[–] knije_tahou 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I have a complete Encyclopedia Americana set from 1940 and it is quite clear that it wasn't about slavery
[–] knije_tahou 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
If it was about slavery the north wouldn't have waited till after the war to free their slaves. In the south we grew up hearing referred to as the war of northern aggression
[–] ZenAtheist 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Ok, you people always say this, but as an outsider, I have to ask...
Why is "slavery" mentioned 18 times in South Carolina's declaration of secession?
Why was "slavery" mentioned 7 times in Mississippi's declaration of secession?
And why did Alabama, Texas and Virginia, in their Ordinances of Secession call their confederates "Slave-holding States"?
I may see your point if you said that the Civil War was not only about slavery, but it definitely was about slavery to a large extent.
[–] Thisismyvoatusername [S] ago
Did you read what Dr. Roberts said (including in the longer prior posts to which he linked)? I mean that was the entire point of the post.
[–] johnjohn 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Slavery was a big issue for sure but the biggest issue was the states rights and constitutional law. The war was secession vs. preserving the union, which should have been handled in the courts, not on the battlefield. The constitutionality of unilateral secession was not even decided by the Supreme court until after the civil war.
People forget slavery was LEGAL at the time of the civil war and Lincoln even said the war was wasn't about slavery but to preserve the Union. Lincoln had to ensure his troops that they weren't fighting for his abolitionist views. The South knew the North was already waging soft war on them through different measures like tariffs and illegally helping free slaves, and had plans to abolish slavery in a way that would damage the Southern economy. Make no mistake the North would have never had so many abolitionists if their economy relied heavily on slavery like the Southern economy did. Furthermore the South knew the North had a lot of dumb cucks and social degenerates that would release the African slaves into the general public and the South didn't want miscegenation and all the other social problems that come along with mixing Africans with Europeans, man were they right about that.
The right way to have dealt with slavery would have been for the North and South to make a plan to gradually reduce it to zero, which wouldn't have been too hard with the burgeoning industrialization and machinery. Send all of the African slaves back to Africa to be with their people, as well I think they should have been paid reparations for their work.
[–] sosat_menya_reddit 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
If you were taught history prior to the 1980s you were taught that abolition of slavery was a punishment not the cause