federally indicted mattoid

S***ery wasn't the reason for the Civil war? Are you sure about that. Lol

federally indicted mattoid

Well swallowed, dixie chimp.

Ginny_Dandy Loc: Pacific Northwest

The Civil War was started to bring those states that seceded back into the union. S***ery was just a cover.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Bob is showing his latest fashion craze;
https://static.onepoliticalplaza.com/upload/2022/1/25/618373-original_428966240.jpg

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

By John Potter...M.A. in History, Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania

What was the South fighting for in the US Civil War?

Look, human history is vibrant and nuanced and complex, and there usually are no easy answers. Usually.

This is one of those cases where it’s really quite simple.

The South fought the Civil War to preserve s***ery.

This is just a fact. They said so in their own words as they v**ed to secede from the Union. But thanks to the records they left us, you don’t need to take my word for it:

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

Now, if you’ve read the other answers to this question, you’ve seen other reasons proffered as to why they fought the war. Let’s take a look at some of them.

“They were just fighting for independence, like we were in 1776.”

Okay. But that’s the “what” of the Civil War, not the “why.” They were obviously fighting to be an independent nation for a reason, and as they said so clearly in their Declarations of Secession, that reason was to preserve s***ery.

“They were fighting for states’ rights.”

They sure were. But not for any generic or ambiguous states’ rights, or some lofty belief that state power should supersede federal power. The South loved the power of the federal government when they had control of it, and could use it to protect and prioritize their interests. Nope, they were fighting to preserve one state right, and one state right only. And that is the right to own s***es. And again, this is what they told us when they v**ed to secede.

“They were fighting because the Federals were invading the South.”

For many Southern infantrymen, this is indeed why they were fighting. Their homes were under threat, and they wanted to protect them. We all can understand that.

But it wasn’t Southern infantrymen v****g to secede from the Union, and it wasn’t Southern infantrymen writing the Declarations of Secession, nor was it Southern infantrymen who gave the order to fire on Fort Sumter.

All of those fall to the South’s planter aristocracy, the guys who absolutely, positively did all that s**t to preserve s***ery.

Try as they might over the last 150 years to mask their intentions when they seceded from the Union and then made war on the Federal government, the documents they themselves created and promulgated at the time stand as clear testament to what was central in their minds when they were deciding to undertake that course.

S***ery, s***ery, s***ery.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Now it the time for more B****s to understand it is the Republican party that fights for e******y for all, and v**e accordingly.

More have figured that out and are doing so. They are leaving the Democrat's plantation, and the Demos are scared to death.

4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory

Man you've nailed it !

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

"Man you've nailed it !"

Thanks, 4430.
I use a ball peen hammer in one hand, and claw hammer in the other.
I am amadextrous.

Vice grips work well also.

RandyBrian Loc: Texas

This argument has gotten silly and ridiculous. There were LOTS of reasons the Civil War was fought, and ALL of them were valid to the people involved. Yes, MANY people wanted to eliminate s***ery. But many others were very angry because someone they deemed unfit, Lincoln, was elected (their reaction was much like Democrats in 2016). They were convinced that he intended to end s***ery (which is still being argued by historians) which would have devastated the South financially and socially. But it is also true that a long term battle had been going on about state's rights, and that played a very big role, especially for politicians. And they were technically right (but not morally) because s***ery was not addressed in the Constitution, which means it should have been left up to the individual states. The non-s***e states wanted to force their policies on the s***e states (sounds a lot like modern Washington DC). The south also launched an economic war prior to hostilities, which brought about a depression that harshly affected the north, and people were angry about that. But the primary reason the typical southerners approved of the war, and fought so hard in it, was that they were defending their homes from invaders.
ALL of the above are true, and which ones were the primary cause of the dissention and the war varied from individual to individual. Picking just one reason and claiming that is THE reason is foolish and illogical and untrue.
The bottom line is that 1.5 million deaths resulted from a vicious war that resulted in almost 4 million s***es being freed. The vast VAST number of deaths were among white people, and not B****s. In spite of what many modern Black families are 'teaching' their children, the Black people did NOT rise up and win their freedom. They were freed at a terrible cost in WHITE deaths. Was it worth it? In my opinion, yes. A horrible evil was eliminated from America. Why each individual fought, and gave their lives, is almost immaterial. The s***es were freed, and America took a major step, bloody though it was, towards e******y of the races. Yes, we still have a long way to go, and some of the 'tribalism' we call r****m still exists, and among ALL races. That is unacceptable, and reflects a serious defect in the individual that harbors such feelings. We continue, as a society, to work towards MLKs dream.

Army

Ginny_Dandy Loc: Pacific Northwest

More importantly, the Dems are afraid of losing control.