The Real Cause of the Civil War: In 1860, Southern Plantation Owners owed $1 billion+ to NY Banks

wbull1

Sergeant
Joined
Jul 26, 2018
Messages
811
#81
There is interesting information on this thread, as there are on other threads about one single "real" cause of the war. I respectfully submit that there is no single "real" cause, but rather it the war was overdetermined, i.e., multiple factors were involved to varying degrees which are actually related to each other.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#82
There is interesting information on this thread, as there are on other threads about one single "real" cause of the war. I respectfully submit that there is no single "real" cause, but rather it the war was overdetermined, i.e., multiple factors were involved to varying degrees which are actually related to each other.
Shooting at Fort Sumter is the proximate cause. Slavery is at the bottom of most if not all the rest.
 

Norm53

Corporal
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Messages
473
Location
Cape May, NJ
#83
For 150 years, Southerners have clung to 'The Cause' of States Rights for why the Civil War was fought. In an attempt to rewrite history and thus promote their 'righteousness', even some Neo-Confederates on this forum and elsewhere continue their propaganda of "The Civil War wasn't fought over slavery." Not only was the Civil War all about the struggle to free the African-American slaves, Southerners have attempted to mute how the Rebels never took black Union soldiers prisoner - they were always ruthlessly shot! Furthermore, the real reason for the Southern Secession movement has been effectively kept out of the history books. In 1860, Southern plantation owners were greatly in debt to New York City banks to the tune of over $1 billion dollars! That was a HUGE amount of money back then and no matter how much cotton they sold, they could never pay it back. The plantation owners figured if they could get the Southern States leaders to secede, then they wouldn't have to repay their debts. Wow! I was never taught that in school; you won't find that 'little fact' in a college textbook, battlefield park gift shop or History Channel program.

The combined worth of the African slaves in the Southern States was greater than all the other combined wealth in the United States. Yes, money and greed were the real cause of the Civil War but that wouldn't get hundreds of thousands of Southern men to fight and maybe die for that! So the slave owners' propaganda was "States rights and no Northerners coming down here and telling us how to live!"

Have you heard of anything more evil? Of course, the Northern bankers were also at fault. Their lending practices forced the plantation owners to take drastic actions! It's time to write the truth in the history books.
Since no one can provide facts that link the debt as a cause of going to war, we'll just consider this another excuse to write something - anything - on the war
 

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,932
Location
NC
#84
There is interesting information on this thread, as there are on other threads about one single "real" cause of the war. I respectfully submit that there is no single "real" cause, but rather it the war was overdetermined, i.e., multiple factors were involved to varying degrees which are actually related to each other.
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,459
#88
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.
I don't know about the "all sensible people", but it is certainly true that Southern slaveholders were not pleased with the idea that their $5.8 billion 'walking capital' might be freed.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#89
I don't know about the "all sensible people", but it is certainly true that Southern slaveholders were not pleased with the idea that their $5.8 billion 'walking capital' might be freed.
It appears that the value of slaves at 4.2 billion was roughly 6 times the total outstanding loans of .7 billion in the entire US. at 5.8 it is 8.3 times suggesting that slavery was a prime financial motive.
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,311
#90
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.


Not really. At least not in historical terms. The sensible evidence of history shows clearly enough, I think, that protection of slavery, was the reason for secession, which invoked a great Civil War.

There was only a single issue for the War itself, i.e., were the seceding states actually out of the Union, or not ?

As John C. Calhoun, would have explained it ... 'the South would secede to defend their slaves and the Union would fight to defend itself',
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
513
Location
New Mexico
#91
The Southern cotton economy ran on credit. I cannot recall reading anything by any of the leading secessionists about being in debt to Northern or European banks. It was the standard operating procedure and there seems to be little evidence that they gave it much thought.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#92
Not really. At least not in historical terms. The sensible evidence of history shows clearly enough, I think, that protection of slavery, was the reason for secession, which invoked a great Civil War.

There was only a single issue for the War itself, i.e., were the seceding states actually out of the Union, or not ?

As John C. Calhoun, would have explained it ... 'the South would secede to defend their slaves and the Union would fight to defend itself',
OR as we say here, at the bottom of every rabbit hole we go is slavery.
 
Last edited:

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,459
#94
OR as we say here, at the bottom of every rabbit hole we go is slavery.
"It was States' Rights!" Yes, States' Rights about slavery. "It was about the money!" Yes, the money tied up in slaves.
As always in Root Cause Analysis, one has to ask enough questions to get to the bottom of the 'rabbit hole'.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#95
"It was States' Rights!" Yes, States' Rights about slavery. "It was about the money!" Yes, the money tied up in slaves.
As always in Root Cause Analysis, one has to ask enough questions to get to the bottom of the 'rabbit hole'.
Yes
Lack of industrialization-land cotton and slaves was perceived as a better investment. FWIW I finished a book where the author 'proved' that industry was a better investment and Southern slaves owners were deficient in not investing in industry instead of slaves. It was full of figures and calculations, but in the end, the folks in business in the place and time of the Antebellum chose differently. Maybe emotions got the better of those generations or pride the better of the author.

States Rights for slavery was sacred while States Rights impeding slave catching were evil.

The Southern Honor system was based in a slave labor system.
 
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,569
Location
los angeles ca
#96
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.
Not really. If the ACW was over money then why didn't Northern businesses men buy Southern land for pennies on the dollar? Jefferson Davis had to finance the sale of his land to an ex slave then default on him.
Isn't it more reasonable to conclude the war was fought for the reasons that the secessionists articulated in the various Ordinances of Secession.
Leftyhunter
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top