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

Going back to the Egyptions, Romans and so forth, you would realize that slavery began way before the civil war. Also it was the Africans in Africa that started selling their people to other countries.

2007-06-15 13:20:42 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

17 answers

I will be called a racist, too bad. It was not about slavery. If it had been then slaves in the north would have been freed by the emancipation proclamation.
Northern states felt that the south had an unfair market advantage because of low labor cost due to slavery. Several northern states tried to tax Cotton and other agricultural products. States cannot impose tariffs on each others goods.

2007-06-15 13:37:56 · answer #1 · answered by Charles C 7 · 1 3

Slavery was at the heart of most of the issues between the North and the South. The North was becoming more anti slavery for both moral and economic reasons and was abolishing it within their states, blocking its extension into territories, harboring fugitive slaves. and opposed to the creation of any more slave states. The South saw that their political power was being diminished, and the election of Lincoln confirmed their worst fears.
The fact that slavery had existed in the past and on a small scale still does, is not a reason to not find it morally reprehensible either to the abolitionists in the North or by most people today. Most Christian countries had abolished slavery before 1860.
Economics also played a role, in that with the increasing population there was no longer labor shortages, so in most places hiring wage labor was competitive with the costs of maintaining a slave society.
The North did not fight the war to immediately abolish slavery but the South fought the war to preserve it. If the South had not seceded and precipitated the war it was enviable the slavery would have been abolish within decades anyway if the nation remaind united.

2007-06-15 16:17:02 · answer #2 · answered by meg 7 · 1 0

I will start off by saying that slavery is evil. That said, the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery. It was not in fact a "civil war" by definition. A civil war is when two bodies of people fight for control of the same government. The American Civil War was the opposite: the Confederacy fighting to establish an independent government, and the Union fighting to restrain that establishment, and reunite the South with the North.

It has been said that the United States won the first Revolution, but lost the second. That statement perfectly demonstrates the actual principles over which the Civil War was fought.

Within the Virginia Ratification of the Constitution, in writing, it states in some alteration of words that Virginia reserves the right to secede from the Union if it deems necessary. The rights of the individual states were violated by the very nature of the war.

2007-06-15 13:34:24 · answer #3 · answered by druryp7 2 · 0 2

Yes, Nearly every civilization has at some point been enslaved. If, not the civilization itself, then their ancestors were at some point. That is why the African American agenda of wanting special treatment is bogus. I do not want special treatment for my ancestors being enslaved at some point. I believe in equality of all people, and not special treatment to any race.

As for the Civil War issue, it was mainly over states rights. Many states, mostly in the south, wanted to have very strong state power and weak federal power. Hence the war against brothers commenced. Slavery was a powerful issue during this time. The state's that wanted slavery pushed the states rights issue so that states could decide for themselves whether to have slaves or not. They wanted to decide for themselves more than just the slavery issue though. The slavery issue was just a very large catalyst.

2007-06-15 13:35:06 · answer #4 · answered by blueice_1820 2 · 2 0

Reading the answers that were given I realize just how badly we're being taught history in our schools. The laws of PC have been in effect for so long, we don't have a clue as to what really happened. Slavery was a non-issue until Lincoln thought if could keep England and France out of siding with the Confederacy. He said many times that if he "could keep the Union together without freeing one slave, he would do it". The issue of States Rights, the right to succeed (in the Constitution), and a small federal government were issues. As were the high tariffs placed upon imports and exports of which the South was in dire need of. The Abolishment movement was strong in the NE in that they could no longer make money on the "slave trade" by ferrying slaves from Africa to America (The clipper ship era)......so they were more into having their new projects financed by the unfair tariff laws, i.e. the Robber Barons, RR's and such Federal programs . Lincoln was chosen to run for President in that his feelings were more toward the "American Empire" he wished to build and thus was easily manipulated by the New Englanders (who tried succession before the War of 1812). Lincoln knew that in order to have his way, he would have to totally defeat the South and that is why the War of Northern Aggression was so bloody. The Union Generals had orders to go after a "total war" which meant the destruction of the Southern economy, war against the civilians, burning of the cities, destruction of all crops and livestock they came across. As Gen. Sherman stated, that only "20% of his time was spent in battle against the Confederate Army, but 80% was spent in destroying Southern assets." They did not necessarily free their slaves in the North, (Gen. Grant kept his till 1870, while Gen. Lee had freed his before the war), they didn't want them up north, Check the "Black Codes in states like IL., IN., WI" Lincoln's plan was to send them back to Africa, (didn't work), and the "Underground Railroad" was just a way to get them up to Canada and out of the Northern states. But in that War of Northern Aggression, the Constitution was turned into toilet paper, the South was totally ruined, the blacks were left to starve or steal, and the whole thing could have been avoided. But we're still paying for it today, and will continue to pay until someone realizes what really did happen during the "Uncivil War".

2007-06-16 06:59:23 · answer #5 · answered by dixielady1864 1 · 0 0

The civil war was indirectly over slavery. The federal government voted to abolish slavery. The few people in the North who had any slaves freed them. The southern states were heavily dependent on their slaves because their's was an agrarian economy with cotton being the major crop. It had to be picked by hand. Rather than free the slaves, several southern states joined together and decided to form a separate nation apart from the United States. The US would not allow these states to secede from the Union, thus the war started.

2007-06-15 13:28:08 · answer #6 · answered by KIZIAH 7 · 2 1

The Civil War was about trying to re-unite the country, until Antietam, when Lincoln felt that the moral cause of abolishing slavery would boost the war. At least that's the super-simple version.

2007-06-15 15:54:07 · answer #7 · answered by Elle 2 · 0 0

Causes of the American Civil War: A Summary

There were a series of significant events which greatly affected States' Rights, the Union, African Americans and accelerated the American Civil War. These historical events are commonly referred to as the "Causes of the American Civil War" and are listed without significant order: States' Rights (Bill of Rights and the 10th Amendment), High Tariffs, Nullification Crisis, Missouri Compromise, Kansas-Nebraska Act, Manifest Destiny, Dred Scott Case, Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, Bleeding Kansas, Crittenden Compromise, John Brown, and President Abraham Lincoln's election (Lincoln didn't receive a single Southern electoral vote).

2007-06-15 13:26:48 · answer #8 · answered by . 6 · 6 1

It was an argument over the right of states to withdraw from a contract they signed back in 1787. It was called the constitution. Although a bloody war was fought, the question remains and rumblings are beginning to be heard once more.

2007-06-15 13:28:22 · answer #9 · answered by Sophist 7 · 1 0

Abraham Lincoln was not an abolitionist, he only wanted to stop the spread of slavery, the civil war was not fought over slavery, Lincoln only wanted to preserve the Union.

2007-06-15 15:31:58 · answer #10 · answered by drewbee 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers