was the civil was inevitable?

Answer 1

We know it was not over Slavery Lincoln repeatedly offered to allow anyone back in the Union WITH THEIR SLAVES and a promise they could keep them! No one took him up on the offer.

It was inevitable. The 1810, 1830 and 1850 census showed the South to be made up of roughly 50% Celtic, 30% English and the remaining 20% were German, French or Spanish. The Irish Potatoes famine of 1846-1850 killed a million plus Irishmen, the problem there was food but the British took it for themselves. Another good example of who has suffered under slavery. The real point the majority of English settled up North and continued to this day their opinion of superiority and want of control over our lot. .

There are these who have the need to demonize and discredit anything they don't like with or understand. Was the War over Slavery? Yes and no, it was a part, not as much as many would have you believe but again more than others would have you think. The renowned Shelby Foote, stated after his appearance in Ken Burns “Civil War” that the producer manipulated and edited his statements to make it appear that he the leading authority on the war was saying the war was over slavery, when he and any reasonable scolder knew better.

The war was over money. In the 1770s, the South had every reason to continue the relationship with England, one of its best customers. It was the manufacturing North that was getting the short end of that stick. Southerners joined the Revolutionary War out of patriotism, idealism, and enlightened political philosophy such as motivated Jefferson, not patriotism, philosophy and economic betterment which inspired the North.

In 1860, the shoe was on the other foot. Southern agrarians were at heel to the nation's bankers and industrialists. That just got worse with the election of the Republican Lincoln, bringing back into power the party favoring the wealthy supply side, as it still does.

Then as now central to that, party's interest was keeping down the cost of manufacture. Today labor is the big cost, so today they move the plants offshore and leave US workers to their fate. Back before the US labor movement existed the big cost was raw materials, and the GOP was just as unprincipled toward its Southern suppliers as it is today toward labor. Thanks to modern graveyard science and surviving records, researchers know that in 1760, 100 years before the War Between the States, Charleston, South Carolina, had the largest population of slaves and we say proudly the SECOND LARGEST SLAVE POPULATION WAS IN NEW YORK CITY.
One of the main quarrels was about taxes paid on goods brought into this country from foreign countries. This tax was called a tariff. Southerners felt these tariffs were unfair and aimed toward them because they imported a wider variety of goods than most Northern people. Taxes were also placed on many Southern goods that were shipped to foreign countries, an expense that was not always applied to Northern goods of equal value. An awkward economic structure allowed states and private transportation companies to do this, which also affected Southern banks that found themselves paying higher interest rates on loans made with banks in the North. As industry in the North expanded, it looked towards southern markets, rich with cash from the lucrative agricultural business, to buy the North's manufactured goods. The situation grew worse after several "panics", including one in 1857 that affected more Northern banks than Southern. Southern financiers found themselves burdened with high payments just to save Northern banks that had suffered financial losses through poor investment. However, it was often cheaper for the South to purchase the goods abroad. In order to "protect" the northern industries Jackson slapped a tariff on many of the imported goods that could be manufactured in the North. When South Carolina passed the Ordinance of Nullification in November 1832, refusing to collect the tariff and threatening to withdraw from the Union, Jackson ordered federal troops to Charleston. A secession crisis was averted when Congress revised the Tariff of Abominations in February 1833. The Panic of 1837 and the ensuing depression began to gnaw like a hungry animal on the flesh of the American system. The disparity between northern and southern economies was exacerbated. Before and after the depression the economy of the South prospered. Southern cotton sold abroad totaled 57% of all American exports before the war. The Panic of 1857 devastated the North and left the South virtually untouched. The clash of a wealthy, agricultural South and a poorer, industrial North was intensified by abolitionists who were not above using class struggle to further their cause.
In the years before the Civil War the political power in the Federal government, centered in Washington, D.C., was changing. Northern and mid-western states were becoming more and more powerful as the populations increased. Southern states lost political power because the population did not increase as rapidly. As one portion of the nation grew larger than another, people began to talk of the nation as sections. This was called sectionalism. Just as the original thirteen colonies fought for their independence almost 100 years earlier, the Southern states felt a growing need for freedom from the central Federal authority in Washington. Southerners believed that state laws carried more weight than Federal laws, and they should abide by the state regulations first. This issue was called State's Rights and became a very warm topic in congress.

These are facts not emotions or unsupported claims, now what was the War over?


God Bless You and The Southern People.

Answer 2

Regardless of what any states-rights fanciers may think, slavery was the contentious issue that drove the two sides into war. Although southern states' ultimate secession makes it "appear" that "states-rights" was the issue, slavery was the ONLY state right volatile enough to propel the country into armed conflagration. Therefore, slavery was the CAUSE of the American Civil War - without it, there is no Civil War. The War actually started with Lincoln's "House Divided" speech during his debates with Douglas leading up to Linclon's election as President, as many from the south declared they would secede if he were elected. It was Lincoln's decision (not shared by all in the north) to challenge the south's secession even to the point of war. If he had not decided upon this path, secession was still probable as slavery was being violently contested all along the north-south border. So, was the Civil War inevitable? No. But secession probably was. Followed by DECADES of violent clashes by pro-slavery and abolitionist, maybe even stretching into the 20th century, causing even more racial contention than there is to this day. Inevitable? Maybe not. Necessary? Absolutely. No other country has gone to war - at the cost of 600,000 lives - to throw off the yoke of slavery. The thing that should surprise the most is that Lincoln wasn't advocating the abolishment of slavery in slave-owning states; only the abolition of slavery in FUTURE states.

Answer 3

yes. I am not going to get into too much detail, but the US was on a collision course to civil war long before Lincoln. Lincoln was just the catalyst, the straw that broke the camel's back.

In every other country, slavery had been abolished. Only in America was it still going on. And in America, only the states who's economy depended on slaver (the south) were for it.

Northern and southern disputes in chronological order:
1776-1861 The south was strongly in favor of states rights and the state's right to choose whether or not to continue slavery and the northern states were generally favorable to a strong central government.
1812-1861 Trade disputes - the federal government enacted a series of tariffs which protectected the manufacturing industries of the the north but hurt the southern economy.
1820-the Missouri compromise
1835-1844-the gag rule in congress that prohibitied discussion of the slave issue
1845 - the admittance of Texas as a slave state
1850 - the passage of the fugitive slave act
1852- the publishing of Uncle Tom's Cabin
1854- the Dred Scott Decision
1857- The Kansas Nebraska Act
1859- John Brown's Raid
1860 - the last remaining national political party, the Democratic Party, split along northern and southern lines

Lincoln or no, the war was going to happen. either in 1861, or 1881, it was just a matter of time.

Answer 4

All the facts Answerki cites are true - and I congratulate him for putting them so well. But even so war was not inevitable until the South fired on Fort Sumpter. There were strong political forces in the north that would have accepted a political settlement even if was a negotiated secession instead of war. With the entrance to Charleston harbour closed Sumpter was unholdable. The Confederates had time on their hands. The longer they postponed war the less likely it would become. They simply became impatient - and for that they paid a heavy price.

Answer 5

I had a history professor in university who was fond of saying, "There are lots of inevitable things that never happened." Nothing is inevitable.

Answer 6

I would say yes because there were the Industrial North facing the Agrarian South engaged in a battle over who was going to control the rich lands of the West. The two societies were completely different in their culture, beliefs, and economic systems. Thus the collision was inevitable.

Chow!!

Answer 7

If you refer to the Civil War, it was. The comunists were killing people and doing very bad things. General Francisco Franco liberated Spain

Answer 8

Great question. I'd say no. If Lincoln had lost the election, if Ft. Sumter hadn't played out the way it did. The South might have gotten away with succession.