Time Magazine:"the REAL reason for the Civil War was to end slavery"

[Kirk Freeman]

The war was over economic issues as all wars are.

What was the economic issue in Bleeding Kansas?

Isn't it true that the killing was over slavery and slavery alone?

 

[E5RANGER375]

the british were all about supporting the southern cause ...... until they ran out of gold.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I see that I have mentioned the Slave Codes and Patrols, but not the Bogus Laws of Kansas (copied from the slave code of Missouri).

Remember, under the laws of the Southern states it was illegal to write or speak against slavery (those that assisted with the escape of slaves faced death or hard labor). Nothing else had such protection by the rule of law as slavery in the South.

Lawrence, Kansas was not raided because of a tax on imported iron. People were killing each other in Kansas over slavery.

 

[Phil502]

The Civil War was about slavery but it was the economic aspect of it, the South was about to lose a resource. I don't think it was simply that Southerners hated blacks. Yes, I know slavery is a horrible thing but it wasn't invented here either.

 

[E5RANGER375]

The Civil War was about slavery but it was the economic aspect of it, the South was about to lose a resource. I don't think it was simply that Southerners hated blacks. Yes, I know slavery is a horrible thing but it wasn't invented here either.

I dont agree in the northern propaganda that it was about slavery. plus, there are MANY accounts of union soldiers writing home saying they wouldnt be willing to die for no slave. I dont blame them. at that time in history I wouldnt have either. some of my family owned slaves. I dont blame them or judge them by todays standards for something they did that was legal and acceptable back then. some of my family still has money today because of their businesses they had that used slaves. should they go turn over their bank accounts to modern black groups? hell no.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What the North thought is irrelevant.

What matters is that to the side that started the Civil War, slavery was the polestar of Southern politics.

It is not Northern propaganda that held that the war was about slavery. Rather it is the words (and actions) of the South that held that the war was about slavery.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Accoeding to the April 16th TIME magazine, the Civil War's TRUE cause was to end slavery. That is also what our kids are taught in public schools: "The civil war was fought because the northern states wanted the southern states to stop slavery".

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Civil War started in 1861, and the emancipation proclamation was issued in 1863, and it ONLY freed slaves in the SOUTH, an area the Union had no control over.

How does THAT translate into the REAL reason for the Civil War being about ending slavery?

Well, you certainly opened a can of worms on this one. As I stated in my earlier post, the worldview presuppositions are so deeply ingrained that challenging them only leads to anger. Whenever a worldview presupposition is challenged, folks respond with anger—deep unreasoning anger. The issues here are challenging deeply held beliefs, often unconsciously held beliefs. After 150 years, the presuppositions remain. We will not change them by debating them, by publishing articles in Time magazine, or by logical reasoning. We can present the evidence, but it will only fall on deaf ears due to the cultural transmission of a worldview from one generation to another. Still, we must present the evidence, I suppose, and allow the debate to go forward.

Over the past 150 years I think we have made one change in the American worldview presuppositions: No man should be another man's slave. I think today we all agree this is a good change.

 

[right winger]

Accoeding to the April 16th TIME magazine, the Civil War's TRUE cause was to end slavery. That is also what our kids are taught in public schools: "The civil war was fought because the northern states wanted the southern states to stop slavery".

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Civil War started in 1861, and the emancipation proclamation was issued in 1863, and it ONLY freed slaves in the SOUTH, an area the Union had no control over.

How does THAT translate into the REAL reason for the Civil War being about ending slavery?

You are correct.
When Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 many Unions soldiers tried to quit the war.
Including Indiana troops.Their reason we joined to save the union not free slaves.

 

[Ter]

Kirk Freeman Rep coming your way for being a man who knows his history.

 

[Hkindiana]

Well, you certainly opened a can of worms on this one. As I stated in my earlier post, the worldview presuppositions are so deeply ingrained that challenging them only leads to anger. Whenever a worldview presupposition is challenged, folks respond with anger—deep unreasoning anger. The issues here are challenging deeply held beliefs, often unconsciously held beliefs. After 150 years, the presuppositions remain. We will not change them by debating them, by publishing articles in Time magazine, or by logical reasoning. We can present the evidence, but it will only fall on deaf ears due to the cultural transmission of a worldview from one generation to another. Still, we must present the evidence, I suppose, and allow the debate to go forward.

Over the past 150 years I think we have made one change in the American worldview presuppositions: No man should be another man's slave. I think today we all agree this is a good change.

I think you are right on this one. It seems to be like discussing religion - no matter how many FACTS you provide, most religious people are totally unwilling to change their way of thinking, because that is how they were taught, and it HAS to be right.

Did you know that in the 1980's Japanese schoolbooks still taught that the reason we did not use Atomic bombs on the Germans was that they were white, and we reserved them for the Japanese because we felt that they were sub-human? I actually had this conversation with a Japanese student in 1982. I provided PROOF that the Germans had surrendered in May of 1945, and that we didn't even test the first A-bomb until August 1'st. However he stuck to his beliefs, because that was what he was taught.

 

[Hkindiana]

Kirk Freeman Rep coming your way for being a man who knows his history.

At least one form of it

 

[88GT]

No other issue dominated the antebellum period like slavery....

It's a little known fact that slavery featured rather prominently in the Continental Congresses and/or Constitutional Conventions as well. (Forgive the uncertainty on the actual meetings; it's been a while since I read the book in which that information was covered.) Long before there was a North or South, slavery was an issue that threatened the nation.

 

[Terp7]

Indiana was one of the first states to meet the quota for requested soldiers. Many legislators and state officials made it known that the only reason Indiana was sending out soldiers and having people join the war effort was to keep the South from seceding. Indiana, along with many other Union states, were adamant that they were NOT fighting to free slaves. I was never taught that slavery was the driving cause for the war - always that it was rooted in State/Federal rights.

 

[grimor]

The civil war was about slavery, both the the moral and economic aspect in one form or another. but many people incorrectly believe that Lincoln thought that abolishing slavery was the primary mission. In fact his mission was to preserve the US and had said (in short) If he could of reunited the union without abolishing slavery he would. If he could reunite the union and abolish slavery he would. His main concern was preserving the US

 

[E5RANGER375]

Indiana was one of the first states to meet the quota for requested soldiers. Many legislators and state officials made it known that the only reason Indiana was sending out soldiers and having people join the war effort was to keep the South from seceding. Indiana, along with many other Union states, were adamant that they were NOT fighting to free slaves. I was never taught that slavery was the driving cause for the war - always that it was rooted in State/Federal rights.

boggstown Indiana seceded from the union and never rejoined themselves. of coarse they were forced to, but

 

[eldirector]

boggstown Indiana seceded from the union and never rejoined themselves. of coarse they were forced to, but

Huh, forgot about that. Never rescinded the resolution, either.

A good friend of mine performs in the Cabaret out there.
Coachlight Musical Theatre

 

[Terp7]

boggstown Indiana seceded from the union and never rejoined themselves. of coarse they were forced to, but

I never knew that! Interesting. Was it because of the slavery issue, or some other reason?

 

[Cemetery-man]

We all know it was about southern aggression!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

It's a little known fact that slavery featured rather prominently in the Continental Congresses and/or Constitutional Conventions as well. (Forgive the uncertainty on the actual meetings; it's been a while since I read the book in which that information was covered.) Long before there was a North or South, slavery was an issue that threatened the nation.

Hence my references to 1808.

We all know it was about southern aggression!

Yes, from Texas to Kansas to Fort Sumter to Kentucky, Southerners were aggressive and unapologetic about being so.

Indiana, along with many other Union states, were adamant that they were NOT fighting to free slaves.

Again, it matters not what the Union was fighting for--right to green cheese, Union forever, right to grow weird facial hair on officers, inter alia. Those that started the war in Kansas and Fort Sumter fired the shots in defense of slavery. The Union fought the "slave power conspiracy" which wanted to tear the nation apart. The CSA wanted their slaves.

In the words of those that shed blood and tears on behalf of the CSA:

"The South went to war on account of slavery. South Carolina went to war - as she said in her secession proclamation - because slavery w[oul]d not be secure under Lincoln. South Carolina ought to know what was the cause of her seceding."

John Singleton Mosby

The higher the percentage of slaves in a Southern state, the quicker it was to leave the Union.

South Carolina knew why the Civil War began and made no apology for defending slavery. Why do people now apologize for the South's defense of slavery?

Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[edporch]

To MANY of the everyday common men who fought the Civil War, it WAS about slavery.

That's why my great grandfather says he fought.

How do I know?

My mother was born in 1914, the youngest of her siblings.
(she lived to age 93 and passed in 2008, clear headed up to within a few days of her death)
She passed on MUCH family history to me throughout my life.

In her youth there were many of her living relatives who knew her grandfather.

EVERY one of them quoted him as saying he fought "to free the slaves" when he spoke of fighting in the Civil War..

I REALIZE there were several reasons for the Civil War, but OFTEN in history, the common man has his own slant on WHY he is involved.

All too often the perspective of the "common man" isn't taken into account when discussing history.
Make no mistake, LONG before the Civil War a large share of everyday people were disgusted by slavery, and held slaveholders with absolute contempt.
My genealogical studies of writings from additional members of my own family back this up.