George Rollings

Not once have I heard any black man or black woman talking about how their ancestors from the North or South helping to end slavery by fighting along side the Confederate Soldiers for the fight to stop slavery. Nearly 300,000 thousand or more helped this Great Country put a end to slavery.
TRUMP2020.
GW PEACE OUT...

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

The idea that the Civil War was fought over the issue of slavery is incorrect.

"It seems that the root cause of the Civil War was not slavery, it was taxation. Over a century before anyone had even coined the term, “fake news,” our own government put a spin on the real cause of the Civil War which has been the accepted truth in history books and media to this day. Here’s how taxes caused the Civil War."

The cause of the Civil War dates back to long before the first shots were fired by the South at Fort Sumter, South Carolina in 1861. In fact, economic disputes between the North and South existed even before the Revolutionary War (also fought over taxes!), and things got even worse with the Tariff of 1828.

Called the, “Black Tariff” or “Tariff of Abomination,” (meaning, “the most evil thing ever,”) the tariff was created to repay the national debt (who does that?!) after the War of 1812. However, by 1832 the national debt was paid and there was no reason for such high taxes. The tariff had created a favorable situation for the North, who benefited greatly from such high taxes.

The South produced and exported most of the goods in America, and under the tariff, that resulted in the South paying about 75% of all taxes in America."

https://www.mightytaxes.com/taxes-caused-civil-war/

Abraham Lincoln repeatedly stated his war was caused by taxes only, and not by slavery, at all.

"My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861)." reads paragraph 5 of Lincoln's First Message to the U.S. Congress, penned July 4, 1861.

"I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so," Lincoln said it his first inaugural on March 4 of the same year.

There is no proof of Lincoln ever declaring the war was fought to abolish slavery, and without such an official statement, the war-over-slavery teaching remains a complete lie and offensive hate speech that divides Americans, as is being done now by the media and politicians regarding the Confederate flag in South Carolina. https://www.al.com/opinion/2015/06/war-over-slavery_rhetoric_is_i.html

Kickaha Loc: Nebraska

Check the way the war was going at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation. The South knew they could not win a long, drawn out war, they needed to either defeat the North quickly or have enough success early on to turn the tide of public opinion for the war in the North. The North had superior population and industry. The South had to rely on imported weapons and manufactured goods. Lincoln could see what was happening and issued his Emancipation Proclamation, which only freed the slaves in the areas deemed to be in insurrection. Anyone who was a slave in the North, was still a slave. This would not change until December 1865, when the 13th amendment was ratified. This was to try to open a second front and change the fortunes of war. There were a great many in the North who would not have fought if the war was just about ending slavery.
Just for a little more trivia, there were blacks who owned slaves of their own. There were also free blacks who fought on the side of the Confederacy.

Smedley_buzkill

The 1830 Census showed 1276 black slave owners in the US, owning some 10,000 plus slaves. According to, believe it or not, MSNBC, about half of them were protecting family members and the other half bought and sold their black brethren and sistren just like their White counterparts in this country and their Black counterparts in Africa where almost all of them, or their ancestors were enslaved in the first place.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.

Georgia declaration of secession


In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world.

Mississippi declaration of secession


We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

South Carolina declaration of secession


She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?

The controlling majority of the Federal Government, under various pretences and disguises, has so administered the same as to exclude the citizens of the Southern States, unless under odious and unconstitutional restrictions, from all the immense territory owned in common by all the States on the Pacific Ocean, for the avowed purpose of acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions of Texas and her sister slaveholding States.

Texas declaration of secession

Tell me again how slavery wasn't the cause of the war? Even the argument about states' rights was about the right to hold slaves and expand the institution to the west coast.

jwrevagent

I was of the opinion, and I do not know if this was given me in college or where I got it, but the South desperately wanted to bring the war to the North so their land could heal, and they could get crops in and harvested. The North, was not physically as devastated as the South, since most battles were fought either in the South or close to it, and with battles going on, the land suffered tremendous damage, while in the North, they had some crops, but it was more an industrialized place. Thus, the South marched into Pennsylvania headed for Gettysburg, to obtain shoes from the manufacturer there. At least this is what I was given as a reason. Apparently Jefferson Davis was not releasing a warehouse full of boots for the soldiers-have no idea why seems a bit weird to me-so they went to Gettysburg for the shoes and to bring the war to the North, hoping to devastate the North as the South had been. According to what I read, they did not realize there was a patrol of Soldiers out and when they met, the battle began. How much of this is true, and how much is not, I have no idea. Just things I recall from either history books I read, my 4 visits to Gettysburg, or my college and high school classes. Any idea of what the truth of the matter was? I never quite believed all of it.

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

Read Brian Kilemead's book on it. Slavery was an afterthought. The union army needed more bodies on the line and white men well there just weren't any more. So Lincoln "allowed" Blackman to fight. All were pretty well trained. He couldn't really leave slaves as they were. However, is the thirteenth amendment that we see the legal one? Or is the missing 13th the legal? Hm.

jwrevagent

I have read some of Kilmead's books, and I find his writing tedious and his research questionable, though I have no real evidence. Perhaps I simply do not like his style or something. Probably won't read it any time soon.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

As far as I know, what you heard is true....except this is the first I heard of the shoe expedition. My understanding for the foray into Pennsylvania was as a kind of shock and awe: Lee thought the North would reconsider it's position if the war came to their doorstep and let the South leave rather than face devastation. Could just be my ignorance though: soldiers need shoes and it could be a reason to head north.

jwrevagent

Now that I think about it since I posted, I believe I heard about the shoes when I was in Gettysburg and taking a bus tour through the village and the battlefield. I believe it was the guide who mentioned it. Also mentioned was that there was one civilian casualty in that battle, and that was a young woman taking a freshly baked loaf of bread out of the oven-she was on the side of the Confederacy and would bake bread and other goodies for the soldiers-anyway, apparently as she was bent over to retrieve the bread from the oven, when she was hit by a stray bullet. The home where she lived and worked is on the tour. Interesting.