In The Absence Of Slavery There Would Have Still Been Secession Over Other Fiscal Issues

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

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,462
It is amazing to see such myth in 2017, after all we now know on the subject. Some facts, again:
* Four of the 11 Confederate states rejected secession when it was clearly based only on slavery and the tariff. Those four states only joined the Confederacy later and only after Lincoln made it clear the North was going to invade the CSA. They seceded over coercion, not slavery.
* Thee of the secession documents of the seven Deep South states mention economic and other reasons for secession, not just slavery.
* The internal correspondence of Confederate leaders clearly shows that they did not believe they were fighting for slavery, but for independence with or without slavery.

So to say that the Confederacy was "all about slavery" is just erroneous.



In relation to the four border states, what made Texas more of a sister state to Va. than Pennsylvania?

Would any of those 'economic' issues cited, have anything to do with slavery?(i.e., without slavery would those economic issues be considered worth secession and civil war?)

Any claim that secession did not revolve around the issue of slavery, has to claim that without slavery there would still have been secession and civil war in 1860-1861?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top