Politics

AndreLeGeant posted...

For the record, not all whites in the south owned slaves. Majority didn’t. They got stuck fighting for rich white people. What’s more a lot of white southerners (including all my family) fought for the Union.

And who cares?

Plantation owners were able to get out of being the in the confederate army because they owned slaves.

Another except from the article I linked that I think helps my defense of the Civil War's beginnings:

The other critical economic issue that divided the North from the South was that of tariffs. Tariffs were taxes placed on imported goods, the money from which would go to the government. Throughout the antebellum period, whenever the federal government wanted to raise tariffs, Southern Congressmen generally opposed it and Northern Congressmen generally supported it. Southerners generally favored low tariffs because this kept the cost of imported goods low, which was important in the South's import-oriented economy. Southern planters and farmers were concerned that high tariffs might make their European trading partners, primarily the British, raise prices on manufactured goods imported by the South in order to maintain a profit on trade.
In the North, however, high tariffs were viewed favorably because such tariffs would make imported goods more expensive. That way, goods produced in the North would seem relatively cheap, and Americans would want to buy American goods instead of European items. Since tariffs would protect domestic industry from foreign competition, business interests and others influenced politicians to support high tariffs.

Seceding didn't cause the war to begin. Even if slavery ALONE is why the South seceded and the war didn't begin because the South seceded, then slavery can't be the reason that the war began because secession isn't why the war began.

It's... actually pretty simple... you could set up the logical steps in a couple of different ways.
The most direct method is the following:

A) The South seceded because of slavery.
B) The war didn't begin because of secession.
C) Therefore, the war didn't begin because of slavery.

mystic belmont posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

For the record, not all whites in the south owned slaves. Majority didn’t. They got stuck fighting for rich white people. What’s more a lot of white southerners (including all my family) fought for the Union.

And who cares?

Plantation owners were able to get out of being the in the confederate army because they owned slaves.

When you talk about white southerners it in one brush it rather offends me because my southern ancestors fought against that cause and for the Union.

AndreLeGeant posted...

mystic belmont posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

For the record, not all whites in the south owned slaves. Majority didn’t. They got stuck fighting for rich white people. What’s more a lot of white southerners (including all my family) fought for the Union.

And who cares?

Plantation owners were able to get out of being the in the confederate army because they owned slaves.

When you talk about white southerners it in one brush it rather offends me because my southern ancestors fought against that cause and for the Union.

I think it’s pretty obvious when people talk about white southerners in the Civil War they’re referring to ones who aided the Confederacy.

Relle posted...

Mirage13 posted...

An except from the article link I posted on the 1st page since no one is taking the time to read it:

What did the Confederacy hope to accomplish by seceding from the Union? The clearest goal was to defend and preserve the right of Southern Whites, including the right to own slaves. While the concept of owning another human being would obviously be a moral and criminal issue today; many slaveowners either ignored or tried to justify their way out of that dimension, focusing on the economic aspects of slavery. They held that the right to own people was a property right, just like owning land or buildings. Thus, when Northern politicians tried to ensure that new states admitted to the Union were "free-soil" (i.e., that no slavery was allowed), slaveowners felt that their right to settle in the West with their "property," including slaves, was being infringed. In addition, in the minds of secessionists, the threat of national abolition not only had the potential of reducing the wealth of many prominent Southerners, but also interfered with the "property" rights of Southern Whites. Thus, secession seemed to be the only way of preserving those rights.

And after reading all that, it still boils down to one word: slavery. Southern whites wanted to enslave people as property. They didn't want the federal government telling them they couldn't enslave people as property. They felt their rights to enslave people as property were being infringed. Hell, this very passage says that they even recognized what they were doing was morally indefensible, so they justified it by reframing it as a property rights issue. But you know what?

It was about slavery.

But it wasn't just about slavery for the sake of slavery. There had to be a reason for why Southerners wanted slaves and to fight to keep them. That is the point I am trying to make. The slaves were a form of cheap labor that benefited the South and their economy, even if it was completely wrong for them to do.

Edit: Anyways, I am trying to tread softly on thin ice here out of respect for everyone and so I don't get moderated. So I will take my leave from this topic.
Good day, everyone. :)

MegatokyoEd posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

mystic belmont posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

For the record, not all whites in the south owned slaves. Majority didn’t. They got stuck fighting for rich white people. What’s more a lot of white southerners (including all my family) fought for the Union.

And who cares?

Plantation owners were able to get out of being the in the confederate army because they owned slaves.

When you talk about white southerners it in one brush it rather offends me because my southern ancestors fought against that cause and for the Union.

I think it’s pretty obvious when people talk about white southerners in the Civil War they’re referring to ones who aided the Confederacy.

Just like it's obvious when people talk of gangsters and thugs the skin color of the group of people being thought about is ___(fill in the blank)___
if your answer was anything other than "offensive" you're wrong

AndreLeGeant posted...

mystic belmont posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

For the record, not all whites in the south owned slaves. Majority didn’t. They got stuck fighting for rich white people. What’s more a lot of white southerners (including all my family) fought for the Union.

And who cares?

Plantation owners were able to get out of being the in the confederate army because they owned slaves.

When you talk about white southerners it in one brush it rather offends me because my southern ancestors fought against that cause and for the Union.

People who shout about states rights and the south during the civil war deserve nothing.

Thebrah posted...

MegatokyoEd posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

mystic belmont posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

For the record, not all whites in the south owned slaves. Majority didn’t. They got stuck fighting for rich white people. What’s more a lot of white southerners (including all my family) fought for the Union.

And who cares?

Plantation owners were able to get out of being the in the confederate army because they owned slaves.

When you talk about white southerners it in one brush it rather offends me because my southern ancestors fought against that cause and for the Union.

I think it’s pretty obvious when people talk about white southerners in the Civil War they’re referring to ones who aided the Confederacy.

Just like it's obvious when people talk of gangsters and thugs the skin color of the group of people being thought about is ___(fill in the blank)___
if your answer was anything other than "offensive" you're wrong

Statues.

Now go cry in the corner. Adults are speaking.

mystic belmont posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

mystic belmont posted...

AndreLeGeant posted...

For the record, not all whites in the south owned slaves. Majority didn’t. They got stuck fighting for rich white people. What’s more a lot of white southerners (including all my family) fought for the Union.

And who cares?

Plantation owners were able to get out of being the in the confederate army because they owned slaves.

When you talk about white southerners it in one brush it rather offends me because my southern ancestors fought against that cause and for the Union.

People who shout about states rights and the south during the civil war deserve nothing.

What about people who risked their lives and abandoned their home state’s government to fight to preserve the Union? I’d add as well, we need more educational focus on white southerners who didn’t aid the Confederacy. Let’s educate southerners today that you could be southern then and still support the Union.