what was the cause of non-slave holders to support the South in the civil war?

Question

Before the civil war...
Why were the soutern people that did NOT own slaves support the war and slavery to continue?

what other situations can this example compare to?
---defending a system that doesn't benefit you [the non-slave owner of the south] because it is of the group think.

{non-slave holders living in the south}

i would just like to add that "group-think" came from my professor

Answer 1

Much of what has been posted so far repeats popular mythology...

First, let me respond to the "non about slavery" claim. This was first made by Confederates at the END of the war -- and in many cases the very same people who had made it VERY clear in their complaints in the 1850s, and in their acts of secession and forming the Confederacy in 1860-61 that protecting this institution was a CENTRAL reason for what they were doing. Unfortunately, many Northerners, eager to 'patch things up' and often racist themselves, gradually gave in to this and adopted the whole Southern "Lost Cause"/states rights mythology.

Here are some links that demonstrate from their OWN words, that secessionist leaders based much of their case on the concern to keep slavery (and their fear that "black Republicans", as they called all members of the party, were actually intent on outlawing it).

Declarations of Causes of Seceding States - South Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia and Texas.
http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/reasons.html

Note that they DO make references to "states rights", but THE right they feared was threatened was a particular "property right", viz., that of OWNING SLAVES!

See also [Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens: Cornerstone Address (March 21, 1861)]

Speaking of the draft Constitution for the Confederacy he notes the following:

"not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other-though last, not least: the new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions-African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the ***** in our form of civilization. THIS WAS THE IMMEDIATE CAUSE OF THE LATE RUPTURE AND PRESENT REVOLUTION!! [emphasis mine]. . . .

"Those ideas [of the founders], however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it-when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell." Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the ***** is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. . . ."
http://civilwartalk.com/cwt_alt/resources/documents/cornerstone_addy.htm

Interesting thing is Stephens did not favor secession, but went with his state when they voted for it. He ALSO tried to say AFTER the War that slavery was NOT the cause .... but, as you can see, we have his own words to the contrary.
_________________________

As for why NON-slaveholders supported the Confederacy.

Do note, that not all of them DID. . . ! There were territories, esp. in the mountain regions far from plantations, where pro-Union sentiment remained strong. Some of these regions sent many troops to join the UNION Army.

After the war, these areas supplied many of the pro-Union votes which, joined to black votes, enabled the Republicans success in the early post-War state governments. (Other Southerners maligned them as "scalawags", treating them as traitors. But since many of these had opposed rebellion in the first place, the charge is a slander.)

As for those who supported the Confederacy -- The fact is, many of them DID support slavery. And they said so repeatedly! A great source for this is a recent book based on thousands of letters of both Confederate and Union soldiers. The author examines how the common soldiers on BOTH sides very much recognized that slavery was what had caused the conflict, and that this specific issue needed to be settled (whether by protecting or ending the institution).

One theme that is often sounded in the Confederate letters is the sense that the HONOR and status of WHITES depended on the status of black slaves beneath them. That is, in one sense all whites were regarded as equal, and even the poorest could regard himself as ABOVE the black slave. It that should change (as it would with abolition/emancipation) the whole structure of their very SOCIETY would fall apart.

That "coming apart" included values (honor, etc), but it also involved PREJUDICE and FEAR. If the huge slave population were freed, what would they then DO? Become shiftless, and a burden on the society? Steal from whites? Exact revenge on white society? Act like equals and no longer show deference to all whites? Even (a major fear) marry, or seduce and ravage white women? THESE were wide-spread fears (which vocal proponents of slavery and secession played on and fed).

In fact, these very fears help explain how groups of white Southerners reacted AFTER the war to try to "control" the new freedmen, to effectively remove their civil rights and terrorize them so that they would not vote. (In other words, this was a, perhaps THE, central reason why Reconstruction fell apart by 1877.)

Check it out -- Chandra Manning, *What this cruel war was over : soldiers, slavery, and the Civil War* (2007)

In addition, note (as Manning does to some extent) that more Southerners were somehow involved with slavery than you might think. ALSO, many who did not own slaves held out the hope that someday they COULD afford to. And they might also look up to the wealthy, educated elite who owned slaves.

Further, keep in mind that even if people did not own slaves the whole social and economic structure of the region was still dependent on those who DID. Non slavery-holders would suffer great economic hardship if the large part of the economy built on slavery were to come apart.

At this point it helps to recognize the element of the truth in the claim that "it wasn't ALL about slavery". That is, it was not some hypothetical argument about the morality of slavery. It was about the whole SYSTEM and WAY OF LIFE that was so intertwined with and dependent on slavery.

Even for those who did not own slaves or DIRECTLY concern themselves with slavery, were enmeshed in the regional SYSTEM that depended on it. Thus defending their regional (or more even, simply LOCAL) interests necessarily meant defending the SLAVE interest.

One answer pointed out the LOCAL concerns of Confederate soldiers. Manning's book demonstrates this very nicely. But she shows it was not just about "defending my neighbors" but even more about defending MY family and relations (including, for instance, my wife and daughters, as noted above).

It is interesting to see how these soldiers responded to Confederate actions they DIS-agreed with, the suffering and disorder brought by the war and THEIR government's policies (from heavy taxes to conscription). Apparently, one central thing that kept them fighting despite all these things, was the fear that life would be WORSE if the Union won. The end of the slave system (much of the complaint was specifically against the ABOLITIONISTS) was a big part of this. This becomes even clearer in their writings after the Emancipation Proclamation 'confirmed' their fears.

Answer 2

While slavery was partially to blame for the Civil War, there was more to it than just that. The South, unlike the North, was not industrialized and relied heavily upon slave labor. This created a power divide in Congress between the slave states and the free states, much like republicans and democrats nowadays. When new states entered the union, the decision as to whether they were a slave or free state would tip the power to one side or the other. After the power tipped heavily in favor of the free states, the slave states seceded from the union and became the Confederate States of America. The USA couldn't have this, and thus the war was started. There's alot more to it, but that is roughly the main synopsis. So, while slavery played a major role, it wasn't directly fought over slavery.

Answer 3

Slavery was not the reason of the Civil War. Economics was the chief cause. The south had a agrarian economy and the north a industrialized economy. The south wanted to trade with Europe and the north wanted the goods that were produced in the south but they did not want to match Europe's price. The south also believed that it was their right to decide what was best for them (State Rights). Slavery did not really become a issue until 1863 when Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation and the only reason he did was because the north was losing the war. One thing that is never mentioned in the history books or is glossed over is that no slaves above the Mason-Dixon line were freed by Lincoln. Slavery would have ceased to exist without the Civil war due to the industrial age.

Answer 4

It was not a one issue war. Talk about Group-Think, what ever that word means. The war was about States Rights. The Constitution gave them. The Federal Government took them away.
Slavery was a good deal. I know that most of the young people today are not taught to think things out, but how else would the crops be harvested, the south basically totally supplied the North with cotton for textiles and tobacco. They also were part of the Triangular Trade route. You probably don't know what that is either.

Answer 5

Most southerners did not, in fact, own slaves. But they had a very strong sense of community - much stronger than you see today. They were loyal to friends and neighbors, and far less caring about what happened at the national level. When abolition began to be preached, it was perceived not only as an economic threat to the south, but as a case of unwarranted interference in local affairs. In other words, I may not like my neighbor very much, but if you attack him, you're attacking me.
Most folks, north and south, felt much greater loyalty to their state than to the country as a whole. So much so that a man who was a career soldier, when asked to lead the Union army, decided he could not fight his fellow Virginians, and so Col. Robert E. Lee resigned his commission in the Union army and became a colonel in the Virginia militia and then a colonel in the newly-formed Confederate army. And as you know, he quickly thereafter became a general, and upon the wounding of his commanding officer, General Johnston, became the commander of the Army of Northern Virginia and the most legendary soldier in the history of the nation.
Lee actually opposed secession and also thought slavery an evil thing...

Answer 6

Slavery was not the central issue. The right of individual States to govern themselves without interference from the central government was. Beyond that, Southerners resisted an armed invasion of their homeland, families, friends and farms. Take time to read and learn. Maybe you will find that the "group think" is coming from you.

Answer 7

they would probably be the business men who were buying the product that was grown on the farms and picked by the slaves. if they got rid of slaves then prices would go up. which is bad from a business stand point