If the "War" Wasn't About Slavery?

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Status
Not open for further replies.

Virginia Dave

Sergeant
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
730
Location
Waynesboro, Virginia
If the war was not about slavery. Why did they need the KKK, night riders etc. to terrify and kill the freed men after the war. If it wasn't about slavery where did all of this hate come from, and why did it continue ............Just an honest question that deserves honest answers. Not trying to start an argument I just want to hear what others think. Thanks
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2018
Messages
74
The original intention behind the KKK is something that's entirely different from what that organization came to represent in later years. The KKK was first created out of a need to protect whatever Southern interests still remained after the unspeakable devastation of war. It was set up to protect the defeated victims against the violent depredations of the "carpetbaggers" and the Union League and various other agents of a military occupation that was set up in the South after the war was lost. During the war, the Union Army was sent into the South on a mission of destruction; after the war it was sent on a mission of "reconstructing" the defeated nation by completely wiping out all vestiges of self-rule and self-determination. It was only many years later that the KKK was transformed into the "hate group" that we've come to regard it as.
 

jackt62

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 28, 2015
Messages
3,841
Location
New York City
The KKK was first created out of a need to protect whatever Southern interests still remained after the unspeakable devastation of war. It was set up to protect the defeated victims against the violent depredations of the "carpetbaggers" and the Union League and various other agents of a military occupation that was set up in the South after the war was lost. During the war, the Union Army was sent into the South on a mission of destruction; after the war it was sent on a mission of "reconstructing" the defeated nation by completely wiping out all vestiges of self-rule and self-determination. It was only many years later that the KKK was transformed into the "hate group" that we've come to regard it as.
No. The KKK was not "set up to protect the defeated victims against the violent depredations of carpetbaggers . . . " The original KKK was set up to ensure that white Democratic rule would prevail in the former states of the Confederacy. To that end, the KKK perpetrated a reign of terror and violence against the formerly enslaved Black population to prevent them from exercising their newly gained voting rights. As such, Congress designated the KKK as a terrorist organization and under the KKK Act (Third Enforcement Act 1871), the federal government was provided with enforcement powers to combat the organization, which it successfully carried out under the Grant administration.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Virginia Dave

Sergeant
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
730
Location
Waynesboro, Virginia
The original intention behind the KKK is something that's entirely different from what that organization came to represent in later years. The KKK was first created out of a need to protect whatever Southern interests still remained after the unspeakable devastation of war. It was set up to protect the defeated victims against the violent depredations of the "carpetbaggers" and the Union League and various other agents of a military occupation that was set up in the South after the war was lost. During the war, the Union Army was sent into the South on a mission of destruction; after the war it was sent on a mission of "reconstructing" the defeated nation by completely wiping out all vestiges of self-rule and self-determination. It was only many years later that the KKK was transformed into the "hate group" that we've come to regard it as.
That is an interesting take on the situation. Where did you discover the documentation for this reasoning. It would be great to have links to that in this discussion. Thanks
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
20,080
Location
Laurinburg NC
The original intention behind the KKK is something that's entirely different from what that organization came to represent in later years. The KKK was first created out of a need to protect whatever Southern interests still remained after the unspeakable devastation of war. It was set up to protect the defeated victims against the violent depredations of the "carpetbaggers" and the Union League and various other agents of a military occupation that was set up in the South after the war was lost. During the war, the Union Army was sent into the South on a mission of destruction; after the war it was sent on a mission of "reconstructing" the defeated nation by completely wiping out all vestiges of self-rule and self-determination. It was only many years later that the KKK was transformed into the "hate group" that we've come to regard it as.
Well said.
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2018
Messages
397
Location
Nashville, TN
The Confederates made the war about slavery from the very beginning by naming it as their reason in their declarations of secession. The North eventually started to agree with them with the Emancipation Proclamation.

It's as simple as this: slavery was the cause of secession, secession was the cause of the war.

It doesn't mean there weren't heroes and villains on both sides. It doesn't mean that each combatant didn't have their own personal motives to participate in the fight like saving the Union or defending their homeland. But ultimately, if no slavery than no war.

The American Civil War WAS about Slavery
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

archieclement

Captain
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
5,215
Location
mo
That is an interesting take on the situation. Where did you discover the documentation for this reasoning. It would be great to have links to that in this discussion. Thanks
Just curious why do you think there was KKK, race riots, discrimination, segregation, anti miscegenation laws ect in the North with this question the thread presents? Why did they need major riots to drive blacks out?

For example Lincolns home state.....race riot at Springfield 1908, East St Louis 1917, Chicago 1919, West Frankfort 1920, Cicero 1951, 2 riots in Chicago 1966 (Division street and Marquette Park riots), Cairo 1967........while neighboring Missouri a former slave state never had any major riot, till 2014 Ferguson

Where did the hate come from in Illinois? Would seem a fair question if one is wondering where the hate came from. But obviously being a free state didn't provide some immunity from hate.

BTW the scale of the Illinois riots always amaze me, 2000 black refugees from 1908 Springfield, over 6000 blacks left homeless from East St Louis..........
 
Last edited:

archieclement

Captain
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
5,215
Location
mo
Just curious why do you think there was KKK, race riots, discrimination, segregation, anti miscegenation laws ect in the North with this question the thread presents?

For example Lincolns home state.....race riot at Springfield 1908, East St Louis 1917, Chicago 1919, West Frankfort 1920, Cicero 1951, 2 riots in Chicago 1966 (Division street and Marquette Park riots), Cairo 1967........while neighboring Missouri a former slave state never had any major riot, till 2014 Ferguson

Where did the hate come from in Illinois? Would seem a fair question if one is wondering where the hate came from. But obviously being a free state didn't provide some immunity from hate.
Still curious as the OP seemed to suggest slavery explained the KKK and racial violence.......How exactly does it explain the KKK and racial violence in states that never had slavery? it would seem an honest question, that would deserve an honest answer.

Personally I think the OP premise is flawed, as there is examples of other racial groups facing hate, violence, and racism that were never were slaves......for example the SF 1877 riots or 1880 Denver riots, both of which targeted Chinese, or even prewar as in the 1844 Philadelphia riot targeting Catholics and Irish

America has a long history with hate......American Indians, Mexican-Americans, about ever immigrant class from the Chinese, Irish, Italians, Germans, ect......It's never been confined to blacks or slavery
 
Last edited:

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
17,396
Location
los angeles ca
Just curious why do you think there was KKK, race riots, discrimination, segregation, anti miscegenation laws ect in the North with this question the thread presents? Why did they need major riots to drive blacks out?

For example Lincolns home state.....race riot at Springfield 1908, East St Louis 1917, Chicago 1919, West Frankfort 1920, Cicero 1951, 2 riots in Chicago 1966 (Division street and Marquette Park riots), Cairo 1967........while neighboring Missouri a former slave state never had any major riot, till 2014 Ferguson

Where did the hate come from in Illinois? Would seem a fair question if one is wondering where the hate came from. But obviously being a free state didn't provide some immunity from hate.

BTW the scale of the Illinois riots always amaze me, 2000 black refugees from 1908 Springfield, over 6000 blacks left homeless from East St Louis..........
Most likely because black people in Missouri knew their place and didn't live in close proximity to white people. I never seen it written that Missouri was a model for perfect racial harmony and equality under the law.
Leftyhunter
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

archieclement

Captain
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
5,215
Location
mo
Most likely because black people in Missouri knew their place and didn't live in close proximity to white people. I never seen it written that Missouri was a model for perfect racial harmony and equality under the law.
Leftyhunter
What evidence do you have for this "conclusion" of yours, and noted you avoid the question of why was hate in states that never had slavery.......if its tied to slavery? Or why would California extend racial hate and violence to the Chinese and Mexican Americans?

I haven't ever seen it written any US state was a model for perfect racial harmony and equality under the law........another one of your standard diversionary tactics with no point at all..........
 
Last edited:

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
17,396
Location
los angeles ca
What evidence do you have for this "conclusion" of yours, and noted you avoid the question of why was hate in states that never had slavery.......if its tied to slavery?
White people don't need to have owned slaves to hate other people . Race relations are more complex then that. I have to do other things today but the city of St.Louis "the African American experience of St.Louis" as an interesting online article on race relations in St.Louis. St.Louis was not an integrated city living in a state of perfect harmony.
Leftyhunter
 

archieclement

Captain
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
5,215
Location
mo
White people don't need to have owned slaves to hate other people . Race relations are more complex then that. I have to do other things today but the city of St.Louis "the African American experience of St.Louis" as an interesting online article on race relations in St.Louis. St.Louis was not an integrated city living in a state of perfect harmony.
Leftyhunter
I agree that was my point, the original OP implying hatred of blacks was based on slavery or confined to one area was baseless, as racial hatred in the US was never confined to slavery, or one race, or one region at all.........

Your also making a red herring argument, I never said Missouri was a "state of perfect harmony" what I did state simply was unlike Illinois we didn't commit mass murder with racially charged riots, and leave thousands homeless at a time. It probably should be noted as well Ferguson was a black mob destroying a black neighborhood, and not a white mob targeting blacks such as at Springfield or East St Louis
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Fairfield

Private
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
177
The original intention behind the KKK is something that's entirely different from what that organization came to represent in later years. The KKK was first created out of a need to protect whatever Southern interests still remained after the unspeakable devastation of war. It was set up to protect the defeated victims against the violent depredations of the "carpetbaggers" and the Union League and various other agents of a military occupation that was set up in the South after the war was lost. During the war, the Union Army was sent into the South on a mission of destruction; after the war it was sent on a mission of "reconstructing" the defeated nation by completely wiping out all vestiges of self-rule and self-determination. It was only many years later that the KKK was transformed into the "hate group" that we've come to regard it as.
Here in Maine, there was a very active KKK (it was politically well placed, too). Its target was not blacks but Canadian & Irish Catholics. Its intention was, most certainly, hate.
 
Last edited:

Fairfield

Private
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
177
I just want to hear what others think
IMO slavery was the main issue---however not slavery in the south but in the opening territories. Slavery in the south was pretty well protected by the Constitution but the spread of that institution was unthinkable to the Abolitionists (Maine was strongly pro-abolition) and to the emerging industrial class (that did not want to compete with "free" labor from the South).
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,604
If the war was not about slavery. Why did they need the KKK, night riders etc. to terrify and kill the freed men after the war. If it wasn't about slavery where did all of this hate come from, and why did it continue ............Just an honest question that deserves honest answers. Not trying to start an argument I just want to hear what others think. Thanks

Vwerey true, just as the history of the increasing political dissension before the war centered aound Slavery(or more precisely, thepercieved threat of emancipation) so also the violance in the South in its resistance to Negro enfanchisement, after the war.

Southern violent resistance to votes for their ex-slaves and the need for the KKK did not cease until 1870, when Republicans agreed to accept 'separate buut equal' separation of the races, where in negro enfranchisement was effectively abrrogated.

As I have noted before on other threads, peace and reconstruction was finally achieved by reestablishing the forms of Slavery in the South, even without slavery. The KKK only appeared when appeared threats of enforcement of Black Voting Rights.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
20,080
Location
Laurinburg NC
No. The KKK was not "set up to protect the defeated victims against the violent depredations of carpetbaggers . . . " The original KKK was set up to ensure that white Democratic rule would prevail in the former states of the Confederacy. To that end, the KKK perpetrated a reign of terror and violence against the formerly enslaved Black population to prevent them from exercising their newly gained voting rights. As such, Congress designated the KKK as a terrorist organization and under the KKK Act (Third Enforcement Act 1871), the federal government was provided with enforcement powers to combat the organization, which it successfully carried out under the Grant administration.
The alternative was black rule at the behest of their white carpetbagger and scalawag masters who needed their votes and suppression of the white vote to keep them and the Republican Party in power.
 

archieclement

Captain
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
5,215
Location
mo
Vwerey true, just as the history of the increasing political dissension before the war centered aound Slavery(or more precisely, thepercieved threat of emancipation) so also the violance in the South in its resistance to Negro enfanchisement, after the war.

Southern violent resistance to votes for their ex-slaves and the need for the KKK did not cease until 1870, when Republicans agreed to accept 'separate buut equal' separation of the races, where in negro enfranchisement was effectively abrrogated.

As I have noted before on other threads, peace and reconstruction was finally achieved by reestablishing the forms of Slavery in the South, even without slavery. The KKK only appeared when appeared threats of enforcement of Black Voting Rights.
Which has little to with racial hatred in the United States, the know nothings preceded the KKK and had nothing to do with slavery or the KKK at all.......in fact oddly enough many of the know nothing who had a hatred for Catholics and Immigraqnts joined the Republician party

As would be that in fact mass violence occurred in states that never had slavery.....so where is the link to slavery?

Any honest discussion of racial hatred in the US would have to acknowledge it precedes the ACW, so to pretend it somehow is solely responsible would seem pretty false.

If the OP's question is indeed where did all this hate come from, one would concede our history with racial hate and violence far precedes the ACW, just ask an American Indian..........

Also the first riots and mass violence against African Americans was in Cincinnati and in 1829......and again in 1836.....and yet again 1841
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,604
Which has little to with racial hatred in the United States, the know nothings preceded the KKK and had nothing to do with slavery or the KKK at all.......in fact oddly enough many of the know nothing who had a hatred for Catholics and Immigraqnts joined the Republician party
As would be that in fact mass violence occurred in states that never had slavery.....so where is the link to slavery?
Any honest discussion of racial hatred in the US would have to acknowledge it precedes the ACW, so to pretend it somehow is solely responsible would seem pretty false




To the extent that the Know Nothings and KKK both preached and praticed intolerance, you are correct there was no real difference.

Historically the Know Nothings and the philosophy was so vigorously opposed politically, that it did not ever gain any real footing as a political force in Congress.

Resistance to Negro enfranchisement was, in fact, race based. Know Nothings opposed all migrants not from Northern European stock, no matter their race.
 

archieclement

Captain
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
5,215
Location
mo
To the extent that the Know Nothings and KKK both preached and praticed intolerance, you are correct there was no real difference.

Historically the Know Nothings and the philosophy was so vigorously opposed politically, that it did not ever gain any real footing as a political force in Congress.

Resistance to Negro enfranchisement was, in fact, race based. Know Nothings opposed all migrants not from Northern European stock, no matter their race.
However not all racial hatred or violence was based on enfranchisement, that would be disingenuous.....

The reason it happened in states that never had slavery, or was happening in northern states even before the CW, was immigration, they simply didn't want blacks there..........just as they didnt want Catholics, Irish, Germans, ect.......and would react violently against them at times

Edit- added- BTW I think the war was about slavery, just find this claim of postwar violence as "proving it" as a rather curious and dubious line of proof. As racial hatred had always existed, both prewar-wartime-and postwar
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top