Quick question /confederate/, how many of you believe that that the civil war was fought over state's rights and not slavery?

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1419799967944.png (34.5 KB, 153x266, 153:266, 1274406-capcon.png)

Anonymous 12/28/14 (Sun) 20:52:48 No.54

Quick question /confederate/, how many of you believe that that the civil war was fought over state's rights and not slavery?

Anonymous 12/29/14 (Mon) 07:57:04 No.55

I always thought it was over lack of representation in the federal goverment, as well as states rights and economics.

Anonymous 12/31/14 (Wed) 18:20:55 No.56

>>55
If you read the state constitutions they pretty clearly state that they want to secede because they fear that slavery will be outlawed.

Anonymous 12/31/14 (Wed) 21:56:31 No.57

It's pretty much all of those, slavery was one of many things being intruded upon by the federal government, but was the largest and easily identifiable. Slavery was ingrounded into the economic and social fabric of the South. The North was quick to tax everything it could off of the benefits of the system while Lincoln wanted it contained in order to ensure his party's majority.

Anonymous 01/01/15 (Thu) 22:08:36 No.58

Yeah, slavery was an issue. The thing people fail to realize is it wasn't because they just wanting slaves for the sake of having slaves, slave labor was essential to to the southern economy. The farming technology just didn't allow for the plantation owners to manage their land on their own.

Anonymous 01/23/15 (Fri) 04:55:57 No.79

It was about tariffs.

Anonymous 01/26/15 (Mon) 20:13:34 No.82

File: 1422303214365.gif (5.61 KB, 209x126, 209:126, maryland_winder_calvary.gif)

Marylandfag here. I always thought that it was about federal vs state governments. The southern states were unhappy with the way the country was being ran and wanted to succeed, which at the time was not against any laws and as such there shouldn't have been any repercussion. Ole' 'Honest' Abe decided that he alone should've made the decision to "Preserve the Union" so he started a war upon anyone who left and threw slavery in with it so he could get freed blacks to fight for him. And they even went so far as to placing cannons on top of what is now called Federal Hill in Baltimore and threatening to blow the whole damn city up if Maryland succeeded.

Thus one of the reasons the North won was because they were so afraid of having their capital surrounded by the South that it would've happily murdered innocent people.

Anonymous 02/28/15 (Sat) 21:59:09 No.95

It was largely to do w/ slavery, and I don't have a problem justifying that. Slavery isn't wrong, per se. It can actually be perfectly moral.

Anonymous 07/05/15 (Sun) 21:32:36 No.695

>>95

The chattel slavery used at the time was morally bankrupt, though.

Anonymous 07/06/15 (Mon) 16:10:12 No.703

>>695

Changing economic and social pressures would have resulted in the Confederacy abandoning slavery not too long after secession.

When Lincoln emancipated the workers, he created a rift between Southern whites and blacks, which has resulted in years of antagonism and brutality. Neither integration nor peaceful segregation has occurred yet, and will likely not occur any time soon.

Had the South freed the blacks on their own terms, master and workers could have reconciled in such a fashion as to prevent the discord which has characterized race relations since the end of the Civil War.

Anonymous 07/06/15 (Mon) 18:55:11 No.706

>>703

I'm all for something more similar to indentured servitude, using only convicted felons, for the purpose of public works projects. It would certainly be more productive than letting them rot in a cell.

Anonymous 07/07/15 (Tue) 23:17:20 No.719

>>706

This. Life of hard labour > death penalty.

Anonymous 07/08/15 (Wed) 09:06:44 No.724

>>706

A lot of them are already like this except they make like .14 cents an hour.

Anonymous 07/08/15 (Wed) 11:37:18 No.725

>>724

Isn't that mostly happening in privately owned prisons? I would much rather their work benefit the general public than line the pockets of some CEO.

Anonymous 07/08/15 (Wed) 19:02:55 No.728

>>703

As an outsider (Canadian), I've never heard/read anything like that, and it makes a lot of sense. Thanks for giving me something to think about.