Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
I must admit that I tend to try to stear clear of the political side of the war but for the moment I have to get something off my chest.
When discussing the cause of the war it can be argued in favor of both sides of the arguement. It can be argued, quite strongly, that Slavery was the main cause of the war but it could also be argued quite strongly that persuit of money and power was the cause of the war.
But when looking at why 600,000 men or maybe more threw their away their lives for the North and South then, regardless of the reasons behind secession, neither case really matters all that much.
For the common man of the South politics was another world all together. They didn't care about who argued what in Congress. They didn't care if some senator attack another with a cane, or if some people were fighting in some other state over some issue or other. All they cared about was working wherever they did to get money so that they could feed and clothe their families.
Similarly many of the common men in the north didn't care a jot about what the politicians were arguing about or what some minority was fighting over. For them all that mattered was making money and living a comfortable life and, for the immigrants, a better life than the country they had come from.
For these men the war had an entirely different meaning.
For the common Southerner it was an issue of protection. The second the Northern government decreed that it would invade the seceeded Southern States and forcably bring them back to the Union it became that issue. The way a Northern invasion of the South was perseived by the common southerners was a threat to the well being of their families and their way of life and that was a threat that could not be ignored, so they rightfully and justifiably took up arms to protect what they held dear.
For the common Notherners however it was a case of keeping together a country that they loved and protecting the future of that country. It was a case of protecting and building upon the ideals that the founding fathers had thought up when the original states broke away from the Britain. And to take up arms for such an ideal can be justifiable in own right, as no man wishes to see his country broken up.
While it can be argued that either Slavery or the persuit of money and power was the main cause of the war those issues were not what the war was fought over. The war was fought, at a basic level, by one side to protect their homes and families and by the other side to protect their country.
Both are honorable causes and neither is more honorable than the other...
__________________
"I would rather be a private in Virginia's army than a general in any army that was going to coerce her." - General JEB Stuart CSA
Each man, north and south may have joined the army for his own personal reasons, but none of them were daft enough to not realize something much larger was going on. They all knew the heart of the issue and what was at stake. A reason for joining the army is not a reason the war was fought. Each one is important in it's own right, but they are not the same.
To say one doesn't matter? Well, I can't really agree with that. It all leads to a greater understanding, which is why each of us is here.
__________________ "In mortal combat, a man may and will become so infuriated by the din and dangers of a bloody fight that his heart will turn to stone and his every de sire [be] for blood."
John Hadley, 7th Indiana after the battle at Port Republic
Each man, north and south may have joined the army for his own personal reasons, but none of them were daft enough to not realize something much larger was going on. They all knew the heart of the issue and what was at stake. A reason for joining the army is not a reason the war was fought. Each one is important in it's own right, but they are not the same.
A most excellent observation Dred. And if you don't mind if I add to it just a touch, the reasons for joining and staying developed along different line during every day of the war.
Aside from why the individual joined -- excessive enthusiam for adventure, defense of the homeland, conviction in the right of the cause, a job, the embarrassment of being a shirker -- the armies fought for victory. Eventually, the individual fought to hold up his end. To do otherwise was dishonorable.
The reasons a side's armies fought waxed and waned along various lines of political and military objectives. The reason the individual fought was more personal. And I doubt very much it was for cause and country.
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
"But when looking at why 600,000 men or maybe more threw their away their lives for the North and South then, regardless of the reasons behind secession, neither case really matters all that much."
What a miserable epitath for all those deaths!
Neither case rally matters all that much?
"I would not have the anniversaries of our victories celebrated, nor those of our defeats made fast days and spent in humiliation and prayer; but I would like to see truthful history written. Such history will do full credit to the courage, endurance and soldierly ability of the American citizen, no matter what section of the country he hailed from or in what ranks he fought...For the present, and so long as there are living witnesses of the great war of sections, there will be people who will not be consoled for the loss of a cause they believed to be holy. As time passes, people, even of the South will begin to wonder how it was possible that their ancestors ever fought for or justified institutions which acknowledged the right of property in man."
U.S. Grant
I'm sorry, but this one idea can not pass me by without comment. The idea that the deaths of over 600,000 men, the bondage of over 4,000,000 people does not 'really matters all that much.'
Even the men of the time do not agree with that statement or that one side didn't know what was going on in Congress while the other was more concerned about money, etc.
To dismiss the agitation and the political issues of the day is to dismiss the entire meaning and cause of the war. It also means that we have learned nothing from that conflict, that still impacts upon on our everyday lives every day.
It still matters, it still has impact, and it still has meaning.
"I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause thought was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse."
Grant on Lee's surrender at Appomattox.
They knew and it mattered to them. Both sides.
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
There is a difference between cause and motivation. As Aaron Sheehan-Dean explained in Why Confederates Fought: Family & Nation in Civil War Virginia:
"From our current perspective, it is clear that conflicts over slavery caused the war. But this, most historians also admit, is not the same as explaining what motivated men to enlist and fight. Causes reflect the deep social forces that generate historical change whereas motivations operate on the individual level. . . . If we regard the Civil War as a truly popular conflict, then understanding the relationship between causes and motivations becomes crucial."
Understanding the relationship between causes and motivations is crucial precisely because it is that relationship that gives meaning to the sacrifices that so many made.
To all who have looked at this and responded, and even to those who have not.
I appoligise if you have perseived my statemant as some kind of insult, it was not meant as such. I have this tendancy of putting things in a style that tends to get me missunderstood.
I must confess that I was in the throws of an emotional fit when I posted my the opening statement of this thread and I realise that a lot of what I said was not true. I allowed my emotions to overpower me and thus I did not think things through when I posted.
I have never meant to insult the memory of any of the soldiers who fought for either the CSA or the Union, indeed I have the utmost respect for both sides, and if I have done so the I appoligise for that also.
And so you can see why I tend to stear clear of the political side of things when in regards to this war, I neither have the temperament nor the knowledge to make an effective arguement for one case or the other and often the when I put my feelings into words something gets lost in translation.
__________________
"I would rather be a private in Virginia's army than a general in any army that was going to coerce her." - General JEB Stuart CSA
Understanding the relationship between causes and motivations is crucial precisely because it is that relationship that gives meaning to the sacrifices that so many made.
If i were physically able to get down on one knee, I would do that . But I hope you will accept a bit of a nod.
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
did come to realize that it was a rich man's war and a poor man's fight, with the draft protection given those who owned twenty or more slaves.
In the Confederate states wealth and slaves were the same. You could measure wealth, but you could never measure it accurately or substantially, without counting slaves.
The Confederate Constitution was similar in many ways to the U.S. Constitution, but the U.S. Constitution was not as similar to the Confederate Constitution.
The Confederate added slave or some derivation of the word many times to their constitution. Slavery was an expressed right of the citizen to possess in all the Confederate states.
Regardless of other reasons, the Confederate soldiers task was to protect and defend rights expressly stated in their new constitution -the right to own slaves.
By fighting for such a constitution, they were ending the days that the U.S. Constitution would even apply any rights to slavery.
By fighting for the Confederacy, the Confederate soldier was ending slavery in North America.
Regardless of other reasons, the Confederate soldiers task was to protect and defend rights expressly stated in their new constitution -the right to own slaves.
By fighting for such a constitution, they were ending the days that the U.S. Constitution would even apply any rights to slavery.
By fighting for the Confederacy, the Confederate soldier was ending slavery in North America.
"We are sometimes asked in the name of patriotism to forget the merits of this fearful struggle, and to remember with equal admiration those who struck at the nation's life, and those who struck to save it - those who fought for slavery and those who fought for liberty and justice. I am no minister of malice..., I would not repel the repentant, but...
may my toungue cleave to the roof of my mouth if I forget the difference between the parties to that ...bloody conflict."
Frederick Douglass, Address at the grave of the Unknown Dead, Arlington, Virginia, May 30, 1871.
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana