The confederacy had precious little to do with preserving slavery.
The war was waged because the north wanted to impose steep tariffs which would harm the southern states economically while enriching and empowering the federal government. They didn’t really give a fuck about slavery until the war had waged on, and President Lincoln freed the slaves primarily as a strategic move, not as a moral one. Although rhetorically, he claimed much credit, and as time went on his views and the views of many evolved to recognize the evils of slavery, the initials reasons for the war had far more to do with an economic and political power struggle between different regions of the country. On the one hand, you had the southern states, who provided much of the goods needed for trade. On the other hand you had the northern states, who controlled the majority of the international trading ports. The war was a power struggle between these two groups, and slavery was abolished as an effect of the war, not as its initial purpose.
You're as bad as the fucking leftists, with their revisionist history, but in your asinine version, the south were the victims, being preyed upon by the mercantilist north. It's even funnier if you read the whole thing with a southern (Cavalier) accent. The "purpose" of the war, which Lincoln tried to avoid, because he was trying to preserve the United States, was determined by the south, which chose to wage it. And WHY did they wage it? Saying it wasn't about slavery is just fucking ridiculous. What the fuck was the Missouri Compromise, and how the fuck do you go through that entire asinine diatribe without even fucking mentioning it? Talmadge passed in the House, but not the Senate. The Kansas-Nebraska Act effectively vacated the Missouri Compromise. The Republican party BEGAN, effectively, to oppose the expansion of slavery. Respectively, the priorities of the North/South:
North (mostly Republican): a) preserve the United States, b) end slavery
South (mostly Democrats): a) preserve the states' autonomy to sustain slavery, b) secede from the U.S. in order to preserve that autonomy. They didn't want more anti-slavery states, because then, they would have lost the slim margin they had in the Senate.
Your disdain is praise for the rational man. In fact, though I'm no specialist in Civil War history, I've read a shit-ton of U.S. history and am well-read compared to pretty much everybody I ever meet, and I can't help but notice that you included no citations for your completely ignorant apologia. Southerners, with their fucking "pride and honor" refrain, rewriting history so they don't have to admit that a lot of people died because some of them didn't want to give up slaving.
Also, it's "unresearched," which is especially hilarious not just because it's not true, but because you called me a "dipshit" and can't even fucking spell all the words in a seven-word sentence correctly.
The confederacy had precious little to do with preserving slavery.
The war was waged because the north wanted to impose steep tariffs which would harm the southern states economically while enriching and empowering the federal government. They didn’t really give a fuck about slavery until the war had waged on, and President Lincoln freed the slaves primarily as a strategic move, not as a moral one. Although rhetorically, he claimed much credit, and as time went on his views and the views of many evolved to recognize the evils of slavery, the initials reasons for the war had far more to do with an economic and political power struggle between different regions of the country. On the one hand, you had the southern states, who provided much of the goods needed for trade. On the other hand you had the northern states, who controlled the majority of the international trading ports. The war was a power struggle between these two groups, and slavery was abolished as an effect of the war, not as its initial purpose.
The Senate passed the Morrill(Tariff) Act by a vote of 32 to 7 on June 10, 1862.
You're as bad as the fucking leftists, with their revisionist history, but in your asinine version, the south were the victims, being preyed upon by the mercantilist north. It's even funnier if you read the whole thing with a southern (Cavalier) accent. The "purpose" of the war, which Lincoln tried to avoid, because he was trying to preserve the United States, was determined by the south, which chose to wage it. And WHY did they wage it? Saying it wasn't about slavery is just fucking ridiculous. What the fuck was the Missouri Compromise, and how the fuck do you go through that entire asinine diatribe without even fucking mentioning it? Talmadge passed in the House, but not the Senate. The Kansas-Nebraska Act effectively vacated the Missouri Compromise. The Republican party BEGAN, effectively, to oppose the expansion of slavery. Respectively, the priorities of the North/South:
Hey dipshit, thanks for your unresearched opinion.
Kindly go fuck yourself.
Your disdain is praise for the rational man. In fact, though I'm no specialist in Civil War history, I've read a shit-ton of U.S. history and am well-read compared to pretty much everybody I ever meet, and I can't help but notice that you included no citations for your completely ignorant apologia. Southerners, with their fucking "pride and honor" refrain, rewriting history so they don't have to admit that a lot of people died because some of them didn't want to give up slaving.
Also, it's "unresearched," which is especially hilarious not just because it's not true, but because you called me a "dipshit" and can't even fucking spell all the words in a seven-word sentence correctly.
I typed it quickly because I don’t respect you.
https://medium.com/@doubleday/what-trump-should-know-about-tariffs-10e9c2b0e258