"plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose."
But no, the war had nothing to do with slavery at all, just ask the Democrats of 1856:
Democratic Party Platforms: Democratic Party Platform of 1856
As for Lincoln's letter to Greeley, it might be a good idea to actually read what he is saying and understand why he repeats the phrases "I would" and "If I..." The fact that slavery is repeated several times in both letters should be a clue. No, the war was not begun to end slavery. But, the overriding issue that separated the Southern states from the rest of the country was the issue of slavery. It dominated their economy, politics, and society. By 1860 it was apparent that their (the South's) political power was ebbing, so they took action. As to why it did not happen sooner, you can look back to as early as 1788 with the start of a series of compromises (3/5, Missouri, 1850, etc.) that by 1860 could no longer be achieved thanks to an increasingly fervent abolitionist movement, the lack of expansive possibilities, and the paranoia of the Southern plantocracy.
As for the "war of aggression" nonsense. The legality of secession is still debated by legal scholars. All that really matters is that from 1861-65 the question was settled on the battlefield by draftees, volunteers, and militiamen on both sides. Predictably, the South lost and has been hell bent on rewriting history ever sense.
I am curious if the white sheets still come packaged with the stars and bars or if they are sold separately these days.
But no, the war had nothing to do with slavery at all, just ask the Democrats of 1856:
Democratic Party Platforms: Democratic Party Platform of 1856
As for Lincoln's letter to Greeley, it might be a good idea to actually read what he is saying and understand why he repeats the phrases "I would" and "If I..." The fact that slavery is repeated several times in both letters should be a clue. No, the war was not begun to end slavery. But, the overriding issue that separated the Southern states from the rest of the country was the issue of slavery. It dominated their economy, politics, and society. By 1860 it was apparent that their (the South's) political power was ebbing, so they took action. As to why it did not happen sooner, you can look back to as early as 1788 with the start of a series of compromises (3/5, Missouri, 1850, etc.) that by 1860 could no longer be achieved thanks to an increasingly fervent abolitionist movement, the lack of expansive possibilities, and the paranoia of the Southern plantocracy.
As for the "war of aggression" nonsense. The legality of secession is still debated by legal scholars. All that really matters is that from 1861-65 the question was settled on the battlefield by draftees, volunteers, and militiamen on both sides. Predictably, the South lost and has been hell bent on rewriting history ever sense.
I am curious if the white sheets still come packaged with the stars and bars or if they are sold separately these days.
