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

I've recently had to listen to a couple of morons talk about how the south was right in trying to suceed from the union and that the civil war was not fought over slavery. I'd just like to say - GO READ YOU'RE DAMN HISTORY BOOK!!! People say it was over taxes or tariffs placed on the slave traders boat. Or even the wacky thing of Lincoln and his "conspiracy" to take over. Every "reason" the south gives just traces back to slavery. Why don't people just face the facts? Now I am not in any way bashing southerners. Both my parents were born and raised in the south and my whole family still lives there it's just that as a history major I think people need to accept the fact that they were wrong and the north was right for trying to stop them. Also I heard that some schoold don't even teach that the south lost. Would someone mind telling people the truth? Any comments?

2007-07-24 09:39:07 · 11 answers · asked by freedomfighter 3 in Arts & Humanities History

Harlin 42

If you read this thread again then this is for you. I believe you've had a little too much southern teaching. To say the civil war was about mones because the south raised "51%" of americas income is absurd! The north was the money maker. They had the industries, the trade, they would have been fine on their own. Yes the south did well with their cotton and agriculture (all picked by a black slave may I remind you), but without their slaves there was no way they could have kept up such a great income. Most couldn't come close to hiring as many slaves as they had and the few that could wouldn't have wanted to spend their money. The war was fought because the north threatened to take away the south's free work labor and thereby "destroy" their way of living. You don't even have to read a history book to figure that out you just have to have some common sense.

2007-07-25 03:35:03 · update #1

11 answers

you're totally right...people fail to make the connections between the "other" reasons that they spout off and slavery...one gentleman who responded to you said it was about money...and he was right, because slavery provided free labor, which was something that no economy outside of the south could compete with...when slavery was threatened, they realized it would hurt their pocketbooks...people just need to step back and see the big picture...no southerner wants to readily admit just how much they depended on slave labor to maintain their "southern society"..."their way of life" was entirely due to slavery. The south did indeed lose the war, because it was a practice that was abominable and even residents of the South knew that it was fundamentally wrong to enslave another human being. they resented the shift of power to the North and felt that by the North's efforts to abolish slavery that they were themselves having their own rights violated...the war was a backlash in the same vein that a child throws a temper tantrum when it realizes that it has no power in a situation. The "south" has been dead for a long time...we are all americans and to keep insisting that we perpetuate the North-South divide in today's society is segregative and ignorant.

2007-07-24 11:03:37 · answer #1 · answered by sunflowerpinwheel 4 · 0 0

The root cause of the Civil War was slavery. We can trace the conflict over this issue back to the Constitutional convention. The northern delegates wanted to leave out slaves in the census used for determining the number of representatives each state could have. The south wanted slaves counted as the rest of the population. So the "3/5 Compromise" was adopted, counting each slave as 3/5 of a person. In return, the ban on the importation of slavery was not to take effect until 1808.

In 1828, Congress passed a tariff that favored the northern industrial economy at the expense of the southern slave economy. John C. Calhoun of SC led a call to nullify the act and declare it inapplicable to his state. President Andrew Jackson threatened to use force to enforce the tariff on the state. By 1832, a compromise for a revised tariff settled the dispute. SC was acting in its economic interests driven by slave labor.

December 20, 1860, SC succeeded the union, starting the Civil War. Again, the issue was slavery. When Lincoln officially emancipated the slaves in 1863, the southern economy and way of life was changed for good.

The causes of southern discontent over federal authority was always based on its slave agrarian economy and the interests it supported.

.

2007-07-24 10:41:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The civil war was about slavery. The main reason why some southerners have a tough time admiting this is two fold.

1. It's not easy to admit your ancestors and friend's ancestors fought to keep people in bondage.

2. The main reason is that almost all southern soldiers weren't fighting for slavery. They had nothing to gain by slavery continuing. Sure they thought africans were inferior, but so did most northerners.

Shelby Foote, mentioned often in this thread, has a great story explaining the average southerner point of view. A northern soldier yelled to a southern soldier, "Why you fighting us?" The southern soldier yelled back, " Cause you're down here."

The Civil War was created by a small group of influential plantation owners who didn't want to give up there extreme wealth. CEO's today have nothing on the wealth of the few UBER-wealthy plantation owners who didn't want to give up their way of life.

2007-07-24 14:50:50 · answer #3 · answered by coach_pearce 2 · 0 0

The south was right. The war was about money.
Greed of the government. The tariffs on the cotton that the south grew amounted to about 51% of the governmnet money. when the south
left the government lost large amount of money. Most history proforessors in college wiil agree
history is writen by the winners

2007-07-25 03:16:59 · answer #4 · answered by harlin42 3 · 0 0

I am afraid SFAIK you are wrong. (BTW- no skin off my nose either way, as I'm in Poland)
The root cause of the war was the conflict between central and state government- essentially who would be calling the shots.
Of course the Washington bureaucrats felt they should run the whole country as they saw fit, and thanks to the lobbing (money in the pocket) of the northern factory owners decided to enforce taxes on the southern exports and imports - thus forcibly creating a market for their sponsors

The "states rights" advocates had their own "lobbies"- exporters and importers. hence the inevitable conflict.

All the rest- the slave question, "civil rights", "state rights" are just a colourful cover made to justify somehow the carnage which resulted from these bribes. If you are a history major, try and find any mention of black freemen volunteers serving in the Confederate Army- in "integrated" units to boot! As a hint- try and find the casualty and prisoner lists after Gettysburg.
I am afraid this part of history has been, and still is being erased by both sides of the "north/south" divide. Surely the only instance of extremely enthusiastic co-operation between "political correct" so-called "historians" and racist apologists of slavery.

2007-07-24 11:22:00 · answer #5 · answered by cp_scipiom 7 · 0 2

I recently moved down south (S.C.) after living in the north all of my life. I hear what you're saying & I do agree with you. Sometimes people choose to stick their head in the sand instead of accepting what is or what was. It's all in the history books & Shelby Foote has written some great books on the Civil War. It makes for some great reading at best.

2007-07-24 09:55:13 · answer #6 · answered by Shortstuff13 7 · 0 0

look the "South" ur talking about is in the country dude thiers like interaccial couples everywere ppl treat each other fine nobodies calling any one a niger or a cracker or a squinty eye...well ppl do call me terrorist sumtime but cant help it if sum assholes from my part of the world have issues....and guess what most of the north at that time was for slavery to its just that the loss of it would not have as a profound affect on the north as it would on the south since the south was mainly agricultural and the north was mainly industrial...

2007-07-24 18:53:22 · answer #7 · answered by Hannibal 2 · 0 0

There is an excellent historical description of the run-up to the Civil War in Doris Kearns Goodwin's book "Team of Rivals" which covers this topic quite well.

2007-07-24 10:42:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

this grasping to a notion that the south didnt lose is both completely ignorant and drenched in racist sentiment. i'm from rural texas and on any given saturday you can see stands on the side of the highway selling flags bearing the confederate emblem and the phrases "If the South Would Have Won, We'd Have it Made" and (the more telling) "We Will Rise Again". i think its truely despicable and frankly, disturbing to think that so many people around me feel this way.

2007-07-24 10:04:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

History major huh? eww. Wars are rarely about diffirences in ideas of leaders they are almost always about politics and money. Read between the lines. Were you in the room when Lincoln was being advised to declare war on the South? I did not think so.

2007-07-24 09:53:03 · answer #10 · answered by Francis H 2 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers