[ 1 ] 2 3 Next >>
2 years ago#1
Guest
Guest

why did the north want to end slavery
during the civil war

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
2 years ago#2
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16

Not ALL people in the north "wanted to end slavery". There were some genuine abolitionists that wanted to end slavery on moral grounds of course. However many northerners weren't concerned with slavery one way or the other but simply supported the federal government.

As far as the "emancipation proclamation" "honest abe" himself called it a "war measure". In other words his purpose was not to free the slaves but to win the war and "save the union" (by denying slave labor to the South, forestalling diplomatic recognition of the South and encouraging slave uprisings, which would have drawn CS troops from the front).

Lincoln's most important objective was to "save the union" and not to end slavery (and he said so himself)

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that." lincoln 1862


Lincoln was most probably genuinely anti-slavery but he was certainly not pro African-American. Another of abe's (life-long)objectives was the deportation (ostensibly voluntary) of large numbers of freed slaves to Africa, the Caribbean or Central America. His assassination cut this pet project of his short (Or more accurately His death coupled with the radical-republican realization that they could use the freed slaves as a ready made voting block to keep them selves in power and steal the South (as well as the US treasury) blind.
Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
2 years ago#3
LiveVegan
Ace
Blogs: 4
Forum: 701
Votes: 4

To add a little to what Mac said...

Some Northerners also refused to fight in the war because they didn't want to free slaves or risk their lives for slavery.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
2 years ago#4
Scamp
Junior Member
Blogs: 0
Forum: 23
Votes: 0
Guest wrote:
why did the north want to end slavery
during the civil war


They didn't.

Northern or Union states of Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, New Jersey and the capital of the Union, Washington DC, all had slavery when the war started.

Some of them still had slavery after the war was over and all the Southern or Confederate slaves were free.

New Jersey even voted against the 13th Amendment on March 15 1865.

But thanks for proving the ignorance of many people that the North wanted to free the slaves despite the fact that they still had slaves after the war.
Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
2 years ago#5
LiveVegan
Ace
Blogs: 4
Forum: 701
Votes: 4

This concept is still taught in schools, I was there once. I thought the same thing. The evil south. They all whipped slaves and separated families and those horrible boats...down with the south.

The trouble is...it wasn't true. The south isn't the enemy and the north isn't the hero. They both did bad things that shouldn't have happened and they both produced cowards and they both had courageous people who did extraordinary things.

I wish schools would teach correct accurate history...I sound like a broken record. But how can we learn from history if we never get the right history?

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
2 years ago#6
Shannon Pritchard
Junior Member
Blogs: 2
Forum: 23
Votes: 0

The emancipation was a war measure intended to keep England and France, who recognized the South to be in the right, from getting into the War in defense of the South.

Lincoln calculated, correctly, that if he turned the War's appearance from one of conquest, to one of freedom,it would keep Europe out of the War. He also calculated incorrectly that the slaves did not like their life, and if given the opportunity would rise up and kill the women and children left at home (the same mistake John Brown made) as had been done in the islands.

The laughable part is that Lincoln did not free any of the slaves in Delaware, Maryland, or even Washington D.C. he only declared freedom for those he could not free.

Sherman waged total war to cover the his and his army's crimes. In 1864, the bulk of the yankee army was made up foreigners and home grown mercenaries who joined for the age old reason; rape and plunder.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#7
221876
Guest

the north wanted to have industrial stuff in every state

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#8
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16

Huh? If the "north" ( and I take that to mean
mean the federal government which was controlled by northern industrial and financial interests for at least 100 years after the WBTS ended) wanted "industial stuff" in "every state" then why did they go to such pains to keep the South in economic peonage right up through the 1960's?

What industrial development that took place in the South (even now) was/is mostly owned and controlled by NORTHERN corporations.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#9
fstroupe
Champion
Blogs: 25
Forum: 1,458
Votes: 21
macreverie wrote:
What industrial development that took place in the South (even now) was/is mostly owned and controlled by NORTHERN corporations.
Actually much of the most recent industrial additions to the South are foreign controlled. (Nissan, Toyota, VW, BMW, and a huge number of other European- and Japanese-owned companies) And we welcome them with open arms. Though we're now looking at some American arms manufacturers heading this way.....
Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#10
Maggie Jones Tanquary
Guest

You are absolutely right. We have dozens of letters written by my uncle James Tanquary, who later perished on the blockade runner General Lyon off Cape Hatteras...right after he was mustered out and had survived many battles.. In all the letters he constantly repeats that his goal was to Preserve and Save the Union..he NEVER mentions anything about slavery..his cousins in Fredericksburg, Virginia had slaves and were confederates..this was
cause for great sadness in the family..cousin against cousin and he mentions
it...there was also slavery in Southern Illinois where my Uncle was from. His goal always the Union...

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#11
kasie
Guest

why did north not want slavery?i need it for my homework

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#12
maggie jones tanquary
Guest

Basically because of weather conditions. The South has a hot climate where Black people used to the tropics work well. White people s skin burns etc..In the North there were many immigrants with family farms. But there also was slavery in the North, on a smaller scale. In Southern Indiana and Illinois there was slavery.There were also many indentured servants.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#13
Shannon Pritchard
Guest

They did not care about the slavery. It was only abolished in the states where it could not be actually enforced; the northern states which had slavery were not affected by the emancipation proclomation.

The aim of the emancipation proclomation was two fold, one, to turn the war into a moral crusade instead of the real reason, one for money, so that England and France would not support the South.

The second was intended to start a slave revolt in the South, where only women and children were at home, the idea being to cause the wholesale murder and pillage of the soldier's families at home, thus necitation the return of the soldiers from the field.

It did work to keep out the foriegn powers, but it did not incite a single insurrection at home. The reason it did not is because the slaves were happy at home; they were Southern born and bred and it was their homes that were being invaded also and their women were treated even worse than the white women by the yankee vandals.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#14
Guest
Guest

actually the civil war didn't start because of slavery, what it really started of is the south wanting to break a part from the north. Slavery didn't come into play in the war until other countries started helping the south. Then Abe wrote the Emancipation Proclamation making the war about slavery. The reason he did this is because when other countries started helping Abe knew that they didn't like slavery either. So he made the war about the civil war

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#15
Karen_J
Guest

There was only one major reason why the Deep South wanted to leave the Union, and that was to insure the continuation of slavery. They had no other serious arguments with the North.

CSA border states did not leave the Union until after South Carolina fired on federal forces.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#16
fstroupe
Champion
Blogs: 25
Forum: 1,458
Votes: 21
Karen_J wrote:
There was only one major reason why the Deep South wanted to leave the Union, and that was to insure the continuation of slavery. They had no other serious arguments with the North.

CSA border states did not leave the Union until after South Carolina fired on federal forces.
You should study a little more history....like American politics between 1820 and 1860. The South had nothing but serious arguments with the North by 1860. The two sections had grown so far apart that they had little in common.

I know that you are quoting what you have been taught, but the politically correct answer has little or nothing to do with the actual truth.
Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#17
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16
fstroupe wrote:
Karen_J wrote:
There was only one major reason why the Deep South wanted to leave the Union, and that was to insure the continuation of slavery. They had no other serious arguments with the North.

CSA border states did not leave the Union until after South Carolina fired on federal forces.
You should study a little more history....like American politics between 1820 and 1860. The South had nothing but serious arguments with the North by 1860. The two sections had grown so far apart that they had little in common.

I know that you are quoting what you have been taught, but the politically correct answer has little or nothing to do with the actual truth.


Troup is is correct here of course.

and Karen you may honestly believe your statement (and BTW believing something don't make it so) but even if your statement were even partly accurate you MUST STILL ask your self this question:

What argument did the federal government (lincoln et al.) have with the South? Why did lincoln very deliberately provoke the war without even an attempt at a negotiated peace settlement? It certainly wasn't because of slavery (and lincoln said so more than once).

BTW the 4 States of the upper South DID NOT secede because the CS government responded to a blatant and deliberate provocation and attempted invasion by firing on Sumter. They seceded because abe after that very deliberate act in effect declared war on the States of the South and asked them to send him State troops to help him wage an unconstitutional war.
Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#18
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16
Guest wrote:
actually the civil war didn't start because of slavery, what it really started of is the south wanting to break a part from the north. Slavery didn't come into play in the war until other countries started helping the south. Then Abe wrote the Emancipation Proclamation making the war about slavery. The reason he did this is because when other countries started helping Abe knew that they didn't like slavery either. So he made the war about the civil war :thumb-up:


Secession did not start the war. South Carolina Seceded December 20, 1860. If Secession was the cause of the war why did it not start until nearly four months later?

You can argue the cause of secession til the cows come home but the patent fact is the war started because lincoln an his pals very carefully and very deliberately PROVOKED it. This fact is manifest
Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#19
maggie jones tanquary
Guest

Totally agree. Kids are taught that Lincoln was some sort of a folk hero..nonsense..warmonger and frankmason..

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#20
Karen_J
Guest

These last four responses are very vague and unsupported by facts.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#21
Shannon Pritchard
Guest

I believe they are very detailed and contain many pertinent facts.

People tend to take it personally when they are told they are wrong. Please don't. Instead use this as an opportunity to study the War and its causes. Not from some text book written by the victors, but go the primary sources before and during the War. You will find that Lincoln intentionally started a war in order to loot the South. When the South seceded it cut off Lincoln's industrialist supporters cash cow, and that would not do.

The overreaching Federal Government we have today is a direct result of the South losing that war.

The South fought for Constitutional liberty, just as their forefathers had done.

Just as the Government of today has thrown out what was left of the Constitution and we are yoked by regulators and bureaucrats who do not really have the(legal) constitutional authority, the people of the South (and many in the north who were summarily imprisoned without trial) were being robbed and oppressed by the government. The remedy was secession.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#22
Karen_J
Guest

I've studied plenty, over a period of many years.

What I need to do now is stay off forums like this one.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#23
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16
Karen_J wrote:
These last four responses are very vague and unsupported by facts.


Lincoln & co. very carefully and very deliberately provoked the war. Again this fact is manifest.

I suppose one could believe that this is "unsupported by facts" but the ONLY way an honest person could believe this is if they simply don't know (and/or don't WANT to know) the facts. But "vague"? I hardly think so. I don't see how the statement could be put in more clear terms.

If you are willing to learn what abe actually did and said, and just as importantly what he did not say and do, in the months leading up to Sumter Here is a good treatment of the subject. Read it if you want to know the truth of the matter (and all of it is supported by the federal government's own "official record" and other written documents that are readily available if you wish to check them out yourself). If you don't want to know the truth then don't read this and just continue to rely on the conventional wisdom and politically correctness of court "historians", lies, half truths and all.
http://americancivilwar.com/authors/Joseph_Ryan/ Articles/Lincoln-Instigated-War/The-Buried-Fact- Record.html
Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#24
Shannon Pritchard
Guest

If ignorance is preferable to intellectual honesty, by all means, only converse with those who agree with you. If you have no thoughts to articulate, or If you cannot articulate your thoughts, you have spoken (typed) without thought. Meaning you are speaking in ignorance.
To be ignorant is not an insult, nor intended to be, ignorant means to not be apprised of the facts.

I find this is always the case with the South's detractors, and liberals in general. Intellectual debate is much more difficult than emotional self righteousness. So stay in the cozy corner you have made for yourself, spend your life absorbed with the latest Hollywood idol or the latest fashion, but never, never take the time to think or discuss your opinions to see if they will stand in the face of adversity.

That way you can go pass through your years on earth and die in peace, but you unfortunately will never have lived.

I encourage you to begin an honest search for wisdom. Should you decide to do so, I recommend you begin with "The real Lincoln" and then Pollard's History of the War. Should you desire more book recommendations, please feel free to email me anytime. Education is free, but it cannot be found at most Universities at any price.

None of the above is intended to be insulting, demeaning or in anyway offensive. I offer it in love and kindness. Do not let the sting of truth turn you from it.

May God bless you, keep you and guide you.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#25
Karen_J
Guest

The last thing I wanted to do was mistakenly wander into a forum that is 100% pro-South. Sorry for wasting your time.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#26
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16

This forum is certainly not pro or con anything. Many of us here though are pro truth. I don't consider the truth a waste of time. You are certainly welcome here any time.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#27
Shannon Pritchard
Guest

To wander into the truth can be disconcerting if one is not used to doing so.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#28
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16

and BTW if you prefer a civil war forum that does not allow any descent from political correctness (aka the truth) there are several out there. Just do a google search for "civil war forum" and start visiting some of the sites with the most traffic other than this one (unfortunately it seems most Americans do not want to hear anything except politically correct myths and out ant out fraud (see blog below) about the WBTS)


http://www.americancivilwarforum.com/150th-of-fort- sumter-and-an-historic-fraud-313.html

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#29
Karen_J
Guest

I was just caught off guard by the lack of diversity of opinion. Usually, online, you can't get a group of Americans to agree that grass is green and the sky is blue.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
1 year ago#30
macreverie
Ace
Blogs: 26
Forum: 986
Votes: 16

I am not espousing opinion here but demonstrable manifest fact using the federal governments own documents and "honest" abes own words to condemn him.

Further communication on this topic has been disabled.
By entering this site you declare you read and agreed to its Terms, Rules & Privacy and you understand that your use of the site's content is made at your own risk and responsibility.
Copyright © 2006 - 2015 American Civil War Forum