What was the civil war fought over?

[Proximity 10+ year member]

Why did the south want to secede from the union?

To preserve slavery. Which means the confederate flag stands for slavery. Anyone who has the confederate flag on their car is a racist redneck.

Discuss.

Click to read more...

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Even though you are just trolling, the popular idea is it was over slavery. However the main reason was state's rights versus federal rights. Basically the states were against the federal govt, each vying for more power over the other. The confederates wanted a country that was a group of sovereign states that were loosely held together by a federal govt, the fed mostly existing to regulate a single monetary system (can anyone say EU?). The union was for a country with a govt whose federal branch wielded more power than the states, far beyond just the financial fed the confederates wanted. A modern example of the legacy of which side won is, a federal law supersedes a state law. If the south had won, passing from one state to another would be much like what passing from one country to another in Europe is like today.

An ironic lesson from the civil war is, in the U.S. we are told we are free, yet we dont seem to be free enough to secede even with a majority vote. I am 100% against slavery (obviously) or racism of any type, but I have to say that if those states wanted to leave the union, they should have been able to.

 

[twistedchild420 5,000+ posts]

This thread is racist

 

[thegreatestpenn 5,000+ posts]

no, the civil war was fought over a different way of living. The southern states just did not like how the Union lived and treated their southern neighbors so they said "F-U we out." But the North needed the South (heck slavery made lots of money) so they wouldn't let them go.

the Slavery stuff was just to piss the south off even more.

I think the confederate flag represents a different way of living, and part of that is oppression of some other race (in this case african americans). But slavery is not all what that life style is about

 

[geonfreaq 10+ year member]

slavery was an important cause of the Civil War, but the biggest reason that the war was fought was over secession.

/thread!

 

[thegreatestpenn 5,000+ posts]

slavery was an important cause of the Civil War, but the biggest reason that the war was fought was over secession.
/thread!

no it wasn't, it was an afterthought. a way to get under the South's skin. Why else was slavery abolished like halfway in instead of in the beginning. If it were the cause it would have been the first thing mentioned regarding why the war started. The union didn't really care about slavery/oppression and they let oppression of african americans happen for another 100 years

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

Even though you are just trolling, the popular idea is it was over slavery. However the main reason was state's rights versus federal rights. Basically the states were against the federal govt, each vying for more power over the other. The confederates wanted a country that was a group of sovereign states that were loosely held together by a federal govt, the fed mostly existing to regulate a single monetary system (can anyone say EU?). The union was for a country with a govt whose federal branch wielded more power than the states, far beyond just the financial fed the confederates wanted. A modern example of the legacy of which side won is, a federal law supersedes a state law. If the south had won, passing from one state to another would be much like what passing from one country to another in Europe is like today.
An ironic lesson from the civil war is, in the U.S. we are told we are free, yet we dont seem to be free enough to secede even with a majority vote. I am 100% against slavery (obviously) or racism of any type, but I have to say that if those states wanted to leave the union, they should have been able to.

^This

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

slavery was an important cause of the Civil War, but the biggest reason that the war was fought was over secession.
/thread!

And secession was over state's rights versus federal rights. Slavery was a law the confederates wanted states to have the power to decide on (slavery might be legal in georgia but not in new york) while the union wanted the fed to have the final say.

Slavery, control over banking, tax systems... all things both sides felt either the fed or the state should decide on. Slavery was merely one of many large issues both sides fought over. But as time went on, history pushed the less important issues into the background, and highlighted the more obvious ones. 200+ years later its still debatable if it would be better to have each state decide how their banking structure is constructed, but nobody (in their right mind) argues one human bein should be able to own another one. So history portrays the entire conflict as centered around this obvious and popular issue, instead of placing it in the more realistic position as merely one of many issues. It sounds less ethical to place state's rights as of higher importance than the single issue of slavery, but that's exactly how they thought about it back then.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

And secession was over state's rights versus federal rights. Slavery was a law the confederates wanted states to have the power to decide on slavery (might be legal in georgia but not in new york) while the union wanted the fed to have the final say.
Slavery, control over banking, tax systems... all things both sides felt either the fed or the state should decide on. Slavery was merely one of many large issues both sides fought over. But as time went on, history pushed the less important issues into the background, and highlighted the more obvious ones. 200+ years later its still debatable if it would be better to have each state decide how their banking structure is constructed, but nobody (in their right mind) argues one human bein should be able to own another one. So history portrays the entire conflict as centered around this obvious and popular issue, instead of placing it in the more realistic position as merely one of many issues. It sounds less ethical to place state's rights as of higher importance than the single issue of slavery, but that's exactly how they thought about it back then.

^This too

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

no it wasn't, it was an afterthought. a way to get under the South's skin. Why else was slavery abolished like halfway in instead of in the beginning. If it were the cause it would have been the first thing mentioned regarding why the war started. The union didn't really care about slavery/oppression and they let oppression of african americans happen for another 100 years

Northerners were not inherently more moral people than Southerners when it came to slavery, it simply meant less to them financially. The south was agriculturally based, the north was more industrial based. Slaves worked southern fields, but they didnt (rarely) work in factory jobs. The less you stood to lose personally from it, the easier it was to embrace the notion of the morality of abolishing slavery.

As I said above, slavery was merely one of many issues both the fed and the states fought to control influence over.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

^This too

lol thanks

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

Well said sir, well said.

 

[ahole-ic]

Lincoln did not want to be known as the President that was in office when the country divided. If you read beyond your school textbooks, you'll see that he didn't give a crap about the southerners. He ordered Sherman to make them pay. When Sherman came back and told him about burning the south, lincoln chuckled. This is all recorded as a fact.

The majority of northerners at the time were not in support of the war. To gain support for the war, he has to use their hot-button item, which was slavery. Slavery in the civil war was nothing more than a political move made by the president to get people behind it. It was not the reason the war was fought, but it WAS the reason that the north actually won.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

Choo - Choo

 

[geonfreaq 10+ year member]

no it wasn't, it was an afterthought. a way to get under the South's skin. Why else was slavery abolished like halfway in instead of in the beginning. If it were the cause it would have been the first thing mentioned regarding why the war started. The union didn't really care about slavery/oppression and they let oppression of african americans happen for another 100 years

I can agree with that too an extent. To be honest, there wasn't just any one cause but if you want to break it down to one definite reason or another, it was simply over a ego. One person wanted it one way and another a different way.

And secession was over state's rights versus federal rights. Slavery was a law the confederates wanted states to have the power to decide on (slavery might be legal in georgia but not in new york) while the union wanted the fed to have the final say.
Slavery, control over banking, tax systems... all things both sides felt either the fed or the state should decide on. Slavery was merely one of many large issues both sides fought over. But as time went on, history pushed the less important issues into the background, and highlighted the more obvious ones. 200+ years later its still debatable if it would be better to have each state decide how their banking structure is constructed, but nobody (in their right mind) argues one human bein should be able to own another one. So history portrays the entire conflict as centered around this obvious and popular issue, instead of placing it in the more realistic position as merely one of many issues. It sounds less ethical to place state's rights as of higher importance than the single issue of slavery, but that's exactly how they thought about it back then.

BINGO!

It all ends up boiling down to states fighting for their rights, what they believed in and what they were willing to fight for.

To be honest with you guys there is a lot more to civil war than what gets mentioned on line or on TV. Im a huge nerd when it comes to history, hence the reason I was a history major in college.

Its just easier for a regular person, who knows just enough about history, to think and "understand" that the civil was was fought over just one issue when in fact is farthest from the truth.

Competing nationalism, political turmoil, what freedom really means, the preservation of "the Union", the fate of slavery and the structure of our economy could all be listed as significant factors in the war.

You sound like one educated individual audioholic. Thumbs up! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif