on Lincoln's views of slavery, and the content of the Lincoln-Douglas debates (there were 7). Lincoln wanted to stop the spread of slavery, not erradicate it. That came later in the war, when the Union finally had the upper hand. He used the oppurtunity to his advantage. Another catalyst to secession, and the war, were the Fugitive Slave laws. Taxes played a part as well. The civil war is an extremely complex topic, and must be looked at and cited from both standpoints to accurately understand and discuss what happened. It is impossible to strip it down to say that "it was" or "it wasn't" about slavery. Slavery was one of the main issues, and was one of the main catalysts, but it was not the sole reason for the war. The strength of the Contitution was tested as a result of the war. In my opinion, if it hadn't been slavery, it would have been something else that led to bloodshed over defining the roles of both the state and federal governments at some point in time.

Edit: FYI - Robert E. Lee was against slavery. He turned down Lincoln's offer to command the Union forces, and to remain loyal to his home of Virginia. He did not lead the Confederate army to defend slavery, he commanded it to fight for his home.

Answer 4

These are the facts, but not necessarily the truth. The truth is never as black and white as folks would like it to be. I am a Virginian as were my ancestors. I had one relative who rode with Mosby, another in a hospital when Richmond fell and still another who managed to make it to the end and surrendered with Lee at Appomattox. Guess what...not one of them owned nor gave a rat's behind about slaves.

Try reading a diary or two written by Southern Soldiers. You will be surprised at how they felt about the Civil War. Imagine your state is suddenly invaded by Federal Troops made up of other states.

Also keep in mind that Virginia, Tennessee, Alabama were much more identified in those days as a person's nation.

Also read the diaries of Union Soldiers and find out they felt about losing their lives to free Slaves...you'll be surprise at what you read.

Racism is not now nor was it then confined only to the South. African Americans already know this. That's why it took another hundred years for them to actually receive the civil rights supposedly won for them at the end of the Civil War.

There is no apology for slavery. It was a terrible and onerous part of our history, but to think that Southerners and Northerners fought so hard and for so long over a race neither cared a lick about...is just plain silly. That's the real tragedy isn't it. Freeing the slaves gave that bloody struggle some semblance of being worth it, but the reality is that it was such a small part of what that conflict was really about.

If you are a Southerner then you already know this, if not, I may never be able to adequately explain it to you.

Answer 5

You may want to check out "The Cornerstone speech" The Cornerstone Speech was delivered extemporaneously by Vice President (of the confederacy) Alexander H. Stephens

(an excerpt. for the full text see the source listed below)
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the ***** is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics.

Answer 6

First of all, to Christian F above who calls he guy below her an idiot. Well, sorry hon but you're wrong. His information regarding the cotton and the north is absolutely historically correct. Please get your facts straight before you call anyone an idiot. And please learn that you should not call people idiots simply because you don't like what they have to say.

The south was indeed fighting for their right to have slaves. The north for their part, was fighting to preserve the union and did not much care about slaves themselves. Though there were many northern and vocal abolitionists, the average person in the north gave little thought to slavery. Those who did care, other than abolitionists,were against slavery simply because it gave the south an economic advantage regarding business and commerce. It's sad to say but very true. The historic archives of New England are filled with personal letters from Northern soldiers who complained after Lincoln freed the slaves that they did not volunteer to go to war to free the slaves. They volunteered to save the union.

Answer 7

Because in some ways it didn't. If you look at the entire argument the South was outnumbered in Washington and they felt it wasn't fair to them to remain in the Union, so they wanted to succeed. The North's punishment for their attempts was the Emancipation Proclimation that was to put pressure on Southern states that wanted to break away. The other states that remain loyal to the Union was allowed to keep their slaves. In fact if the North was smart they should have given slaves the right to vote, that would have stopped the war because blacks outnumbered whites in southern states by 4 to 1.

Answer 8

When Lincoln called for the raising of 75000 militia troops to fight the confederacy he did this not to abolish slavery but to reign in rebelling states. Only later did Lincoln take the highroad by eliminating slavery.

Answer 9

Some cultures in the world love to war over history forever. They study and learn it meticulously so they can keep warring over it. Unfortunately immigration has brought that culture here. I only hope Americans will reject that behavior.

Answer 10

The civil war had very little to do with slavery. That is a fact. People just like to think that it was about slavery because then it become a great war of morals, not one over taxes.

Answer 11

It's simple. The states wanted to decide for themselves if they should maintain the institution of slaver. States rights.

Who the hell are these apologist for slavery you're referring to?