Who is Most Responsible for the Civil War??

[Unreconstructed]

I blame the wealthy New England industrialists and their influence over their bought and paid for president-later-dictator, Linclon. Funny how his public statements changed so with the times...

Oh...and occupied Alabama? I think I know what you are referring to there. We call 'em halfbacks here.

[unionblue]

Unreconstructed,

Well, I guess if you have to blame someone, it might as well be New England industrialist, etc. Never mind that a bunch of these folks approached Lincoln and other Republican leaders with the idea that the Federal government NOT take any action against the South and its illegal taking of forts, arsenals, ships, mints, custom houses, etc. Seems like they had this crazy idea that war might be bad for business. You know, like cutting off supplies of cotton for those New England textile factories and such?

If you have to blame someone, that is.

Unionblue

[Unreconstructed]

This appeal to Lincoln for the welfare of the Southerners...was that before or after they lined their pockets with slave trade money by selling all theirs and then outlawing owning slaves, so as to further their holdings? I disremember.


Thanks for setting me right, I apparently need it.

All due respect,

The Unreconstruted One

[ewc]

Well, Old Abe seems to be running away from the field. My guess here would be that he would happily accept the onus if it would win the North the war- in cwt polls as in life. As for me, I am somewhat surprised, my understanding of Lincoln has always been one of firmness tempered with moderation.

This is not an easy poll, and it's not supposed to be. The poller is required to discern and distill ideas and groups and events into personalities. I deliberately din't ask if the politicians or the abolitionists, or the industrialists or the banks and railroads, or the Southern patricians were to blame. Isn't that what we debate all over this board? But one must go to the person here and what he represents and what he said and did. Lincoln may be at a great disadvantage as being so prominent and identifiable. To me, I find Lincoln blameless, but President Buchanan not so, in the scheme of things. Personalities were not the only thing responsible for the war, but for this poll, the question is reduced to a consideration of the persons involved and our thinking must spiral that way as well.

[FSPowers]

There are too many factors in how the Civil war started to place the blame on one person.

I understand that the seeds of the War were sown in Philadelphia in 1776 during the formation of the Declaration. The Southern Colonies were against any words in the Declaration that were against Slavery. That language was left out as a compromise, despite the face that many African-Americans fought in the Continental Army.

The Constitution only addressed Slavery in that the US partticipation in the slave trade ended in 1808.

The rise of industry in the North and the emphasis in the South of agriculture played a role. The invention of the cotton gin only breathed life into Slavery, since cotton became a cash crop as a result.

The Southern states had vast political power in Congress, the Courts, and the White House. As the country expanded west, they feared loss of that power.

The Missouri Compromise brought ease, but the Kansas-Nebraska act brought violence to the issue.

A Southern judge (Taney) ruled that an African-American was not a person, therefore not a citizen.

Harriet Beecher Stowe's inditment of the issue breathed life into the anti-Slavery movement.

The rise of the Republican Party was seen as a threat in the South.

South Carolians thought they were obeying the US Constitution in seceeding. That was Alexander Stephens' view.

The South declared "The Union is dissolved" while the North declared "The Union must be preserved."

President Buchanan felt he could do nothing, whilr President Lincoln felt he had to do something.

Next thing you know, shots were fired at Fort Sumpter.

I probably missed a few things, but there were many factors and individuals to blame.

[ewc]

Have fun with this poll. And vote for up to three 'villains.'

[MKotyk]

Is there a button for all of the above?


Mike Kotyk
Virginia

[MobileBoy]

[quote=johan_steele]250,000 odd Southerners fought for the Union, was their right of self determination for naught?
Let's not start this again.Everything Neil said was reasonable Johan, but remember slaves were included in his number.That alone minimizes its importance.Second was the term Southern doesn't simply apply to states of the Confederacy.Thats taking Niel's number out of context if you don't include the information which he was kind enough to do.It would be a little difficult for Kentucky and Maryland men to join the Confederacy when they were located behind Union lines under the despot's thumb don't you think.

Plenty of poeple are responsible for the Civil War.That being said Lincoln would be the man most responsible for 620,000 deaths.He inherited a krap situation no doubt , but he alone made the call to invade the South(without Congressional approval).Also you need to really consider how unpopular he was.He didn't even win a single county in the entire South.Could a candidate more repugnant to Southerners have been possible?I think this played a crucial role in the secession of states.
He was a great man Neil and Ole no doubt , but you see down here in Alabama we just don't look up to poeple who break the law of the Constitution.I guess it's a Southern thing you wouldn't understand.

Have a great one my erring brothers.

[unionblue]

MobileBoy,

If we go with the figures I FINALLY gave you on how many Southern men enlisted in the Union cause and fought the South, we have to go with the 450,000 I quoted on the other thread. Taking 150,000 Southern slaves who enlisted in the Union army away from that total, we still have 300,000 white men who felt it important enough to go against their home section of the country. Again, I ask you to do a simple internet search and see the numbers for enlistment in the Union for Maryland and Kentucky. The numbers might surprise you when you see how many volunteered and were not drafted or forced into service.

And again, I am amazed that simply because they were slaves, that somehow the number of Southern blacks, raised in the South, for some reason should not be held with the number of white men who also fought for the Union. These men were not considered true Southerners? Was there some basic, dark reason these men could not be trusted to be actual Southerners? A little thing like slavery, perhaps?

And again, you fail to take into account the thousands of other white citizens of the South who actively resisted the Southern war effort by joining secret societies, such as were known to be in EVERY Southern state for the entire course of the war. That these secret organizations actively aided Confederate deserters, help Union prisoners to escape, and gave intelligence to Union forces. The idea that every man, woman and child in the South stood behind Jefferson Davis and the Confederate government is a modern-day myth.

If you do a little research, you will see that any attempt to put Lincoln on the ballot in the Southern States would have seen the person attempting to do so, at the very least, tarred and feathered, or even killed. Lincoln name was not entered in the South because it was not permitted, although every other candidate was carried in the Western and Northern states. Freedom of choice? Not hardly and not because Lincoln was repugnant to EVERY Southerner. But will never really know, seeing how he was kept off the ballot. But the fact of the matter is, the man was a legal candidate in a legal election with participation from the entire nation. It was the results the South could not live with and therefore they began an illegal, unconstitutional rebellion over the results of that election.

It's not just a Southern thing, my dear MobileBoy, but it is a Constitutional one.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

[johan_steele]

"...but remember slaves were included in his number.That alone minimizes its importance." Why do black men have minimal importance? THeir contribution to the defeat of the CS was certainly not insignificant. Why do men who take the opportunity to fight for their freedom not count as Southerners? I see it as far from minimal importance; 180,000 odd men who decided to rise up and take their masters to task... if it was so unimportant why did the CSA take such violent and hateful measures against them?