At first, he did that to split the South and to make his armies stronger. Then, it became great politically, to say it was to free the slaves, out of humanitarianism.
2007-11-14 04:40:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by laurel g 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Civil War was not centered on slavery it was centered on the Right of Succession from the Union of the United States. Slavery among other things where major issues leading up to the Civil War but slavery was not the cause or center of the Civil War. Lincoln never denied that slavery played a role in the Civil War the only people that say slavery never played a role in the Civil War at all, are the racists groups spreading their propaganda.
2007-11-14 12:48:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by lord_he_aint_right_nda_head 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
There were several reasons the Civil War began. The following facts will show explanations of how the Civil War occurred.
The areas of the United States had different economies. In the North, the economy was based on factories and wages. Everyday people worked in the factories. The South had large plantations, which grew cotton. The plantation owners needed the slaves to pick the cotton. They didn’t receive wages, but they were provided food and shelter. In the Midwest, wheat was the number one cash crop. It was harvested by a machine, so they didn’t need as many workers or slaves. These different economies caused divisions in the United States.
Also, new territories were being settled. The South wanted the new territories to be admitted to the Union as slave states. This was to prevent the slaves from escaping into free territories. The North wanted the new territories to be free. Some people thought the new territories should have the right to vote whether they wanted to be free or slave. This is called State’s Rights. An agreement was reached called the Compromise of 1850, which lasted for three years. In this compromise, fugitive slaves were ordered to return to their owners. The abolitionists thought that they shouldn’t have to follow that law.
Next, Abraham Lincoln said that slavery should be abolished. He was elected president and South Carolina immediately seceded from the Union. Then, six more states joined South Carolina and formed the Confederate States of America (CSA). The South felt that Lincoln would abolish slavery and take away their economy or their way of life. They also felt that each state had the right to vote on any law.
More people died in the Civil War than any other war. The reasons for the Civil War were different economies, state’s rights to vote on laws, and the election of Abraham Lincoln as president.
The civil war was fought over new states rights. Some states used slavery for their economy. The new territories were part slave and free. Abraham Lincoln did not believe in slavery. When Abraham Lincoln became president, the southern states seceded and the civil war began.
The Civil War started because of slavery, economy, and states rights. The north did not believe in slavery, but the south did. The north protested about slavery, but the confederates believed that slavery was good because they saved money by not paying the slaves. The northeast and mid-west regions had machinery and factories. The southeast region didn’t have those things, so they said and bought slaves. The whole nation started to fight over who would decide if the territories were with or without slavery. Finally, South Carolina, along with six other states decided to leave the United States. South Carolina had a fort called Fort Sumter. The south attacked this fort. This was how the Civil War began. Overall, there were three things that brought up the war. Not only slavery. In the end, the Union won. From then on, there were no slaves in the U. S.
The Civil War started because of slavery, the economy, and states rights. The North didn’t want slavery, but the South did. The North had factories so they did not need slavery. The North thought the federal government should pick whether or not to have slavery. The South disagreed. That is the three main reasons the Civil War started. It was the bloodiest war, and it ended slavery.
The Civil War was started because of slavery, the economy, and states rights. The Northern states thought there should be no slavery, but the Southern states disagreed. Because the Northern states were free states, there was a law that no one could buy, sell, trade, or own slaves there, but the South was the exact opposite. Southern states grew cotton, Mid-western states grew wheat, and Northern states had many factories and businesses. The Northern states paid people to work in the factories. In the Mid-west, farm owners saved money by paying one person to run a wheat cutting machine that did the job of 12 people. There was a different way of life in the South, though. Rich, Southern, plantation owners owned slaves. Slaves worked without pay on the plantation gathering cotton and doing other jobs. Many states in the South wanted to make their own laws, instead of the Federal Government making them. The North wanted the Federal Government making them. The North wanted the Federal Government to make the laws though. The states were also debating whether or not the newly formed states should be free states or slave states. As a result, the Southern states seceded from the United States, and the Civil War began. It ended in 1864 and slavery was abolished, but many people were killed.
2007-11-14 12:44:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
because at first the issue central issue was not slavery. The south went to war because the abolisment of slavery would have decimated them financially. Much of the labor and production in the south was still done by slaves. Lincolns move to abolish slavery waspart of an attack on the FINANCIAL stability of the south. Lincoln really could have cared less whether the slaves were free or not, and actually didn't think that "blacks" were equal to the "white". However he knew that the south would not be able to keep up with the already heavily industrialized and partially automated north without their slaves to perform the work. Later on it just became good PR to say it was about slaves.
Just like our current war is to root out terrorist threats to save the world... not take control of oil rich nations and install governments and powers that are favorable to the u.s.
2007-11-14 12:45:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
From a practical standpoint, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation when he did to prevent England from coming in on the side of the Confederacy. England needed the South's cotton, but once Lincoln did that, the English people and government would never want to be seen as fighting for slavery. (Do remember that the Emancipation Proclamation did not actually free a single slave. It only freed those in the Confederacy, over which Lincoln had no control. The 13th Amendment ended slavery.)
At the beginning, Lincoln simply believed that the South did not have the right to secede from the United States. He said he had taken an oath to preserve the Union, and he could not let them leave--and then they attacked Fort Sumter, effectively declaring war on the United States.
Lincoln personally abhored slavery, but he was not convinced of the equality of blacks and whites and for a while proposed sending freed slaves to Africa, where, at that point, almost none of them had ever lived.
Edit: OK, I am dying to know why anyone would give my answer a thumbs down when all of this is strictly factual information. What's your problem?
And, Lou Lou, you're a bit confused. The Civil War ended in April of 1865. Lincoln was not an abolitionist and, in fact, said that if he could save the union without freeing a single slave, he would do it. (He added that if he could save it by freeing all the slaves, he'd do that. And if he could save it by freeing some slaves and leaving others in slavery, he would also do that.)
I'm a bit of a Lincoln freak; believe me, you can trust what I'm writing here.
2007-11-14 12:43:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
First lets start this properly. The south seceeded because they perceived the election of Lincoln was going to shift to political balance to the abolitionists. Lincoln, who had no such intentions, sought to reassure the south of that fact, and continued to do so, up until the attack on Ft Sumpter.
For Lincoln the war was first & formost about the preservation of the Union.
The abolition of slavery was later needed to turn the war into a moral crusade, to help bolster popular support for the war in the north (& it was a VERY unpopular war in the north).
"If I could preserve the Union by ending slavery I would do it.
If I could preserve the Union by keeping slavery, I would do it.
If I could preserve the Union by keeping some slaves & freeing others, I would do it"-A Lincoln
2007-11-14 12:54:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Monkeyboi 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The civil war was about states rights, not slavery. If you read the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln only freed the slaves of the Confederacy, a country in which he had no control over.
Lincoln stated that slavery was like holding a tiger by the ears, you don't want to be there, but you don't want to let go either.
2007-11-14 12:44:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by radio80flyer 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Because it wasn't about slavery. The civil war was about state's rights vs. the national government. The issue of slavery really didn't become the top issue until Lincoln thought that England would become involved on the South's side. He abolished slavery so England (who had already abolished slavery) would stay out.
Also, it had nothing to do with party affiliations. The republicans were the abolitionist party. It was the southern democrats were for slavery.
2007-11-14 12:42:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by Melissa S 4
·
4⤊
1⤋
The War of Northern Aggression was the kiss of death for state's rights. Lincoln decided it would be more politically correct to tell people it was about ending slavery so they would forget that they were trading away their right to self determination for all time and eternity; or the second revolution.
2007-11-14 14:22:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by acmeraven 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Lou Lou's response above is impressive, if a bit clumsily edited.
It's also almost completely plagiarized.
There is at least one source on the Internet containing this information. This link is provided below.
Lou Lou, it is intellectually dishonest, unethical and illegal to pass off as your own writing responses you have purloined from other sources, including the Internet. Just because it's on the Internet does not mean it's free to use without attribution; and the fact that others may have plagiarized it in the past does not make repeated plagiarism permissible.
Please cite your sources.
2007-11-14 13:03:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by JMH 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
That war was not about slavery. That war was about state's rights. The Unionists had decided that the Federal government had supreme power over the states and could override state laws.
In accordance with the tenth amendment to the U.S. constitution, the Confederacy was formed and attempted to enforce the constitutional law.
That attempt failed and the results are now easy to see.
The only thing that Lincoln did was to have exquisite timing with his 'emancipation proclamation'. The slaves were on the verge of freedom anyway as they had grown outmoded by emerging technology.
2007-11-14 12:44:29
·
answer #11
·
answered by credo quia est absurdum 7
·
0⤊
2⤋