Who is Most Responsible for the Civil War??

[MobileBoy]

Johan,
Can you be anymore of a drama queen?The numbers were mentioned in the context of Southerners against secession.I felt the information was misleading unless that was noted.Maybe you're not aware that blacks didn't have the right to vote.Seeing how you guys throw up slavery every other sentence,it would be logical to deduce that slaves didn't vote.Therefore they had no say in the secession process.Slaves fighting for the Union would hardly be eye-opening to anyone.So that should be noted.Their numbers would be irrelevant in a discussion of causes leading to war unless you think there were slaves representing the Confederate states in Congress.That's why I mentioned that.Now from the list of soilders from Confederate states1)Alabama 197,421 Confederates and 2,835 only Yankees 2)South Carolina 133,602 Confederates and only 93 Yankees,3)Virginia 281,205 Confederates and only 2,598 Yankees,4)Mississippi 173,935 Confederates and only 903 Yankees,5)Georgia 244,812 Confederates and only 195 Union,6)North Carolina 197,314 Confederates and only 5,217 Yankees,7)Florida 35,245 Confederates and only 2,199 Yankees,8)Loiusiana 128,256 Confederates and only 14,686 Yankees,9)Texas 159,031 Confederates and only 4,370 Yankees,10)Arkansas 108,020 Confederates and 12,946 Yankees, and 11)Tennessee 195,805 Confederates and 54,086 Yankees.
Now looking at all those numbers for enlisted men in both armies in states recognized as having seceded doesn't that give a much better picture than these vague claims.I know every source you guys don't agree with is bias right?Please amuse me by convincing me of the bias of the National Park Service in compiling these records from actual enlistment records.Neil there's not even 100,000 there from Confederate states.But I know listing that wouldn't have made the Confederacy look near as bad would it?So not even 1 out of ten Southerners in the Confederacy fought for the Union.I really don't understand why you guys feel the need to mislead poeple or take things out of context.What enjoyment do you get from it.I may be the most irritated by it,but none of the Southerners on this board are buying this mess you guys daily try to push on us.

Regards,
Ashley

[r_moody]

No one person is responsible for any war but in the long and short of it Davis authorized the firing on Ft Sumpter. He has to take responsibility for striking the first blow. The carnage that followed began with his orders. A peaceful resolution, though unlikely, was lost forever.

[unionblue]

Shane,

Ashley has listed the National Park Service as the source for the number of Southern whites who fought for the Union. Would you please list your source for the figures you gave?

Ashley, I assure you that when I gave you my figures, I was in no way attempting to mislead or lie. I often ask for sources when people give figures because I have found in the past they are based on what they have heard, thought they have read, etc. I like to have the source documentation in front of me or available to check. It is one of the great ideas of this board that people can list or quote their sources.

Shane and I as a matter of course, should be able to give you our sources so that you can check them to, but again, I reassure you, I will not lie to you or knowingly give you false data just to score debating points.

I ask that you reserve judgement in your posts about calling people to task about misleading others or taking information out of context, and instead, call upon us to give you sources you can check for yourself.

I will now endeavor to do so for your own satisfaction.

I still feel that you are unfairly disqualifying Southern black slaves from the total of Southerners who fought for the Union. If the Confederate government and General Lee and Cleburne thought Southern slaves could fight for the Confederacy and these slaves resided in the South, should they not be considered Southerners?

I have no problem with the idea of Northern blacks fighting for the Union, nor do I have any problem with the idea of 5,000 white Ohioians fighting for the Confederacy. Why do these Southern men not qualify as Southern men fighting for the Union? Seems a bit unfair to cut them from the totals, simply because they were black slaves residing in the South, doesn't it?

Back to you on my sources for the figures I gave you after I have done a bit more digging.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

[r_moody]

Davis ordered the firing upon Ft. Sumpter and must take credit for the start of military action. Though it is unlikely that there could be a peacful solution, the firing on the fort made peace impossible

[MobileBoy]

UnionBlue and Johan,
I thought that I erased the last post I did in this thread.I changed a few things and posted it on the irrelevance of Sumpter thread.I thought I deleted the one above because after I read it I found parts of it offensive so thats why I changed it.I apologize sincerely though.Neil you have always been an honorable fellow even though we don't see things the same way.Look man, if you say you weren't trying to mislead anyone then I believe you.I apparently misread your intentions and for that I apologize.I have no problem with you checking sources.And I've read several books written by Freehling including the one you mentioned.I certainly don't think he's ignorant and I rather enjoyed the books that I've read written by him.That's why I was all over the where did these Southern troops actually live angle.

Certainly black troops should be counted Neil.I just thought a disclaimer saying this number were black soldiers, or by a mention of how many of them were included would give a better picture.Everyone knows that a lot of freed slaves fought for the Union.Freehling's book focuses more on white Southerners than it does on black units does it not?I read the book expecting to have my world turned upside down.What I found was that aside from Missouri, and the states remaining in the Union a very very small minority of whites in the Confederacy fought for the Union.I already knew about the border states,colored regiments, etch... so I felt like the author duped me out of my money.I really got no revelation from the book at all.

Have a good one,
Ashley

[unionblue]

MobileBoy,

Thanks for the clarification and the kind words.

I understand your view on counting of black troops and I would think that stating they were former slaves and black should be taken into account, no problem there.

But weren't Missouri and Kentucky considered Southern states, by the citizens themselves and the nation at large at the time? I mean, Kentucky was even included in the Confederacy by the Southern government and had a star in the CBF, did it not? And surely Maryland viewed itself as a Southern state and anyone from there today would too, wouldn't they?

Thanks for clearing up the conversation on Freehling and I'm sorry his book, The South vs The South, didn't 'shake you up' as much as I had hoped it would. Perhaps if you checked this one, Disloyalty In The Confederacy, by Georgia Lee Tatum, you might see a bit more of where I am coming form on this one.

I also understand your concentrating on where these Southern troops actually lived as it is a worthwhile angle to pursue. I'd be curious to see where it leads you and what conclusions you draw from it.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

[samgrant]

This is a most absurd question when it is framed as it is to point to an individual being responsible.

The roots of the conflict can be traced back to the folks who put together the constitution. There was disagreement way back then about slavery (the representation question which led to the 3/5ths business, for example), and this issue having not been settled way back then just put off its eventual resolution, one way or another.

Intervening were other related issues: federalists vs. republicans in the earliest years, then begining in the 1820s, the Missouri compromise, national expansion, Wilmot proviso, "Compromise of 1850", railroad routes to the West coast, Kansas/Nebraska Act, etc.

How can one say that any one person was responsible?

You may blame poor Abe, but he did take the responsibility to try to manage the eventual crisis (which would have happened no matter who the Northern candidates was) when it broke. One must admire that at least, that he took on that burden.

[samgrant]

Originally Posted by unionblue

Ole,

Some were more responsible than others. Read Road to DisUnion, and see.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

I looked for Road to Disunion at Amazon and found it subtitled 'Vol. 1', but didn't see a 'Vol. 2' - is there just one book?

[milhistbuff1]

Yancey and Davis may have caused the conflagration on the southern end, but it was Calhoun who lit the match. Sumner and the rest up north fanned the flames from spark size to out of control.
Respectfully,
Matt

[ewc]

Originally Posted by samgrant

This is a most absurd question when it is framed as it is to point to an individual being responsible.

*Sigh* Then why participate??

How can one say that any one person was responsible?

Is it too much to ask to read the first couple of posts, especially the first outlining the poll? This is a multiple choice poll, choose three. And you are not just choosing men, but what they did and stood for. A handy summary accompanies each choice. Regards, ed