I support the CSA but thats because when you get past all the dumb lies your history books tell you they really where the good(well good est)side in the war, that war was not about Slavery, more men died than every US war ever combined! So you can't say that so many men died for freeing slaves or keeping them... Any Historian or just plain smart person would know the real story, that the south was fighting for Independence just like the Colonists in the Revolution, they where fighting for rights and freedom not slavery and what not. And the Union was fighting to keep the country together as one not to free slaves which they did not care one bit about when it came to the man who was dying out in the field or to really any Union leader, sure Lincoln cared about them but he even said that it wasan't something he was gonna fight over ever. And sure the CS lost but they fighted much more fiercely and bravely and where fighting to defend their homes and true American freedom, and in my opinion it was a war where the Good Guys lost cause they where outnumbered, if you ever see paintings and pics you always see southerners in anything they could find to wear cause well they where rebels, but now days people on both sides act like the other wasant American especialy southerners, but they need to remember that their own General, General Lee even said that something they tend to forget is that they both are american, so if the veterans at the anniversary in Gettysburg in the 20s and 30's could shake hands and laugh and admit they where brothers than why cant we do that 200 hundred some years later and learn the truth about it in school, cause when ever were in the civil war in history i always have to do the same speech about how it actauly went and what they where actauly fighting for. If you disagree than iam sorry but you are very ignorant and may as well stay in the 1st grade since thats all you seem to want to know about the most bloody and emotional war this Country of ours have fought.
Well if you look at it, All of the presidents that had signed the Declaration were rich, business owning, millionaires (not to mention a number of them did grow Marijuana xD), and if the 'straw that broke the camel's back' was a Tea Tax, then obviously they were in it for the money.
Perhaps that is getting into conspiracy, rather than fact. It's what my 11th Grade Government Teacher taught us though xD We had a whole debate on it as well...
From what I've read the north was being real D------bags to the south pryer to the war. Unlike popular beleaf, slavelary wasn't the main cause for the war, though it was a big part of it.
Well if you look at it, All of the presidents that had signed the Declaration were rich, business owning, millionaires (not to mention a number of them did grow Marijuana xD), and if the 'straw that broke the camel's back' was a Tea Tax, then obviously they were in it for the money.
I agree that some presidents signed their name to the Declaration of Independence, but all. Were those presidents that did sign all rich? I would like to see references, please.
I think you mean 'hemp' and yes, it was one of the first crops grown for both use in America and to pay England back in the colonial days.
Wow, that was a close call, I had to hurry and abort because of round #3 of a nasty storm.
I want apologize to Hectichermit because everyone totally ignored what he/she posted:
Well I have heard an interesting reason for the motives behind this... [quote][i]Lets see the South wanted more State independence rather then a central government controlling everything
Yes you're right but please provide us with quotes, when possible.
sort of like the earlier government that was created during the American Revolution, his cause so much chaos because
there were no currency regulations or tax collection and such that you literally had to change your money every state
I think you're talking about confederate money? Here too please, try to be more specific. If so, and you're referring to how the Confederate Government failed their cause fiscally, you're right.
...the central government was so weak it couldn't raise enough funds to support a military
During the ACW, the central government was The Union and this would be incorrect since one by one union backing states were sending in large sums of money. If not, and you're referring to the American Revolution the controlling government was England. The Federalist and Anti-Federalist arguments were over 'having the Constitution stand as is' or, 'add a Bill of (States' and (Peoples' Rights.
Otherwise, if you're talking about the Confederacy please, just say so because that would be accurate.
...there are other problems that the first government of the United States that the whole thing had to be rewritten...the more known American Constitution of today. Anyways after that many advocates of a States came back around the Civil war...because the main problem was more political then ethical...
Another reason I also have heard was if that the cotton the southern States provided to Northern textile mill was a big part of American Economy back then, and that when the South separated they started exporting their crops to foreign countries
King Cotton, you're right but please try to provide quotes because... it's the 'separation' or secession that President Buchanan, as lame duck, allowed by not blocking the seceded states' overtaking of Federal Forts and Ports that directly led to Lincoln's decision to blockade the South's exports. So please try to be as specific as you can. This way everyone understands you and can better respond.
...Great Britain at the Time I think had the worlds largest Empire and that if the South did succeed in succession B) that the British would have eventually invaded it and make it a colony...
the British basically funded most of the southern war effort...even with arms I think
forcing others to do what they should be doing, they were too afraid to let them go and be forced to pay the men for their work
# Excluding slaves, the 1860 U.S. population was 27,167,529, yielding about 1 in 70 free persons (1.5%) being slaveholders. # The distribution of slaveholders was very unequal: holders of 200 or more slaves, constituting less than 1% of all US slaveholders (fewer than 4,000 persons, 1 in 7,000 free persons, or 0.015% of the population) held an estimated 20â"30% of all slaves (800,000 to 1,200,000 slaves).
You can call it The War of Northern Agression, just don't do it in front of people who back the Union.
Point taken. I won't call it anymore on here.
Zxian, not many owned slaves.. -_- Only the rich, wealthy upper planter class. Most of them were yeomen farmers. Who worked on their own. And most of those farmers, made up the 80% or above in the CS Army and Navy. It wasn't about slaves. Get that stupid reason out of here.
the colonist may have been fighting for there freedom but they wanted that freedom so that they could keep there slaves and sttate of economy not saying that slavery is a bad system.(i was in a college dev or world econ)
the colonist may have been fighting for there freedom but they wanted that freedom so that they could keep there slaves and sttate of economy not saying that slavery is a bad system.(i was in a college dev or world econ)
Ok but what about the American Civil War(ACW)? Where do you stand on the subject of the true causes? Was it about unfair taxes, since the South was paying about 90% of both regions combined? Was it about the slavery issue and Lincoln was just answering the abolitionist movement by freeing some slaves, after war was begun?
Was Lincoln's main motive to 'reserve the Union?
Did Lincoln see a way to declare war on the South by: Regaining control of all ports and forts, stop the South's 'free-trade' agreement with other European countries, with England being the richest, by imposing large tariffs?
Only freeing the slaves in the Confederate controlled states?
This isn't a test and you won't be given a grade. You don't even have to answer any of these questions. Just give us you honest opinion.
with all the the taxes and stuff its easy to see that because of that the south were the good guys. which they werent bad guys theyre state of government was wrong in the eyes of lincoln.
it was when lincoln became president that the american government system decided to be capitalist and when the south wanted to secide they need to keep a democratic government for the world.
it all goes under the philosiphy of imperialism (learned in a college class bout all this) that the US government wanted the world to be democratic starting with there own country. with slavess in the mix, they didnt have to worry about loosing jobs and work, theyre wasnt the worry of loosing labour casue if a land lord wanted to get rid of labour he sold it.
with this there couldnt be the government that they wanted
All we have to do is look what happened right after the war to see what happens after freedom of slaves, bad economic policies and overall just too much Radical Republicans forcing Southerners (who "left the Union, but we stand by the never left, and we make them ratify these laws to make them come back into the Union when most of us claim they never left" AKA contradictions.
I don't know why it took me so long to think to go to this web site? South Carolina wanted to secede 4/26/52, but decided to wait until further government restrictions became unbearable.
The south fought for independence and freedom...? Freedom for what? To keep innocent men shackled and oppressed? Get real.
The Confederacy was formed to protect slavery and nothing else. How? By seceding from a nation that they thought wanted to abolish it. Wealth nobles through convincing speeches and propaganda were able to convince an army of men to fight to protect just a few wealthy backwards nobles pockets full. They didn't fight to protect what you called "True American freedom", but to protect their racist ideals and to deny freedom of many just because of the color of their skin.
The South's generals WERE better in most ways, however Lee was arrogant at the Battle of Gettysburg which is why they lost. He had too much faith and pride in the spirit of his men, and took strategy and common sense almost completely out of his battle plan. After the loss, the CSA's army was severely crippled, and the Union would go on the offensive for the remainder of the war, until finally achieving complete victory.
Get with the times, the racist side lost, and rightfully so. Just go back to your Tea Party rallies and your racist gun humping pals please.
