Dissing History

[highplainsdrifter59]

So this one hightlighted statement from Mississippi made you a firm believer that no other reason could be added to the cause for the entire south?

 

[Copperhead-mi]

So this one hightlighted statement from Mississippi made you a firm believer that no other reason could be added to the cause for the entire south?

I suggest that you read the Declarations of Causes issued by five of the first seven states to secede. Between those five states the root-word "slave" appears as "slave," "slavery," or "slaves" 99 times, the word "property" appears 18 times, and the word "institution" appears in its singular and plural form 11 times. The word "tax" appears once and the word "tariff" doesn't even receive a single mention. The word "money" is mentioned twice and guess what it's in conjunction with? Yep, slaves. After you've read them, come back and tell me what issue other than slavery, did those states claim was serious enough for them to secede.

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

I suggest that you read the Declarations of Causes issued by five of the first seven states to secede. Between those five states the root-word "slave" appears as "slave," "slavery," or "slaves" 99 times, the word "property" appears 18 times, and the word "institution" appears in its singular and plural form 11 times. The word "tax" appears once and the word "tariff" doesn't even receive a single mention. The word "money" is mentioned twice and guess what it's in conjunction with? Yep, slaves. After you've read them, come back and tell me what issue other than slavery, did those states claim was serious enough for them to secede.

So what you're saying is there are other issues mentioned? Trying to figure this out here, if other issues were mentioned then slavery wasn't the only reason. If the only issue that was mentioned was slavery then slavery was the sole reason.

 

[Jimklag]

So what you're saying is there are other issues mentioned? Trying to figure this out here, if other issues were mentioned then slavery wasn't the only reason. If the only issue that was mentioned was slavery then slavery was the sole reason.

Ask yourself this question. If there had not been chattel slavery in the south would there have been secession or war? If the answer is "no", then slavery is the sole cause for it all.

 

[John Hartwell]

So this one hightlighted statement from Mississippi made you a firm believer that no other reason could be added to the cause for the entire south?

That's your idea, not mine!
My only purpose is to show that these documents were widely disseminated from the start, not hidden away somewhere until the past few decades.
And, nobody questions that there were many causes of tension between the South and North. But, slavery was at the very root of just about all of them. In a few states, slavery is the only issue mentioned; in most, it is the principal issue mentioned before others. IIRC, there were only two seceded states that did not mention slavery as a cause of their secession.
It is the only issue upon which compromise proved unattainable.

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

So....we do have other issues? I'm all for slavery being a huge issue, but I'm not sold on the part it was the only or sole issue for the war.

 

[Jimklag]

So....we do have other issues? I'm all for slavery being a huge issue, but I'm not sold on the part it was the only or sole issue for the war.

Ask yourself the question I posted above.

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

Ask yourself this question. If there had not been chattel slavery in the south would there have been secession or war? If the answer is "no", then slavery is the sole cause for it all.

We must remember that slavery was legal in those southern states. Why go and get yourself killed over something that was already there.
So the southern elite sat around one day and said lets get us a war started to have slaves. Good old Johnny spoke up and said, don't we already have this now and it's legal? Well there you go Johnny you just ruined a good reason to succeed.

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

Ask yourself the question I posted above.

You won't like my answer, NO.
It wasn't the sole reason for the Civil War.

 

[Copperhead-mi]

So what you're saying is there are other issues mentioned? Trying to figure this out here, if other issues were mentioned then slavery wasn't the only reason. If the only issue that was mentioned was slavery then slavery was the sole reason.

Yes. I thought I was clear on the mention of taxes being mentioned once among the five states that issued declaration of Causes. You need to read them yourself. To me at least, it is quite clear that absent slavery, those states would not have seceded. But again, read them for yourself.

 

[Jimklag]

We must remember that slavery was legal in those southern states. Why go and get yourself killed over something that was already there.
So the southern elite sat around one day and said lets get us a war started to have slaves. Good old Johnny spoke up and said, don't we already have this now and it's legal? Well there you go Johnny you just ruined a good reason to succeed.

I see it's a brick wall. If any other issue was ever mentioned anywhere anytime, then that, not slavery, was the cause of the war. Answer honestly. WOULD THERE HAVE BEEN SECESSION OR WAR IF THERE HAD BEEN NO SLAVERY?

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

Yes. I thought I was clear on the mention of taxes being mentioned once among the five states that issued declaration of Causes. You need to read them yourself. To me at least, it is quite clear that absent slavery, those states would not have seceded. But again, read them for yourself.

Good, we both can agree there were other issues.

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

I see it's a brick wall. If any other issue was ever mentioned anywhere anytime, then that, not slavery, was the cause of the war. Answer honestly. WOULD THERE HAVE BEEN SECESSION OR WAR IF THERE HAD BEEN NO SLAVERY?

Oh no, not a brick wall at all. I'm will repeat myself AGAIN, my contention is there were other issues or reason stated for succeeding other than just slavery.

 

[cash]

We must remember that slavery was legal in those southern states. Why go and get yourself killed over something that was already there.
So the southern elite sat around one day and said lets get us a war started to have slaves. Good old Johnny spoke up and said, don't we already have this now and it's legal? Well there you go Johnny you just ruined a good reason to succeed.

You obviously haven't read what their reason for seceding was. Educate yourself.

http://civilwarcauses.org/reasons.htm#SouthCarolina

http://civilwarcauses.org/commish.htm

 

[Dedej]

Speaking of exceptions to the rule, I once took a Civil War & Reconstruction class at my alma mater. The instructor, who was the model of competency, was discussing the role of the Freedmen's Bureau -- namely, to assist former slaves in this way and that. One student raised his hand and objected to the scope of her focus on the Freedmen's Bureau, pointing out that the Bureau also helped some poor southern whites. That is true, said the professor, but that was not it's primary role by any means -- thus the name, Freedmen's Bureau. This caused the student much consternation, but she was right: in the context of a one-hour class meeting twice a week to discuss the entire sweep of the Civil War and Reconstruction, the teacher and students needed to focus on the rule, not the exception -- although we were certainly free to explore the exceptions on our own. Often, however -- not always, but often enough -- I note that some bring up the exceptions not to present a fuller historical picture, but to derail the study of history or to undermine the authority of others. Thus, you end up with these books about "what they didn't teach you in school" or "what they didn't want you to find out in school" -- which is nonsense. The omission of lesser known facts is usually not evidence of an intellectual conspiracy, but of a shortage of time in which to do what needs to be done.

Wonderful comment! I would like it over and over if I could. Thanks for sharing it!

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

You obviously haven't read what their reason for seceding was. Educate yourself.

http://civilwarcauses.org/reasons.htm#SouthCarolina

http://civilwarcauses.org/commish.htm

Do you really have to attack a person character because they do not follow your way like blind sheep. You are notorious for doing this to people that you do not agree with. You have no idea what my education is.....if you did, I'm sure it would stack up well to any of yours...or more maybe.

 

[major bill]

Yes, but Southerners believed that at some point slavery would end in the United States. I do believe the Southerners were right that at some point slavery would have ended in the United States. I put the end of slavery in the 1950s but others believe slavery would have ended at some time, however only a minority of Americans believe we would still have slavery today. The per Civil War Southern states could not imagine slavery ending in 1860, 1890 or 1920, so the only viably option was to form their own nation. I generally believe that without a separate Confederate nation slavery would have been on a slippery slope by the late 1940s.

 

[Jimklag]

Oh no, not a brick wall at all. I'm will repeat myself AGAIN, my contention is there were other issues or reason stated for succeeding other than just slavery.

So your saying that with no slavery there still would have been secession and war. Do you really even believe that?

 

[Copperhead-mi]

Oh no, not a brick wall at all. I'm will repeat myself AGAIN, my contention is there were other issues or reason stated for succeeding other than just slavery.

"He who lives a long life & never changes his opinions may value himself on his consistency, but rarely can be complimented for his wisdom. Experience cures us of many of our theories."
Joseph Story, Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court, 1811 - 1845

 

[highplainsdrifter59]

Yes, but Southerners believed that at some point slavery would end in the United States. I do believe the Southerners were right that at some point slavery would have ended in the United States. I put the end of slavery in the 1950s but others believe slavery would have ended at some time, however only a minority of Americans believe we would still have slavery today. The per Civil War Southern states could not imagine slavery ending in 1860, 1890 or 1920, so the only viably option was to form their own nation. I generally believe that without a separate Confederate nation slavery would have been on a slippery slope by the late 1940s.

I agree with that, I do believe the rich plantation owners were very afraid of the coming years. But you mention years of when you think slavery may have ended, I think it would have ended sooner, even before 1900. The growth of the slave population would have created a never ended attempt to suppress them from leaving or mass escapes. I sat through a lecture in school on this topic and the professor made the point that the solution would have been to begin the sharecropper idea and allow slaves to become a work force for the owners and themselves which would evolve into slaves owning their own land.