Depends on who you talk to. It was about slavery, but it was also about states rights. Virginia especially had agreed to ratify the new constitution in 1786 only if everybody else agreed that they had the express right to leave the union at any time for any reason. I have read the Robert E Lee hated slavery but sided with the south because he was from Virginia and believed in state's rights. Until that war, the idea that the federal government must be supreme and must survive was not accepted by all or maybe even most. This may be why some in the south referred to Lincoln as personally objectionable to them and said that they would accept any other antislavery candidate but would have to secede if he took office. In other words, it was the usual real world mess that boiled over and wound up having to be settled by violence.
Any Historians out there care to expound and/or refute? I'm going by memory of readings nearly 40 years ago.
2007-11-25 15:58:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by balloon buster 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
It wasn't "only" about slavery, but it *was* mostly about slavery. Ever since the colonists first won their independence, there had been north-south tensions, and it was always a delicate question whether the former colonies ought to have united into a single nation that contained both slave and anti-slave states, or 2 separate nations. As the nation expanded westward and new states were admitted, the delicate compromise was tested again and again. There were several congressional compromises that kept the north and south together, but the narrow election victory of anti-slavery candidate Abraham Lincoln tipped the scales, and soon one slave state after another seceded from the nation rather than recognize the first vocally anti-slavery President.
After declaring themselves no longer subject to US federal jurisdiction, the seceded states insisted on the removal of all federal (union) forces from their borders. Eventually, South Carolina fired cannons at Fort Sumter to force the federal forces to leave and the Civil War began.
America had developed into 2 very different economic regions with different economic, social, and class structures. But the heart was 2 very different views on slavery and even though the nation almost survived these 2 different systems for over 90 years, eventually the matter would have to be settled with either 2 separate countries or a single country with a single approach toward slavery. Sadly, it was a very bloody solution. Happily, that is all in our past now and the South and North get along quite well. (Just not during football season.)
2007-11-25 16:07:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Z-man 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
Slavery was the issue about which there could be no agreement. Since its beginning, the country was divided on the issue - with the states in the north generally favoring abolition or limitation of slavery and the south remaining in favor of it. As the first half of the 19th century went on there were many conflicts about the issue. In order to protect their power base the southern states need more states that were pro-slavery, but the northern states were not willing to allow the expansion of slavery and what they came to call the "slave powers."
There were a series of compromises, the most critical being the Missouri Compromise in 1820. The major parts of this agreement were the Missouri would be allowed as a slave state, and Maine as a non-slave state, but that there would be no expansion of slavery above latitude 36-30 in the territories. This compromise prevented a war at the time, because states were already talking about secession.
Over the next 30 years the south became more and more economically dependent on slavery, while the north both relied on it less and less, and the calls for abolition grew stronger.
There were more compromises and changes over the years, but what brought the matter to another crisis came when Kansas and Nebraska were joining the union as states. The government, largely controlled by the southern states at this time, had maneuvered a seris of laws that allowed states to determine for themselves whether or not slavery would be allowed, which was in effect a repeal of the 1820 agreement. In the north the concern over the spread of slavery was so great that political parties split and reformed into what became the Republican Party. Their #1 goal was the stop of the spread of slavery and it's ultimate extinction. Lincoln was an early member, and his election was the final straw - many of the slaves states seceeded after he was elected.
Now, this is a very simplistic telling of the story - there is a lot more to it. But there is no doubt that without the issue of slavery there would have been no need for war. Without slavery there was no issue to hotly divide the country. Some people claim that the way was over states rights, but all you have to do is look at the newspapers of the time, the books of the time, and the speechs of the time, and the issue of rights revolved around one thing - whether or not they had the right to have slaves.
The story is complex, but slavery WAS the issue that caused the Civil War.
2007-11-25 16:01:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by Rich 5
·
5⤊
1⤋
Land was the main reason, however the Republicans (Abe Lincoln) ran on an anti-slave platform and when he won the presidency the South was angered and state after state seceded to become the Confederate States of America. The Civil War began. The North was an industrial Union and the South was built on farming and slavery a part of that, they felt they needed to keep the workers (slaves) to maintain there economy. Things escalated and North and South became bitter enemies, some people forget that people on the North had also owned slaves and people on the South supported freeing them. Slavery has been an occurrence in countries outside the US for 1000's of years, and to this day it still exists, we still have much to do to free all people.
2007-11-25 16:17:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by AggieMom 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Slavery was the overriding issue. States' rights was smoke and mirrors, an excuse, not a reason to rebel. The South wanted to avoid making slavery their stated cause. It was seen as bad P.R. They knew that they would need help from Europe, probably Britain. Many European countries would have preferred that the U.S. be fractured. States had ceded their authority, when they ratified the Constitution. The Constitution was designed to place the federal authority over the states, because the original plan. of a weaker federal government had failed, under the Articles of Confederation. Newspaper articles, from the time of the ratification votes, urged ratification on the grounds that it would prevent states from secession.
2016-05-25 23:25:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The civil war was about many diffirent aspects.
Some of the main parts were the stamp act and slavery. But the root cause of the war was economics and life style. The north and south had economic expectations of the other, and the north did not like that the south used slaves to fulfill their end of the bargan. The south mainly fought to keep the way of life that they were use to.
2007-11-26 01:03:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by jamie a 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
There were several other reasons for the Civil War. The resource listed below indicates these are the top five reasons:
1. Economic and social differences between the North and the South.
2. States versus federal rights.
3. The fight between Slave and Non-Slave State Proponents.
4. Growth of the Abolition Movement.
5. The election of Abraham Lincoln.
2007-11-25 15:54:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by DaveNCUSA 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
The American Civil War was about many things.
1. Economics: The Free Trade Policy - which under John C. Calhoun led to the experiment of Nullification.
2. Social Advancement: The Advocacy of Slavery - both as it existed in the Southern States, and as proposed in the new territories of the Federal Union.
3. Politics: The Doctrine of State Sovereignty and Supremacy - in opposition to the policy of Federal Centralization and Power.
2007-11-25 16:05:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by WMD 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
War for or against the slavery. North was against,south was for slavery ( cotton )
2007-11-25 18:39:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Find a compressed history time line at the Leap Over Web Clutter section of this website. It will give you a good overview and provide articles on various periods if you want to dig deeper.
2007-11-25 16:08:52
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋