Why did they fight?

[leftyhunter]

Price was a politician and was a moderate, as was Lincoln at the onset of the war.

Yes, some did not support slavery and did muster with the Confederacy.

Cheers

GC

Since the constitution of the Confederacy was quite clear that no state could abolish slavery in effect all Confederate troops fought for slavery. If an individual opposes slavery but enlists in the Confederate Army that is one highly confused individuals.
Leftyhunter

 

[OpnCoronet]

Yes, we get your point and it has been beaten to death. It is true that the doctrine of the government you fight for makes you guilty in that regard. However, individual reasons are important also. Whether to protect home and family, conscripted, etc. still matters. I seriously doubt a regiment lined up to charge and the thought on all 1,000 men's minds was "we gotta beat them yanks to protect slavery". Don't mean this to be offensive to anyone but i think you are giving to much credit to a highly uneducated, mostly poor, illiterate, majority of the rank and file enlisted/conscripted solder in the south. You cannot demonize an entire section of the country on an individual basis for the sins of the state. It is easy to look upon the past with our modern views, it's not as easy to try and place yourself in their time, and entirely different world.

Well, we are talking past each other. But, in a history of a War, is the personal motivation of individuals for fighting in the War, really matter, to the goals of the objectives of the gov'ts that made the war in which participate, as long as they participate?

Just as one cannot logically claim to support the confederacy but not slavery, so one cannot reasonably claim that as one was not a slaveholder, one was not fighting 'For' Slavery.

 

[Viper21]

Since the constitution of the Confederacy was quite clear that no state could abolish slavery in effect all Confederate troops fought for slavery. If an individual opposes slavery but enlists in the Confederate Army that is one highly confused individuals.
Leftyhunter

Definitely disagree. Lots of men do things that are a contradiction. Military enlistment is far from immune to this. I could name multiple, reasonably large political issues of today as very clear examples. I won't because of the obvious.

 

[Viper21]

Just as one cannot logically claim to support the confederacy but not slavery, so one cannot reasonably claim that as one was not a slaveholder, one was not fighting 'For' Slavery.

Again, disagree for the reason stated above in my response to Leftyhunter. A good analogy would be attorneys. Many attorneys fight for issues they are personally against.

People, & their personal motivations don't fit neatly into boxes as plenty would prefer. Many do, & have done things they find morally objectionable yet, felt obligated to their plight in other ways.....

 

[OpnCoronet]

Again, disagree for the reason stated above in my response to Leftyhunter. A good analogy would be attorneys. Many attorneys fight for issues they are personally against.
People, & their personal motivations don't fit neatly into boxes as plenty would prefer. Many do, & have done things they find morally objectionable yet, felt obligated to their plight in other ways.....

If one is studying the case for precedents, does the motivations of the Lawyers matter, to the issues of the case itself? It is my understanding that the motivations for taking a case is of little importance, except as to winning or losing a case.

Which box a soldiers personal motivations do or do not fit, is not nearly as important to the Army, as long as he fights to secure the goals for which his Army is fighting to secure.

 

[leftyhunter]

Definitely disagree. Lots of men do things that are a contradiction. Military enlistment is far from immune to this. I could name multiple, reasonably large political issues of today as very clear examples. I won't because of the obvious.

@OpnCoronet hits the nail on its head.
Leftyhunter

 

[Glen_C]

I don't understand how much clearer the cartoon or the article could be. Let me reiterate. The first sentence of the article I posted as reference reads......

In the beginning of the war, Southern women wanted their men to leave — in droves, and as quickly as possible. They were the Confederate Army's most persuasive and effective recruitment officers, shaming anyone who shirked his duty to fight.

Written in 2014, yes, got it.

Repeating it to me in highlights does not show any related primary source. You are welcome to acclaim that article as fact while not accepting that I don't agree with the author. I'll leave you with that, no need to repeat it again.

Happy New Year

GC

 

[Rebforever]

Welcome!

• 33 percent of households in the South had at least one slave.
• Many poorer whites had hopes of acquiring slaves and becoming planters in the future. Climbing the social ladder as it were.
• Poorer whites weren't the bottom rung of the social ladder if slavery existed.

States rights in regards to slavery hits the nail on the head. States rights by itself is a common answer I get all the time. I answer, "states rights about what?

Can you explain what poor is?

 

[unionblue]

Can you explain what poor is?

Poor enough to wish one had slaves for themselves?

After all, slavery was legal, but expensive.

 

[John S. Carter]

Hi, I am a newbie and need some info to counter the nay sayers. I believe the Civil War from the Southern political stand point was to preserve slavery and states rights. The hundreds of thousand Southern soldiers that fought for the South were to poor to have slaves or didn't want them so why did they fight for the South? I do have ideas but want to be sure before I spout off. Thanks

First people have their own ideas as to the cause of the war based upon readings that they have done.Some from theories or ideas that come their own backgrounds.Fear not to express your own ideas , have some facts to support them.You will find people who will be willing and able to inform you in their own knowledgeable and at times in sarcastic way to let you know if your insights are necessary good or not but may need to research your thoughts on the subjects . FORWARD ! and may you gain whatever you seek to learn has you probe our thoughts .Remember that the purpose with this as in history of this era is to gain so insight into simply the how and why .As for me ,the war was a stage of maturity from adolescent to adult,slavery was just correction which the adolescent had to remove to in order to grow and develop a true character of democracy. and as in any growth there is struggle in the mental stages.

 

[Tin cup]

Then you had the conscription issue, brought on to force men into the Confederate ranks. Just what the Confederate Slaveocracy was counting on...

"At the beginning of 1862 the victories had about equalled,
but the Southern army had been slowly pushed back on almost all sides, and the Southern ports were blockaded. Governor Joe Brown, of Georgia, called on the State for twelve regiments. Catoosa County had to furnish one large company. A draft was ordered to be taken March 4th; if quQta was not made up. On the 4th of March the militia was called together and formed in line, and a call made, and the men informed that if the quota was not made up a draft would be made at once. Rather than be forced to go by draft, enough
volunteered to make out the number wanted. Brother I. L. Magill joined that company. I thought I would stay at home and risk the consequences.
I began making a crop, but soon the news came that the Conscript Act had passed the Confederate Congress, which forced every man between the ages of eighteen and forty-five, (except such as were exempted by the Governor), into the Southern Army or take the consequences. This conscript law was to take effect about May 1, 1862. Brother Thomas and myself were subject to conscription. Here was a dilemma that had to be met; there were three horns t0 the dilemma: Volunteer, be conscripted and placed in a company not of your own choosing and bear the odious name of conscript, or attempt to go North, turning our backs on the home of our childhood and a widowed mother, and run a risk of ten to one of being captured and shot as a traitor to the Southern cause. We chose the first, and joined the same company in which Brother I. L. Magill was, so that we might all be together."

Robert M. Magill: PERSONAL REMINISCENCES OF A CONFEDERATE SOLDIER BOY.
Volunteered at Chattanooga, Tenn., in Company F, 39th Georgia Regiment of Infantry.
https://archive.org/details/magillfamilyrec00magigoog

Kevin Dally

 

[ikesdad]

The number one reason.

Men and boys may or may not understand the political reasons for war, but one thing they do understand is an invasion or the threat thereof.

This. Simple.

 

[Viper21]

If one is studying the case for precedents, does the motivations of the Lawyers matter, to the issues of the case itself? It is my understanding that the motivations for taking a case is of little importance, except as to winning or losing a case.

Which box a soldiers personal motivations do or do not fit, is not nearly as important to the Army, as long as he fights to secure the goals for which his Army is fighting to secure.

Please remember that this thread deals with why individual soldiers fought and not the greater, more complex issues that caused the war.

Posted as casual Moderator

Which is what my post was about. Coronet, you keep jumping to the larger issue. Everybody knows the Army doesn't care whether you believe or not, just that you follow orders, & do what you're supposed to do. That's not the point. The point was, what motivated an individual soldier to fight. I realize it's an uncomfortable truth that many thousands of Southern boys did NOT fight for slavery slavery slavery as so many want to represent. The greater cause is a separate argument, as it is today.

 

[BlueNGrey]

Written in 2014, yes, got it.

Repeating it to me in highlights does not show any related primary source. You are welcome to acclaim that article as fact while not accepting that I don't agree with the author. I'll leave you with that, no need to repeat it again.

Happy New Year

GC

It has been my experience that if you don't agree with a premise, in this case, that Southern women didn't have a role in reasons for why men went off to fight that it becomes incumbent on you to provide counterpoints. Dismissing what I have provided and then stating there is no need to repeat it, while offering nothing in rebuttal adds nothing to the discussion. What exactly is it that you are in disagreement with the author? Is it your contention that Southern women had no effect on why the men went to fight? Not looking for an argument. I am just curious as to what your views are.

 

[CSA Today]

Which is what my post was about. Coronet, you keep jumping to the larger issue. Everybody knows the Army doesn't care whether you believe or not, just that you follow orders, & do what you're supposed to do. That's not the point. The point was, what motivated an individual soldier to fight. I realize it's an uncomfortable truth that many thousands of Southern boys did NOT fight for slavery slavery slavery as so many want to represent. The greater cause is a separate argument, as it is today.

Or in the words of wartime New Jersey Governor Joel Parker: "Slavery is no more the cause of this war than gold is the cause of robbery."

 

[Copperhead-mi]

Don't forget the power of the women.

In the beginning of the war, Southern women wanted their men to leave — in droves, and as quickly as possible. They were the Confederate Army's most persuasive and effective recruitment officers, shaming anyone who shirked his duty to fight. A young English immigrant in Arkansas enlisted after being accosted at a recruitment meeting. "If every man did not hasten to battle, they vowed they would themselves rush out and meet the Yankee vandals," he wrote of Southern women. "In a land where women are worshipped by men, such language made them war-mad."
New York Times
The Civil War and the Southern Belle
BY KAREN ABBOTT AUGUST 18, 2014
View attachment 172172

I agree.
"In the beginning Southern women and girls served the cause in traditional ways. They were civilian recruiting officers for the army, shaming and inspiring men into military service by withholding or offering their affections. Once their men were off to war, Southern women vied with each other in knitting and sewing for the troops."
The Confederate Nation, Emory M. Thomas, pg.225

 

[Tin cup]

This. Simple.

Sad those same folk didn't ask WHY the Confederate Leadership and the slaveocracy brought on all the malediction of WAR, down on THEM!

Kevin Dally

 

[ikesdad]

Who's asking questions when their country is being invaded ?

 

[Rebforever]

Sad those same folk didn't ask WHY the Confederate Leadership and the slaveocracy brought on all the malediction of WAR, down on THEM!

Kevin Dally

You can thank Lincoln for that.

 

[ikesdad]

Yep