13 Feb 15
Originally posted by HandyAndyNo
Do you support slavery?
Do you believe that the Civil War was fought on just the issue of slavery, or rather, Lincoln introduced that argument to solicit support.
As a 2nd question, if The South had won the right to secede, do you think that Virginia would be operating slavery now. Obviously not. How long, then, do you think before the Confederate states abolished slavery and paid the ex -slaves (admittedly a pittance) to work on the plantations? 5 years? 10 max??
Finally ~ do you think the slaves lived in worse conditions than mill workers and the like in Victorian England (slightly controversial, that one)
13 Feb 15
Originally posted by st dominics previewIn 1860, the southern states believed that Lincoln, once elected, would work to abolish slavery. Once he took office, secession talks went into high gear. The issue for Lincoln was preserving the union, with or without slavery. He believed slavery would eventually come to an end anyway.
No
Do you believe that the Civil War was fought on just the issue of slavery, or rather, Lincoln introduced that argument to solicit support.
As a 2nd question, if The South had won the right to secede, do you think that Virginia would be operating slavery now. Obviously not. How long, then, do you think before the Confederate states abolis ...[text shortened]... onditions than mill workers and the like in Victorian England (slightly controversial, that one)
According to Lincoln, the south had no right to secede. If the north and south had split into two independent countries, I believe slavery in the south would have continued for many years. The two countries, even as friendly rivals, would be less prosperous and influential. And perhaps at this point, ready to reunite.
13 Feb 15
Originally posted by st dominics previewI missed it by six years without using google, scratch paper OR my brain.
Hi Praxis. As a (very part time now) maths teacher, and with great interest in 'the South', isnt it more like 150 years ago?? back to 1865?
The Confederacy didnt start until 1861 (154 years ago). Stars and Bars adopted midway through Civil War (around 1863 ~ 152 years ago)
I would be proud to fly that flag as my (adapted) country
Please forgive my "maths" error.
13 Feb 15
Originally posted by HandyAndyNo, using people for one's own gain without adequate monetary compensation is wrong. We don't have slaves today, we have the poor working class serving the wheels of control.
Do you support slavery?
If we had slaves today, they should use crotchety old turds like you me and Bob.
13 Feb 15
Originally posted by ChessPraxisIf the Republicans get into the White House, it could happen.
No, using people for one's own gain without adequate monetary compensation is wrong. We don't have slaves today, we have the poor working class serving the wheels of control.
If we had slaves today, they should use crotchety old turds like you me and Bob.
By the way, I'm older but less crotchety than you and Bob.
13 Feb 15
Originally posted by HandyAndyIf it's any consolation to you
In 1860, the southern states believed that Lincoln, once elected, would work to abolish slavery. Once he took office, secession talks went into high gear. The issue for Lincoln was preserving the union, with or without slavery. He believed slavery would eventually come to an end anyway.
According to Lincoln, the south had no right to secede. If the nor ...[text shortened]... y rivals, would be less prosperous and influential. And perhaps at this point, ready to reunite.
I agree with your point of view.
13 Feb 15
Originally posted by HandyAndywell, there is the 'nub' of it. The South DID think they had the right to secede, they lived a totally different way of life. That is what they were fighting for.
According to Lincoln, the south had no right to secede. If the north and south had split into two independent countries, I believe slavery in the south would have continued for many years. The two countries, even as friendly rivals, would be less prosperous and influential.
Slavery 'would have continued for many years'?? What is your guess?? Up to now?? To 1900?? Even that is hardly credible.
Certainly 'The North' would have been 'less prosperous'. Which is, fundamentaly, what it was all about
13 Feb 15
1 edit
Originally posted by st dominics previewExactly. The southern states believed they had the option to secede and Lincoln felt that preservation of the union was the overriding principle. If the Confederacy had become a sovereign nation, I think slavery might have continued until the 20th century, when American society and the world at large experienced some seismic shifts.
well, there is the 'nub' of it. The South DID think they had the right to secede, they lived a totally different way of life. That is what they were fighting for.
Slavery 'would have continued for many years'?? What is your guess?? Up to now?? To 1900?? Even that is hardly credible.
Certainly 'The North' would have been 'less prosperous'. Which is, fundamentaly, what it was all about
13 Feb 15
Originally posted by HandyAndyof course Lincoln felt that 'preservation of the Union was the overriding principle'.
Exactly. The southern states believed they had the option to secede and Lincoln felt that preservation of the union was the overriding principle. If the Confederacy had become a sovereign nation, I think slavery might have continued until the 20th century, when American society and the world at large experienced some seismic shifts.
Vast majority of the wealth of USA came from the Southern states.
They had a totally different way of life. Thus, in such a vast nation, dividing into 2 separate nations was reasonable.
Slavery was/is a side issue. You 'think' it might have continued into the 1900s?? Not by much, if then. Surely you will concede that?? Then the slaves would have become low paid workers. As some whites chose to do on plantations along with the slaves (though without the negative side effects!)