Yes, they do teach it in schools, that's why so many people believe it. However, it is wrong, the war was about states' rights.
To those that believe it was about slavery: just look at the dates. The civil war started in 1860, but the Emancipation Proclamation that freed the slaves was not until September 1862, more than two years into the war. How can the war be about slavery if slaver was not ended until 2 years into it? If it was about slavery, how come many leaders of the Union (including generals like Sherman) supported slavery?
You can't just be a sponge and believe everything a teacher says.
Slavery was a small issue in the Civil War. Do some research outside of school and you'll see that it is obvious.
2007-06-14 01:05:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by Aegis of Freedom 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Almost all modern historians agree that difference in the status of slavery in the north and south was in fact the main cause of the U.S. Civil War.
The North was becoming increasingly hostile to the institution of slavery. Every major constitutional crisis leading up to the civil war was around the question of whether the federal gov't could determine if new states entering the union would be free or slave states. If they all became free states, as the north wanted, then there would be nothing stopping anti-slavery legislation going through the congress. The south saw the writing on the wall and decided to secede.
To claim it was about "States Rights" is simply a more general way of saying it was about slavery. The "right" that the southern states were worried about was the right to make slavery legal. It's like saying that the Civil War was caused by the secession of the south from the union, or the firing on Ft Sumpter. The real crux of the conflict was slavery; the rest of it were principles or events that came together around that issue. I think the only reason we see this sort of thing raised is that it allows revisionist southerners an opportunity to sleep better at night thinking they fought for "rights" rather than slavery.
2007-06-14 00:35:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Michael D 2
·
2⤊
5⤋
The North had to punish the South for seceeding, so as that they banned slavery south of the mason dixon line (the thirty sixth parallel). once Lincoln did this (already partway by ability of ways) it became a way about slavery so as that the Northerner's might want to sense that they fairly had some thing to wrestle for and help. once the conflict replaced into over, slavery replaced into nevertheless banned south of the mason dixon line, yet finished freedom for slaves replaced into delivered by the 14th or fifteenth modification which replaced into created antebellum.
2016-11-23 20:18:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Apparently you are right looking at some of the responses. The victor gets to write the text books. Slavery sounds so selfless. Do you ever wonder why no one asks "why would people who could never afford a slave would be willing to die to have the right to have one?" You would think people would think this through. I am going to fight in a war filled with missery and a strong possibility of death for a right that I can not even afford.
2007-06-14 00:27:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bob J 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Slavery was an issue, but States rights was the bigger issue. The Confederacy believed States rights should trump Federal powers.
2007-06-14 01:16:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Jeff S 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Not as hard to believe as the fact that many people in this country still believe the war in Iraq is about retaliation for the 9/11 terrorist attacks...
2007-06-14 00:28:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Considering that is the one facet of the Civil War that is harped on in school, then no, I don't find it hard to believe that people think that is the only issue we fought about. The Emancipation of slaves, in reality, was just another tactic used by Lincoln to punish Southern states involved in the war. What a lot of people are not aware of is that Southern states who were loyal to the North were immune from this. You'll never hear about that in school.
2007-06-14 00:26:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
This is a good example of how history gets rewritten. When the war started Lincoln was willing to let the practice of slavery continue.
2007-06-14 00:51:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by hdean45 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
I thought it was about the rights of the individual states, but slavery was still an important part of the arguments.
2007-06-14 00:32:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by michellelangston2001 2
·
6⤊
0⤋
The Civil War was about slavery. The American Civil War (1860–1866) was a war between the Union and 11 Southern states which declared they had a right to secession and formed the Confederate States of America.The Union, led by President Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party opposed the expansion of slavery.
2007-06-14 00:29:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by Debra D 7
·
1⤊
6⤋