The Civil War

[Scalawag]

Please check out my website:
The Truth About the Confederate States of America (http://www.geocities.com/jy_wik/big_profits.html)

"The cause of the American Civil War was money - and nothing besides...."

Does anyone agree or disagree??

[Loknar]

The Confederacy was not about keeping slaves, it was keeping a nation al army out of the states. Back then there was something called states rights which have since almost disappeared. People also did not want to die for slavery, when Lincoln issued the Emancipation proclamation many Union soldiers deserted over this issue. However, maybe the rich and politicians had the idea of fighting over slavery in mind, but to the average Joe he did not want Yanks marching on his home land. The Civil was not about a fight over slavery entirely (later it became an objective, but there was more to it), Lincolns goal was to keep the Union together.

What's also interesting to note was that free blacks in the south volunteered for the Confederate army because they wanted to protect their homeland.

[Urban Rubble]

I bet none of you know that both Stonewall Jackson and General Lee were actually in favor of abolishing slavery.

[Loknar]

Originally posted by Urban [email protected] 10 2003, 12:09 AM
I bet none of you know that both Stonewall Jackson and General Lee were actually in favor of abolishing slavery.
Yeah, I believe Longstreet was as well.

[truthaddict11]

Most southern whites were poor and didnt own slaves.
And Rubble I used to love studying the civil war and yes I knew that. Lee was also asked to join the Union army at first but declined.

[Sensitive]

The wealthy, slave-owning class in the South (which controlled the Southern state governments) supported "states-rights" in order to keep slavery (to prevent the Federal government from abolishing it). So when you hear some fool saying that the Confederacy was fighting for "states rights, not slavery", that is complete bullshit. Defending "states rights" = defending slavery.

[Loknar]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2003, 01:21 AM
So when you hear some fool saying that the Confederacy was fighting for "states rights, not slavery", that is complete bullshit. Defending "states rights" = defending slavery.
That's not true, here in the US states rights is very important. And to the average guy he didn’t care to dir for slavery. The average guy wanted to keep federal troops out of his state, but I wont say you're wrong about the slave owners and their agenda.

[Scalawag]

]"...That's not true, here in the US states rights is very important. And to the average guy he didn’t care to dir for slavery. The average guy wanted to keep federal troops out of his state, but I wont say you're wrong about the slave owners and their agenda....."


Personally, I think a war to "preserve the Union" was a bad idea. It allowed the plantation owners to claim the South was being invaded.
People don't like invaders. For example, Mel Gibson was converted to the Colonial cause in "The Patriot". Why? Because the British invaders were killing his family and friends. A similar situation happened 180 years later with the Vietnam War. This problem is coming back with George W. Bush too.

In a sense, Loknar is right and wrong. The Confederates were fighting for states rights. However, it was only a reaction to the aggression of the Yankees. The southern governments left the union in peace. The southern people passively accepted the Confederacy. However, I believe
(at first) most of them still felt like loyal Americans. However, they went along with the rich plantation owners. Why? Because money talks.
For example, do you think America is a real democracy now? No, rich people control politics and the government.


The southern people's heart was not in the struggle. They only became angry after Lincoln invaded. Then thier heart was in it. They had no more mixed feelings after Yankees killed thier family and friends.

I'm not saying the average southern man was not racist (racist but not necessarly a black hater). But he was not angry enough to turn against his country in an armed struggle. Just like many New Yorkers did not hate Middle Eastern people until the WTC attack.

So what should have Lincoln done? I don't know? I don't think Marxism was that popular at the time. It would have been impossible to start a Marxist struggle against the Southern plantation owners. Yes, there were a few politicians who opposed the Southern class (Andrew Johnson is an example.) However, they were unable to get the common southerner to fight the ruling class. Why? Because money talks BS walks...

Rich people always buy support with money. THey say "If you shut up and don't make trouble then I'll give you a job....Just don't make any trouble..." "Go ahead hate the black man... Your better than him... Whatever you do don't turn against your rich friends."