• TheDoozer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It depends on the answer to this question:

    Did the South start the Civil War by seceding, or did the North start the Civil War by not letting them?

    If the South started it by seceding, it was absolutely, unquestionably over slavery. A simple look at the various articles of secession makes that abundantly clear.

    If the North started it by not letting them secede, then the Civil War was about preserving the Union, which the South was trying to leave because of slavery. The North wasn’t fighting to end slavery. The north in general may or may not have wanted that, but that wasn’t why they went to war.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure.

      The South literally declared war so that would be hard to argue plus the whole succession thing.

      Correct.

      Also correct, those that l two things aren’t mutually exclusive nor are they in this case. I mean they don’t particularly care about the union, they wanted to keep the territories and keep the trade. If all the people of the South wanted to leave with their slaves the North world have cheered it on and in fact did with a number of southerners who went to places like Brazil and Argentina before during and after the war. Weirdly enough much like Nazis.

    • JackbyDev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would say the constitution didn’t let them secede.