What Makes People Believe Slavery was the Reason for the US Civil War?

IBDaMann

IBDaMann

Well-known member
What Makes People Believe Slavery was the Reason for the US Civil War?

Is it gullibility? Perhaps a poor education? There are actually quite a few people who have this crazy notion that slavery was the reason for the Civil War. I'm not making this up. Perhaps some of those operating under this misconception can explain how they were led to this misunderstanding. Inquiring minds really want to know.

Fort-Stevens-Civil-War-Reenactment-01-850x567.jpg
 
IBDaMann said:
What Makes People Believe Slavery was the Reason for the US Civil War?

Is it gullibility? Perhaps a poor education? There are actually quite a few people who have this crazy notion that slavery was the reason for the Civil War. I'm not making this up. Perhaps some of those operating under this misconception can explain how they were led to this misunderstanding. Inquiring minds really want to know.

Fort-Stevens-Civil-War-Reenactment-01-850x567.jpg
Click to expand...

That is a very nice trolling attempt.
 
AProudLefty said:
That is a very nice trolling attempt.
Click to expand...
There's no trolling involved. It was an sincere and honest question. You can tell because the question was clear, easy and straightforward ... and leftists refuse to answer.

That's how you know.

Anyway, the obvious answer returns us to how leftists let their slavemasters do their thinking for them and how they don't have permission to address questions like mine on their own.

... but if you want to answer, I promise I won't tell anyone, i.e. it'll be just between you and me. Cross my heart, hope to die.

[I'll give you a little help - your official response must deny something important and fundamental]

state-soverignty.jpg


38
 
IBDaMann said:
What Makes People Believe Slavery was the Reason for the US Civil War?

Is it gullibility? Perhaps a poor education? There are actually quite a few people who have this crazy notion that slavery was the reason for the Civil War. I'm not making this up. Perhaps some of those operating under this misconception can explain how they were led to this misunderstanding. Inquiring minds really want to know.

Fort-Stevens-Civil-War-Reenactment-01-850x567.jpg
Click to expand...

The letter of succession by the States of Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
 
StoneByStone said:
Leftists? Or the entire establishment?
Click to expand...
Yes, "entire establishment" would be accurate ... and that includes leftists.

It's very telling that none of the establishment are willing to elaborate on why they allow themselves to be manipulated into believing that slavery was the cause of the Civil War.

"Slavery" is not the answer to every question.

21
 
IBDaMann said:
What Makes People Believe Slavery was the Reason for the US Civil War?

Is it gullibility? Perhaps a poor education? There are actually quite a few people who have this crazy notion that slavery was the reason for the Civil War. I'm not making this up. Perhaps some of those operating under this misconception can explain how they were led to this misunderstanding. Inquiring minds really want to know.

Fort-Stevens-Civil-War-Reenactment-01-850x567.jpg
Click to expand...

The Confederate declarations, duh.
 
Phantasmal said:
The letter of succession by the States of Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
Click to expand...
Close. Very close. That is one step too early in the cause->effect chain

The direct cause of the Civil War was the North's invasion. The South had done nothing other than to make a peaceful declaration of secession. That is not warfare. There was no Civil War until the North picked up arms and made their incursion into the South with guns blazing. The South, opting not to die, picked up arms and fired back in self defense. Then we had a Civil War on our hands.

So I hear you saying ... OK, OK, yes, the North opting to wage war was the DIRECT cause of the war ... but what if we go one step backwards and ask what caused the North to initiate the war. At that point, yes, the direct cause of the direct cause of the war was exactly what you described:

Ordinance_of_Secession_Milledgeville%2C_Georgia_1861.png


This document represents the indirect cause of the war and is not "Slavery" either.

The direct cause, the Union army attacking the Confederacy.

Lead%20for%20Honor.jpg
 
IBDaMann said:
Close. Very close. That is one step too early in the cause->effect chain

The direct cause of the Civil War was the North's invasion. The South had done nothing other than to make a peaceful declaration of secession. That is not warfare. There was no Civil War until the North picked up arms and made their incursion into the South with guns blazing. The South, opting not to die, picked up arms and fired back in self defense. Then we had a Civil War on our hands.

So I hear you saying ... OK, OK, yes, the North opting to wage war was the DIRECT cause of the war ... but what if we go one step backwards and ask what caused the North to initiate the war. At that point, yes, the direct cause of the direct cause of the war was exactly what you described:

Ordinance_of_Secession_Milledgeville%2C_Georgia_1861.png


This document represents the indirect cause of the war and is not "Slavery" either.

The direct cause, the Union army attacking the Confederacy.

Lead%20for%20Honor.jpg
Click to expand...

No, it was slavery

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

Georgia:
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.

Mississippi:

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world.
 
Phantasmal said:
No, it was slavery
Click to expand...
Nope. You are in denial ... of the very document that I posted. That is absurd. Either you cannot read or you have been ordered to believe that "slavery" is the answer to all questions. Equally absurd.

The reason was clearly stated in the document:

Republic of Georgia.

Ordinance of Secession,

Passed Jan’ry 19, 1861.

An Ordinance to dissolve the Union between the State of Georgia and other States united with her under a compact of government, entitled “The Constitution of the United States of America:

We, the people of the State of Georgia, in Convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained,that the ordinance adopted by the people of the State of Georgia, in Convention on the Second Day of January in the Year of Our Lord Seventeen Hundred and Eight-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was assented to, ratified, and adopted; and also, all acts, and parts of acts, of the General Assembly of this State, ratifying and adopting amendments of the said Constitution, are hereby Repealed, Rescinded, and Abrogated.

“We do further Declare and Ordain, that the Union now subsisting between the State of Georgia and other States, under the name of the United States of America, Is Hereby Dissolved, and that the State of Georgia is in full possession and exercise of all those rights of Sovereignty which belong and appertain to a Free and Independent State.”

George W. Crawford, of Richmond, President
Click to expand...

The word "slavery" is not in there. Even if it were included, that would still make it an indirect cause thrice removed. But if you try to use that logic then your argument breaks down due to bigger problems.

No one is denying that the South had slavery and awesome bread pudding. Neither was the cause of the Civil War.

bread-pudding-vertical-a-1600.jpg


Yes, the South had awesome bread pudding, but just because the South *HAD* something doesn't mean it was the cause of the Civil War. That's absurd.
 
IBDaMann said:
Nope. You are in denial ... of the very document that I posted. That is absurd. Either you cannot read or you have been ordered to believe that "slavery" is the answer to all questions. Equally absurd.

The reason was clearly stated in the document:



The word "slavery" is not in there. Even if it were included, that would still make it an indirect cause thrice removed. But if you try to use that logic then your argument breaks down due to bigger problems.

No one is denying that the South had slavery and awesome bread pudding. Neither was the cause of the Civil War.
Click to expand...
No, it was about slavery, I’m not the one in denial.
 
Phantasmal said:
The letter of succession by the States of Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The Articles of Secession (not succession) tell us that secession was because of slavery...

...and the Civil War was because of secession.

Ya beat me to it.
 
IBDaMann said:
Yes, "entire establishment" would be accurate ... and that includes leftists.

It's very telling that none of the establishment are willing to elaborate on why they allow themselves to be manipulated into believing that slavery was the cause of the Civil War.

"Slavery" is not the answer to every question.

21
Click to expand...

It's two things. First, the North had to justify the war and their treatment of the South after the war was over. Secondly, when the Jews infiltrated the media, they started using slavery as a major anti-white talking-point.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Exactly.

The Articles of Secession (not succession) tell us that secession was because of slavery...

...and the Civil War was because of secession.

Ya beat me to it.
Click to expand...

Here's the insurmountable problem with your argument. You are claiming that anything can be declared the direct cause of the US Civil War if it can be linked by some chain of cause->effect, no matter how far removed.

You claim that the Civil War caused by the North's invasion caused by the South secession caused by the Federal government violating southern State sovereignty caused by the formation of the Republican Party to end slavery caused by the existence of slavery in the southern States ... somehow makes "slavery" the direct cause of the Civil War. Absurd.

Taking your illogic one step further, now everything involving the Revolutionary War is the direct cause of the Civil War. So is the Protestant Reformation. Ultimately, your argument registers the Big Bang as the direct cause of the Civil War.

Your logic is absurd. "Slavery" is not the answer to all questions.

38
 
IBDaMann said:
Nope. You are in denial ... of the very document that I posted. That is absurd. Either you cannot read or you have been ordered to believe that "slavery" is the answer to all questions. Equally absurd.

The reason was clearly stated in the document:



The word "slavery" is not in there. Even if it were included, that would still make it an indirect cause thrice removed. But if you try to use that logic then your argument breaks down due to bigger problems.

No one is denying that the South had slavery and awesome bread pudding. Neither was the cause of the Civil War.

bread-pudding-vertical-a-1600.jpg


Yes, the South had awesome bread pudding, but just because the South *HAD* something doesn't mean it was the cause of the Civil War. That's absurd.
Click to expand...

My favorite desert - if done right. Most restaurants in Alaska pour sauce over a bread roll and call it *bread pudding ".
It's worth it to make my own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top