Slavery was not the cause of the Civil War - as written by an American in 1863.

a reply to: soberbacchus

3) the north was not better on race relations...

Lincoin himself repeatedly stated blacks were an inferior race and he had no plans on equality...

Because Lincoln said he hated slavery, doesn't mean he was willing to take action..

He didn't even free all the slaves. The emancipation proclamation only effected slaves in the states that rebeled. As you hinted. It was a military strategy not a moral issue.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: soberbacchus

3) the north was not better on race relations...

Lincoin himself repeatedly stated blacks were an inferior race and he had no plans on equality...

It seems an absurd logic.

I imagine given the choice between living amongst the North where most, but not all people thought your were of an "Inferior" race and living in the south where you were literally enslaved, used as slave labor and whipped or murdered if you showed too much independence ..the average African American at the time would disagree with your claim that the north was not "better" in race relations.

What was that whole underground railroad thing with slaves fleeing north to freedom?..just made up?

originally posted by: bknapple32
a reply to: bknapple32

Here's what Ill say. The reasons are debated. There are numerous reasons. But to say slavery was not the cause.. Are you saying it was not THEE cause , or not a cause at all?

Cause imo it certainly played a part. where it lands in the top 3 reasons? I dont know.

I'm pretty sure it had something to do with the North Imposing a tariff on Southern cotton so they couldn't sell it over seas. There were a lot of people whom volunteered in the south and I seriously doubt the majority of them didn't do it to keep slavery. Slavery was a horrible thing but the left rarely mentions the unemployment it caused and that poor whites worked those very same fields that the blacks worked in. The left will also point out that the whites were not whipped or mistreated which is a fallacy because sailors were routinely beaten and keel hauled on occasion and I would assume since it was perfectly acceptable then it wouldn't be a far fetch that the whip spared no ones back.

a reply to: jkm1864

What?!?

That's just false..

The tarrif was on manufactured IMPORTS from Europe, but was not added to base materials.. not on EXPORTS of any kind.

The argument that it hurt the south more was that since the north was into manufacturing and the south into producing base materials. The tax on finished products hurt the south more than the north...

And it wasn't even a big tax...



The politicians who orcastrated the rebellion used the john brown raid and that import tax as proof the free states would interfere....and then lincoin's election and the his agenda to make any new western states free states, as proof they would have the legal power to interfere..


It was all based on a "what if" the free states did x,y or z??"

Not any move the federal government had already made.


B) in every war the soldiers fight for 100000 different reason. The cause of something is a set of specific political actions taken by those in power.


C) your dead right the unemployment problem due to slave labor was the reason your average American was anti slavery.

D) chattle slavery is worse than abject poverty.. in every way. You children are also slaves.. it is not a crime to murder you.. BY LAW.

That is a far cry from someone's influence allowing them to get away with breaking the law.

a reply to: soberbacchus

I think you can seperate slavery from race and people did....

In a lot of cases for economy reasons.. that is why you had the push to ship them back to Africa.. people hated it because slavery stole jobs. It wasn't because the Africans deserved equality.

Try competing in the market vs slave labor lol..


There were exceptions.. john brown, for one.. but the past is a dark place sometimes everyone is wrong.