Originally posted by: Chobits
The Civil War had little to do with Slavery. State's rights my friend.
Not necessarily. The intial rift was between states and federal rights and this is seen as early as the convention to create a ratify the constitution where those in the North favored a strong National Government (Federalists) while the Anti-Federalists, including Thomas Jefferson [to think a man of his calibur would be arguing for slavery toward the end of his life], were concentrated more in the South. Even look at some of the most prominent writings of the time - the
Virginia and
Kentuky Resolutions basically screamed "We love state's rights"
Sure of course there were issues that didn't deal with state's rights that went to the courts (and considering John Marhshall was the justice the Federal Government always won. Go Marshall Go!) but the issue that nagged the most was SLAVERY. I'm not saying that the North, or even a lot of abolishonists were not racist (quite the contrary they were! Very few abolishonists were like William Lloyd Garrison) but they realized that slavery was holding back the south from an economic perspective and the North was advancing and building things everywhere (The fact that the North had a super super majority of the Railroads helped it) while the south was stuck in this self defeating pattern thanks to Eli.
Look at legislation/rulings/bills/laws/whatever from the time period. The most important/ most talked about (sorry if I can't draw more specific examples. Its been a year since I've really studied US History) dealt with slavery. The Missouri Compromise, Fugitive Slave Law (where the North chose not to adhere to Federal Laws), Dred Scott Case, Uncle Toms Cabin, the Republic of Texas, Bleeding Kansas, and more highlighted the time period. Also during this time the South was on its cotton high exporting millions of tons of cotton (which proved to hurt itself in the longrun as once war started places in Britian had huge surplus of cotton that workers for a while didn't have to worry about losing their jobs. That and they would rather lose cotton than wheat from the breadbasket of the north) which
further ingrained slavery into their society
In order to protect slavery the South maintained its position that it was state's rights and even went as far as creating an image that a slave in the south was much happier resting and fishing on the banks of a river thant it would be in the north earning subsistence wages (the key would be in the North they were free and were actually paid money. If they chose they could leave. True most lived with menial paying positions but at least they had the
option to leave and that in itself is a huge principal) and they began to spew their crap.
With the beginning of the civil war with the attack on Sumter the South IMMEDIATELY lay their cause behind the State's Rights issue. By doing this it would make their cause seem palpable so that they could attract help from European Nations. If they could just stay on their turf and get help they were absolutely fine (though even had they won chances are they would have quickly fallen apart as internal strife was already building up)
Lincoln, a sympathizer to the "cause", knew NOT to intially make the issue over slavery because as states ceded he needs those on the Ohio river - kentucky, tennesee, maryland becuase they were key states and had he immediately declared the war as a war on slavery they would've also ceded. He even said something to the effect of, "If I could free the slaves and save the Union I would. If I could keep slavery as is and save the Union I would" to show in the beginning that his trump was the Union (this is also when the USA began to be refferred as "That IS the USA" not "They ARE the USA") By the time of the Emanciptation the North got the victory it wanted (well...somehwat wanteD) and Lincoln made the smartest move he coud -he issued the emancipation proclamation. While it is true that it freed slaves only in rebellious states the key factor is that by issuing that he
made sure that the war was a war on slavery; Southern States were hiding their true cause behind the veil of State's rights. True there is merit to that but most of the complaints lead to the establishment of slavery. By doing this he cuts off any European support they MIGHT have gotten (they got some British help) because in Europe by now Slavery was dead and no leader of a European country wanted to be seen as interveneing on the side of slavery.
After the war ended the next three amendments, 13th (which banned slavery...ironically though before the break of the war there was a revision that would keep slavery but not allow it to expand) 14th and 15th delt specifically with slavery and the black man further enforcing the idea that the war was a war over slavery.
The rest as they say, is history.
Let me repeat one more time:
The South used the idea of State's rights in order to maintain slavery which was their key goal. They did complain over other issues and very vocally but if you study what was going on much of it revolved around slavery.
Hell I have a friend who was in Georgia during her 10th grade year and it seems they don't study US History there...they study "State History"
Thank god slavery is gone, and I would easily vote in favor of the employer.
Though I never understood with the longing desire of the "old [racist] south" and stuff such as Civil War Re-enactments.
Kiss it goodbye. The issue of state's rights is LONG dead and it will never ever be a factor anymore. If you cannot realize that you are a person in need of great help
Facebook
Twitter