It doesn't really seem to matter what the subject, it's always the same with the liberal crowd. As I alluded to above, it doesn't matter to them what Lincoln said about the war, it's what 'all historians can agree to'. Just like it doesn't matter to them that the average temperatures have been going down in the US since the 1930's, all that really matters is that 'all scientists agree that the temperature is going up'. Liberalism really is some kind of mental disease.
I did not say the civil war had nothing to do with slavery. I said it had far less to do with slavery than most think. It was primarily states rights in general, slavery being but one of those. The war itself was fought to force the confederacy back into the union. Had the confederacy never succeeded there would have been no war.
Your twisting of words and your ability to conjure the views of others is clear for all to see. Lincoln never said he would "INVADE THE SOUTH" as you would have him say. Instead, he clearly states the opposite. "The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and imposts (import taxes); but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere." He is simply referring to his oath and obligations to occupy and collect duties from the southern states. You can call it an "invasion" all you want, because it's obviously what you've been raised to believe, but Lincoln distinctly says the act of carrying out obligations and duties in any states of the Union shall not be considered an act of invasion. But, again, I made no suggestions that said Lincoln wouldn't continue to occupy the southern states as is necessary, or that he wouldn't use a forceful hand to make sure those duties were collected. Why you seem to be intent on imagining me to be taking such stances, I can only guess... Lincoln assures the people that the Union can not be separated, and he had no intent on invading, but warned that use of force against the U.S. will be considered an act of insurrection. "It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances." Who is disagreeing with that notion???? YOU WILL NEED THE PARTICIPATION OF SOMEONE WHO IS IGNORANT ENOUGH TO BELIEVE LINCOLN ACTUALLY WANTED TO END SLAVERY BEFORE YOU CAN WIN YOUR ARGUMENT. Of course Lincoln was going to allow slavery to continue. He said it over and over again, as I have already provided, and as he blathers throughout his inaugural speech. Are you on something, or is this really that difficult for you? Hasn't this been the case all along? Either you haven't read anything I've said, or it can be surmised that you indeed suffer from acute retardation. If you are retarded, that's cool- but there is no excuse for your ignorance.
I wasn't disagreeing, but rather expounding upon that insight, and relating it to those who have come to believe that the war had little or nothing to do with slavery. For Lincoln, the only reason for the use of force would be to keep the Union intact, as you have said. This was only about secession for Lincoln, and he couldn't allow it, just as any good president couldn't. For the people, the war had VERY MUCH to do with slavery, as is evident throughout Lincoln's speech, and the entire documented history of the times. Lincoln is addressing the voice of the people, which very much had been saying "we want an end to slavery", and this voice of the people had been pressing for a war if necessary to do end the atrocities. "One section of our country believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute." Lincoln knew he was walking into a mess. He din't want the war, and he didn't start it. " In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and defend it." Slavery was the pink elephant sewn on the American flag, at the time. It was becoming more and more obvious that America could never continue long term as a slave trade nation. It was heinous and fucked up, and the world knew it. Those with half of a brain were beginning to figure out that it just wasn't going to be tolerated. Many in the northern states wanted to keep slavery, as you've said. But the vast majority in the south did not want to give it up. The Union, perhaps "goaded" the southern rebels into committing to attack, as Fhl has put it, by implementing a hefty import tax on them. It may have even been Lincoln's own ingeniously devised scheme to force a the 40% tax onto them, knowing good and well the south's greed would prompt them to attack the U.S. Army. They (the south) cried and moaned that it was an unfair tax, as it had previously only been a 20% tax. Further, they reasoned that since they were doing 80% of the U.S. exporting, they shouldn't have to pay such a high penalty. But in the south's glaring ignorance, they couldn't see the HUGE reason why they were able to export so many goods, is because they had all that free slave labor to work their fields and plantations. However, the reason behind their success was clear to Congress who quickly and easily passed the tax act. That was all the south needed to start firing. They didn't want to pay the tax, and they weren't going to give up their slave trade. They were keeping their money and they were keeping their niggers. Or so they thought...
Sorry, but I can't help thinking of that old joke, asking Mary Todd Lincoln, "But all that aside, how did you enjoy the play?"
But republicans, and especially those of the south, are being taught a quite different history. The Republican propagandists have been busy convincing their young that the war wasn't even about slavery. All across the south, and elsewhere, they insist that war was only about the taxation to them, and that taxation was why they seceded from the U.S. They hold that they didn't fight to protect their rights to own slaves. They have devised an arsenal of clever ways to convince the listeners of their reasoning for the war. Carefully consider the following logic, quoted from Confederate Heritage.com, which says: "The Permanent Slavery Amendment that Lincoln endorsed was passed on March 2, 1861 by a vote of over 66% of both Houses of the U. S. Congress, after most Southern States had withdrawn from the United States and had formed their own nation, the Confederate States of America. The Northern Permanent Slavery Amendment reads, "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State." If ratified by 3/4 of the States, this Northern sponsored Constitutional Amendment would prevent the federal government from ever abolishing or interfering with slavery in any State in the United States. If the Southern States wanted slavery protected forever, then all they would have to do is return to the Union and ratify this Constitutional Amendment. But, because the Southern States left the Union to avoid Lincoln's newly passed 40% import tax (see below) and not to protect slavery, few experts expect the South to return." http://confederateheritage.org/Lincoln-Endorses-Permanent-Slavery-Amendment.html The naive easily accept such logic, without ever stopping to think that slavery was NEVER going to be tolerated long term. Did you catch that? You might want to read again that second to last paragraph above, and note that the word "forever" is highlighted. "If the Southern States wanted slavery protected forever, then all they would have to do is return to the Union and ratify this Constitutional Amendment." Now, Did you see how they did that? The propagandist is actually able to convince others that slavery actually would have gone on forever had the south just stayed in the Union and ratified. They now have provided a form of proof to their young that by NOT returning to the Union, the south was essentially choosing NOT to have their slave trade protected, as the The Northern Permanent Slavery Amendment would have provided them the protection of those rights. And once again, the genetically ingrained ignorance of the southerner overlooks an undeniable fact. The fact is, even if The Northern Permanent Slavery Amendment had been ratified by 3/4 of the states (which it was not), there is absolutely nothing that would stop another Amendment from coming along the next year or even the next month and completely doing away with that piece of shit document. Funny part is these teachers of history never let on or even seem to consider there was actually a desire to continue their slave trade. White republicans and democrats alike, bitch and moan about the progress the African Americans have made the past 150 years. But it's doubtful their progress has been any faster. They have come such a short way, in such a long time as 150 years. But who can blame them? Ignorance and Arrogance are their two main traits.
I don't think I could say most either. But only because, the technical reasons belie the truth at the heart of the matter. Obviously, there were millions who didn't want to lose their slavery rights, but not all of them would have actually fought a war to protect those rights. Millions of others wanted slavery abolished, but again, they wouldn't have fought in a bloody war to make it happen. There were obviously many on both sides, willing to fight at the drop of a hat. But, here is the thing. I've already pointed out that slavery was the pink elephant sewn to the American flag. But it was also the 400lb gorilla that Lincoln had to deal with, the moment he took office. There was no bigger, or more pressing issue in America or the world than the slave rights debate, and it had become fiercely heated by the time Lincoln took office. Why do you think The Northern Permanent Slavery Amendment was endorsed by Lincoln and passed by Congress? Do you think it could possibly be because the pro slavery activists were scrambling to amend the constitution so that it would clearly say "The People can have slaves forever"? Hell, just that the document had the word "Permanent" in its title should be a clue as to how desperately people wanted to keep their slave rights. Lincoln was of them. He despised the thought of making Americans give those rights up. Now, this is where people are led astray. What the southern historical doctrines don't teach, is this fact that the southern states feared their slave rights were going to be taken, and that they knew they were going to have to fight for them. They had been worrying and planning for that fight for years, but especially in the year or so leading up to the war. They knew it was coming, and in fact- they prepared remarkably well for it. Why else do you think they already had an Army in place by the time the U.S. troops came to Sumter? So, instead of fighting to protect their slavery, what did the south do? They took the bait. That 40% import tax that the Union devised to piss the south off, worked like a charm. The south took the bait, and simply said, "Goodbye. We no longer belong to the U.S., so you can't make us do anything, and you can't come in to our new country either." At this point, that was all Lincoln and millions of others needed to hear, for them to go to war. Slavery may be tolerated by the Union, but leaving the Union would not be. Secession is the technical reason for the war, as it was the technical detail that was needed for Lincoln to legally start killing southerners. But that technical detail conceals the truth, as do the republicans. Slavery Rights was paramount to the war. It was at the very heart of the matter, from the very beginning and right up through the emancipation.
These posts of yours make me think of that speech Rhett Butler gives in GWTW (fiction, of course, not necessarily history): RHETT: I mean, Mr. Hamilton, there's not a cannon factory in the whole South. MAN: What difference does that make, sir, to a gentleman? RHETT: I'm afraid it's going to make a great deal of difference to a great many gentlemen, sir. CHARLES: Are you hinting, Mr. Butler, that the Yankees can lick us? RHETT: No, I'm not hinting. I'm saying very plainly that the Yankees are better equipped than we. They've got factories, shipyards, coalmines... and a fleet to bottle up our harbors and starve us to death. All we've got is cotton, and slaves and ...arrogance.