Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
The war was over economic issues as all wars are.
What was the economic issue in Bleeding Kansas?
Isn't it true that the killing was over slavery and slavery alone?
The war was over economic issues as all wars are.
The Civil War was about slavery but it was the economic aspect of it, the South was about to lose a resource. I don't think it was simply that Southerners hated blacks. Yes, I know slavery is a horrible thing but it wasn't invented here either.
Accoeding to the April 16th TIME magazine, the Civil War's TRUE cause was to end slavery. That is also what our kids are taught in public schools: "The civil war was fought because the northern states wanted the southern states to stop slavery".
Correct me if I am wrong, but the Civil War started in 1861, and the emancipation proclamation was issued in 1863, and it ONLY freed slaves in the SOUTH, an area the Union had no control over.
How does THAT translate into the REAL reason for the Civil War being about ending slavery?
Accoeding to the April 16th TIME magazine, the Civil War's TRUE cause was to end slavery. That is also what our kids are taught in public schools: "The civil war was fought because the northern states wanted the southern states to stop slavery".
Correct me if I am wrong, but the Civil War started in 1861, and the emancipation proclamation was issued in 1863, and it ONLY freed slaves in the SOUTH, an area the Union had no control over.
How does THAT translate into the REAL reason for the Civil War being about ending slavery?
Well, you certainly opened a can of worms on this one. As I stated in my earlier post, the worldview presuppositions are so deeply ingrained that challenging them only leads to anger. Whenever a worldview presupposition is challenged, folks respond with anger—deep unreasoning anger. The issues here are challenging deeply held beliefs, often unconsciously held beliefs. After 150 years, the presuppositions remain. We will not change them by debating them, by publishing articles in Time magazine, or by logical reasoning. We can present the evidence, but it will only fall on deaf ears due to the cultural transmission of a worldview from one generation to another. Still, we must present the evidence, I suppose, and allow the debate to go forward.
Over the past 150 years I think we have made one change in the American worldview presuppositions: No man should be another man's slave. I think today we all agree this is a good change.
Kirk Freeman Rep coming your way for being a man who knows his history.
No other issue dominated the antebellum period like slavery....
boggstown Indiana seceded from the union and never rejoined themselves. of coarse they were forced to, butIndiana was one of the first states to meet the quota for requested soldiers. Many legislators and state officials made it known that the only reason Indiana was sending out soldiers and having people join the war effort was to keep the South from seceding. Indiana, along with many other Union states, were adamant that they were NOT fighting to free slaves. I was never taught that slavery was the driving cause for the war - always that it was rooted in State/Federal rights.
Huh, forgot about that. Never rescinded the resolution, either.boggstown Indiana seceded from the union and never rejoined themselves. of coarse they were forced to, but
boggstown Indiana seceded from the union and never rejoined themselves. of coarse they were forced to, but
It's a little known fact that slavery featured rather prominently in the Continental Congresses and/or Constitutional Conventions as well. (Forgive the uncertainty on the actual meetings; it's been a while since I read the book in which that information was covered.) Long before there was a North or South, slavery was an issue that threatened the nation.
We all know it was about southern aggression!
Indiana, along with many other Union states, were adamant that they were NOT fighting to free slaves.