Was the Civil War fought over slavery?

[Unkotare]

Of course it was fought over slavery. The issue of slavery lay at the core of every other issue related to the war.

 

[Liminal]

You may have this particular fact right, but you have proven yourself ignorant in many other posts. The main one that comes to mind is your claim that blacks are too stupid to learn higher maths.

HAHAHA. But everyone knows that. Why do so few blacks get degrees in technical fields? Blacks earn only 1% of the math and science PhDs in america.

Blacks are mentally inferior - esp in math and science. You're the only one who questions that.

What's your excuse for being inferior? You obviously aren't very bright........are you.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The South wanted to maintain the right to own slaves.

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

 

[Liminal]

No- Lincoln never advocated the involuntary deportation of blacks- he proposed a plan for voluntary resettlement of American blacks to Africa and was surprised when he found out that they no more wanted to return to Africa than English Americans wanted to return to the place their ancestors came from 200 years before

And that's still true today. Blacks in america have a better life than they would have in africa. They bitch and bitch about america but they know that white means prosperity and black means poverty.

Only in your case white means just plain fucking stupid.

 

[Liminal]

The South wanted to maintain the right to own slaves.

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

In a nutshell. Not too hard to understand.

 

[Skylar]

Of course it was fought over slavery. The issue of slavery lay at the core of every other issue related to the war.

Yup. Though many make as mistake in assuming that the north fought to end slavery. They didn't. They fought to preserve the union. The south fought to defend slavery.

Defend from what is an interesting conversation. As the historical evidence strongly suggests that the south completely overreacted. Slavery was at the core of their secession, as the Declaration of Secession make ludicrously obvious. South Carolina's declaration of secession is about 2 things: justification for secession and slavery. With slavery referenced 18 times.

To argue that secession wasn't about slavery is a ridiculous revisionist farce.

 

[WinterBorn]

You may have this particular fact right, but you have proven yourself ignorant in many other posts. The main one that comes to mind is your claim that blacks are too stupid to learn higher maths.

HAHAHA. But everyone knows that. Why do so few blacks get degrees in technical fields? Blacks earn only 1% of the math and science PhDs in america.

Blacks are mentally inferior - esp in math and science. You're the only one who questions that.

The fact that so few try is an issue. Your claims that they are incapable is simply bullshit.

A black man replaced Carl Sagan as the face of science, namely Neil deGrasse Tyson. I dare say he is far more capable at higher maths than you are.

 

[Skylar]

The South wanted to maintain the right to own slaves.

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

In a nutshell. Not too hard to understand.

The end of slavery was a mid war moral play by the north to keep people the public in the north supporting the war effort. The rhetoric of the North switched from preserving the union in the opening of the conflict to putting down a rebellion in its second year to abolishing slavery in the third year onward toward the end of the war.

Lincoln was very clear that if he could preserve the union without freeing a single slave, he would do it. Lincoln obviously had moral qualms about slavery but his stated reason for eventually advocating the freeing of the slaves was that the US couldn't survive divided as it was into free and slave states.

 

[Liminal]

The South wanted to maintain the right to own slaves.

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

In a nutshell. Not too hard to understand.

The end of slavery was a mid war moral play by the north to keep people the public in the north supporting the war effort. The rhetoric of the North switched from preserving the union in the opening of the conflict to putting down a rebellion in its second year to abolishing slavery in the third year onward toward the end of the war.

Lincoln was very clear that if he could preserve the union without freeing a single slave, he would do it. Lincoln obviously had moral qualms about slavery but his stated reason for eventually advocating the freeing of the slaves was that the US couldn't survive divided as it was into free and slave states.

It would certainly be true to say that the Confederacy fought to preserve slavery more than the Union fought to end it. Slavery was the primary cause of the Civil War none the less.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

HAHAHA. But everyone knows that. Why do so few blacks get degrees in technical fields? Blacks earn only 1% of the math and science PhDs in america.

Blacks are mentally inferior - esp in math and science. You're the only one who questions that.

What's your excuse for being inferior? You obviously aren't very bright........are you.

HAHA. The board notes that i have reduced you to namecalling. Thanks for admitting you have no argument.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

As the war progressed lincoln emphasized ending slavery more and more but he didn't really care. It was a PR stunt with two goals

1. Keep france and england from entering the war on the side of the South

2. Induce slaves to rise up and kill the white women and children left on the plantations.

 

[Skylar]

The South wanted to maintain the right to own slaves.

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

In a nutshell. Not too hard to understand.

The end of slavery was a mid war moral play by the north to keep people the public in the north supporting the war effort. The rhetoric of the North switched from preserving the union in the opening of the conflict to putting down a rebellion in its second year to abolishing slavery in the third year onward toward the end of the war.

Lincoln was very clear that if he could preserve the union without freeing a single slave, he would do it. Lincoln obviously had moral qualms about slavery but his stated reason for eventually advocating the freeing of the slaves was that the US couldn't survive divided as it was into free and slave states.

It would certainly be true to say that the Confederacy fought to preserve slavery more than the Union fought to end it. Slavery was the primary cause of the Civil War none the less.

Slavery was absolutely the cause of the civil war. As it was the cause of the south seceding and eventually waging war against the United States. The South seceded and fought over slavery. The north fought to preserve the union. With the Emancipation Proclamation being an offshoot of the Confiscation Acts of 1861 and 1863, both of which were to weaken the south's ability to wage war.

The moral implications of Emancipation were largely a matter of selling it to the people of the North. That's not to say that there were no moral implications, or that the Lincoln administration didn't believe that slavery was morally wrong. Only that the purpose of the Proclamation wasn't moral in motivation, but practical.

Lincoln openly supported an amendment that would have protected slavery in perpetuity. An amendment that would have (in theory anyway) prevented any other amendment from ever changing it. Had the South taken that amendment and not seceded, its quite possible that slavery would be legal to this day.

The South fell victim to its own conspiracy theoy. They made the seminal mistake of any propogandist: they drank their own Kool-aid.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

A black man replaced Carl Sagan as the face of science, namely Neil deGrasse Tyson. I dare say he is far more capable at higher maths than you are.

What a stupid person you are. That's like saying one man is 7 feet tall, therefore all men are. You are truly dumb.

BTW - sagan was not much a scientist. The science popularizers never are. Tyson is even worse.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

Slavery was absolutely the cause of the civil war. As it was the cause of the south seceding and eventually waging war against the United States. .

HAHAHA. The south didn't wage war, you fool. They were invaded and defended themselves in a war entirely started by lincoln.

 

[Liminal]

HAHAHA. But everyone knows that. Why do so few blacks get degrees in technical fields? Blacks earn only 1% of the math and science PhDs in america.

Blacks are mentally inferior - esp in math and science. You're the only one who questions that.

What's your excuse for being inferior? You obviously aren't very bright........are you.

HAHA. The board notes that i have reduced you to namecalling. Thanks for admitting you have no argument.

Where's your argument? Did you just forget to bring it with you? Have you ever read a book? Have you ever even seen one?

 

[Skylar]

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

As the war progressed lincoln emphasized ending slavery more and more but he didn't really care. It was a PR stunt with two goals

1. Keep france and england from entering the war on the side of the South

2. Induce slaves to rise up and kill the white women and children left on the plantations.

Oh, he cared. He'd long argued, in public and in private, that the practice of slavery was immoral. His support for Emancipation however was practical. First, as a way of weakening the South's ability to wage war. And second, as it became clear that the rebellion was drawing to a close Lincoln looked at the issue as a matter of long term viability for the country. And Lincoln didn't believe that the US would survive divided into free and slave states.

The moral implications were secondary. Though Lincoln cared deeply about the issue, moral implications weren't his motivation for either Emancipation Proclamation or the end of slavery.

Though his interactions with Fredrick Douglas seemed to have an impact on Lincoln. And in his final year may have allowed his moral beliefs to motivate some of his actions regarding slavery. His stance on citizenship for former slaves certainly shifted in large part due to Douglas.

 

[Liminal]

[

Slavery was absolutely the cause of the civil war. As it was the cause of the south seceding and eventually waging war against the United States. .

HAHAHA. The south didn't wage war, you fool. They were invaded and defended themselves in a war entirely started by lincoln.

Wrong again, the Confederacy invaded the North several times. Ever hear of Gettysburg or Antietam?

 

[WinterBorn]

A black man replaced Carl Sagan as the face of science, namely Neil deGrasse Tyson. I dare say he is far more capable at higher maths than you are.

What a stupid person you are. That's like saying one man is 7 feet tall, therefore all men are. You are truly dumb.

BTW - sagan was not much a scientist. The science popularizers never are. Tyson is even worse.

LMAO!! The man has a doctorate in astrophysics. I'd call that being a scientist.

As for the 7 ft man analogy, you are the one making generalized statements. You are the one claiming that blacks are intellectually inferior and incapable of learning higher maths. YOUR statement includes all blacks. All I need to do is provide one example of you being wrong and your claims fail.

You are mistaking a lack of interest with a lack of ability. I doubt there are many astrophysicists from West Virginia, but that does not mean people from West Virginia are incapable of learning astrophysics. If you had a modicum of scientific knowledge yourself you would understand this.

 

[Liminal]

The North's first and primary reason for going to war was to preserve the union, the issue of ending slavery was secondary, but the issue became more and more important as the war progressed.

As the war progressed lincoln emphasized ending slavery more and more but he didn't really care. It was a PR stunt with two goals

1. Keep france and england from entering the war on the side of the South

2. Induce slaves to rise up and kill the white women and children left on the plantations.

No doubt history you read in a book somewhere......right?

 

[Skylar]

[

Slavery was absolutely the cause of the civil war. As it was the cause of the south seceding and eventually waging war against the United States. .

HAHAHA. The south didn't wage war, you fool. They were invaded and defended themselves in a war entirely started by lincoln.

The attack on Ft. Sumpter was most definitely an act of war.

Remember, speedy.....you don't actually know what you're talking about. It tends to hamper your ability to form a coherent argument.