In a recent episode John Oliver said the cause of the American Civil War as 99% slavery and 1% other stuff?
Now I know this is incorrect, but I am having a hard time creating a counterargument as I am not too well-versed into this topic. What exactly exactly was the war fought about?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtu.be
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
abrahamlincolnonline.org
avalon.law.yale.edu
twitter.com
Who cares what that faggot thinks.
States' rights to own slaves
I sure am glad we have socially inept Brit to lecture us on our politics. It's almost as if (((they))) aren't trying to piss us off and cause civil war
The war was fought for the reason all wars are fought, for resources and land. Nobody actually gave a shit about the nogs .
The war was fought for money and state rights , the money from slavery and right of the state to keep slaves
> What exactly exactly was the war fought about?
Your fat ugly face.
...
Pajeet gets it.
>The war was fought for the reason all wars are fought, for resources and land. Nobody actually gave a shit about the nogs .
and blacks were resources. therefor, slavery. therefor racism you white pig
He’s right. The Chair of the History Department at the Military Academy at West Point says the same thing. You can find the ((((Prager)))) video on jewtube.
that weaselly looking cuck can choke on michelle's dick
Not racism you literal tool, race selecting, some races are better as gelded labor's.
In the south it was a second revolutionary war and in the north it was the preservation of the union. Nobody with sense in the lowest classes cared for slaves to be freed as it would create only that much more economic competition.
India........................
>What exactly exactly was the war fought about?
It was fought over tariffs.
It's why one of the first (if not the first?) was at a fort known for tax collection and had no one shot. The south had some troops go there as a symbolic show of force to basically go "don't tax our shit" and in retaliation Lincoln started the civil war.
Big problem was Lincoln was wanting to increase trade tariffs on the exporting of resources from the South to Europe so that they'd be forced to sell to factories in the North, which could then sell their goods to Europe just fine. The effect being the south was kept poor while the north profited. The South thought that was shitty and that they'd just leave.
Anyone that says slavery was the reason is just wildly ignorant about history.
>I know hes wrong but i base this on nothing at all
Come on, user ...
Honestly I don't understand how anyone pretends like the civil war was some sort of mystery. The confederacy spelled out their motivations time and time again. Read the Declarations of Causes for yourself.
Its slavery, user.
Slavery was a multifaceted issue, and each of those issues are separately addressed, but it was still nearly entirely about slavery.
Filthy democrats.
East India Company?
The simplest way to put it for normies is to ask if they think some normal guy would be willing to fight a war to end slavery. And remember that the yankees hated niggers then too.
Uh. . .
Plenty people in the south even hated slavery because it acted the way illegal immigration does today, it drove down wages.
Anyone who denies to was economic related is a moron
Based pajeet im proud of you
people have never fought a war other than for money. there has to be gains in wealth, otherwise you are pretty fucking stupid. no one fights wars for ideals.
jesus christ you must be really retarded to listen to someone like john cuckiver
Its fucking beautiful im keeping that pepe
>it was about tarrifs
>heres an unsubstantiated anecdote about how i continue believing this despite not a single reputable historian agreeing with me
>let me ignore the hundreds of pages of surviving primary-source information from the leaders of the confederacy and the seceding states and their sitting legislatures that spell out their motivations for forming and joining the confederacy in simple language.
save it friend, it's all yours!
Fucking niggers are degenerates. In india we have dalits who are still better than you filthy ape chimps
Rome eradicated Carthage 99% it was demanded by Jupiter and Saturn and 1% other stuff.
>tfw the emancipation proclamation didn't apply to slave states loyal to the Union
I have some rare ones.
He was a pretty great president.
Blacks literally weren't even people back then. They were not considered people. Do you get that. Like, modern day, you turn on the TV and see a black dude reporting about something on the news, or you watch a sports program and there are black people on the team, or you go to a gas station and see a black person getting gas - these are all completely alien examples of existence that the founding fathers had no concept of, that even those fighting in the civil war couldn't imagine. Black people were basically furniture that could move. You tasked a black to sweep the floors and it looked like the broom was sweeping on its own. You tasked a black to pick cotton and suddenly you got a bunch of floating baskets in your field sucking up cotton. It was like magic. To them, black people were what we think robots will one day be, just human-shaped objects that operate tirelessly to please their masters.
Tariffs were at an all time low. The bill to raise them was stalled in committee, and only passed when the South walked out of Congress.
Ironically, it is YOU who are ignorant of history. Read a fucking book and avoid those retarded YouTube videos.
Who gives a fuck, nobody alive today in the USA owned slaves. It sucks that they are going to never let it go and use it as a wedge from now till the end of the country.
Watch this it's Ryan Dawson's "Get Redpilled on the Civil War" youtu.be
The north opressed the poor southern farmers. 1 in 5 died. The south shall rise again.
>hurdur it was economics not slaves
Slaves were the economy you morons.
That economy and culture was being taken away from the south on several fronts. They weren't going to let the abolitionist status quo continue and The north wasn't going to let them secede, nor was it in a position to turn public opinion on its head or start reinforcing the fugitive slave act.
This basic concept is spelled out in so many primary source documents I can't understand why you people won't just fucking read even a single one of them.
It was about the cultural and economic division between north and South.
North had family run farms, the south had plantations using slave labour.
Slavery is only a sideeffect but not the main cause of the war.
The war was started over slavery. The South fought to keep the yanks from raping and pillaging everything they could get their degenerate hands on, and lost, unfortunately.
Few can appreciate the difference.
Money, state right etc
Southern states felt fucked over by the fed whom favored northern states and gave them economic advantages, slavery wasn't that important to the economy and would most likely had become illegal within 10 years anyway.
When northern armies marched in the south they destroyed everything of economic value the could, tools, farms... Back then there where plenty of skilled black craftsmen around, but after the war there was just no market to sell their goods to any more.
South had a agriculture based economy (largely due to slavery), north had a industry based economy. US industry had a hard time competing with European industry, so the federal government put in some protectionist legislation on industrial products. This helped the north, but hurt the south, because the south imported machinery from Europe. In doing so the federal government singalled that they prefer the interests of the north to those of the south, so secessionism rose in the south.
At least that's what I learned in high school.
Tarrifs on products that targeted the south for the benefit of the north. Lincoln forced every "freed" slave in the south into conscription, and once the war was over, he lobbied to force blacks back to Africa.
Niggers had barely any rights until 1965, why would people give a shit about them a century earlier? Revisionist arguments about fighting muh ebil natzees for ideological reasons in WWII are of the same caliber of stupidity. Both were about the usual things, power, resources, money.
The issue was self determination... of issues such as slavery.
As much as I would like to be an apologist, slavery was really fucking important to powerful institutions in the south, but it was definitely on the decline at the point of the civil war; restrictions on the slave trade made importing new slaves impossible, the issues created by the fugitive slave laws made non-compliance with slavery a moral issue, and the economy of the south was stagnant for the lower agricultural class as they had to compete with slave labor.
Slavery was essentially the issue in the window that everyone saw, self determination was a foaming resentment that had been brewing since the constitution. You have to remember that when the 1790 census was formally released, the population divide north south was about 50/50 including the enslaved, by the start of the war it was roughly 33/66 including the enslaved. The reason for the 3/5th's compromise was essentially that no one in their right fucking mind would sign themselves into a democracy as a minority opinion if they could prevent it.
So, by this point, the South realistically had a declining power balance and no real way to recuperate it. I imagine if the South had won the war, it probably would have slowly dismantled slavery as industrialization made it less profitable and it damaged public relations post scramble for Africa.
The civil war is what I like to call the first false flag in the US (at least to my knowledge.) There was no law against secession, and slavery sure as shit wasn't illegal. It was more like "how dare the south break away from glorious America." Now, from what I remember, the south was tricked into a war with the north. This is going to be a stupid explination, but its all I remember:
The north sent some guys to the south to rile them up. This worked. The south went to the north and shot up, say, a farm or some sort of property or establishment or town. This gave the north an excuse to fight the south, and thus the civil war was begun.
Or something like that. In another way to put it: The north tricked the south into a war.
It was fought between states rights vs centraizedl government
The south believed the state law should be more important than federal and the North vice versa
I don't know if that's a shit description of Bleeding Kansas or if you're just blowing smoke.
>John Oliver
What ever you do don't send him back here, there's a good reason why people like him don't have careers here, they are stupid, they are not funny, they are arrogant, they are self righteous and rescind their right to be a UK citizen when they fuck off and live elsewhere.
tl;dr? Put him in the trash compactor.
It probably was bleeding kansas. It's been a while since I even looked at the civil war, to be totally honest. It's very low on my "Shit to remember or care about" list
John Brown was the first Lee Harvey Oswald, or the first in American history. The reptilians aren't that more advanced than us they just can still make believe that controlling the apes can work.
you can tell if someone is a fucking retard or not if they say that slavery caused the civil war
No it wasn't. It was started over the North unfairly taxing the South. The whole slave argument didn't enter the equation until a few years in when Lincoln realized the North might lose the war. That's when it was made about slaves, when Lincoln got scared and tried to fracture the south with the "Slave Rebellion"
The British did the sane thing during the American Revolution. They convinced thousands of slaves that they were the good guys and the should fight against the Americans. 10,000+ slaves flipped and joined British forces, most thinking that the American revolution was about slavery too. Dumb niggers are too easily manipulated.
>slavery wasn't that big of an issue
You realize the 'states constitutional rights' issue mentioned in the Confederate declarations is the fugitive slave act, right? They cite it over and over again directly as their primary complaint.
The north wasn't honoring the fugitive slave act and refused to do so.
The north did not want to allow the slave trade into the expanding new territories.
Abolitionism was the prevailing public culture in the north and was demonstrably expanding south into the Carolinas.
Not even a single point of this is debatable. Every surviving primary document from the Lincoln administration, Confederate leadership, and southern state legislatures confirms this.
>This is going to be a stupid expliniation
You don't dissapoint, user.
>Seceding wasn't illegal
Neither is war but one demands the other. The 'first shot' of the war is debated but unimportant. As soon as the south declared independence and made it clear that it was an irreversible decision, war become a guarantee. The political lines and talks drawn beforehand made it clear that both sides understood this.
>You don't dissapoint, user.
I try not to!
Freedom of Slaves was inevitable due to the geopolitical conditions of the time.
Under 300 were used in total, mainly for spying. Our military leaders feared arming them up in case they started shit, it was the revolutionaries that had more slaves in their ranks with false promises. No the UK went on a mission of forming alliances with the Indians, warning them of what was to come should the revolutionaries win. Turns out, we were correct in our predictions.
Oh well.
The American Civil war happened because people disagreed with the results of the presidential election. Lincoln won and it pissed off everyone who voted for John C. Breckinridge. They said "not my president" and succeeded.
Eerily similar to current events. California is the new Confederate Union.
The southern states explicitly cited maintaining the institution of Slavery as their primary cause and justification for seceeding from the Union and forming the confederacy, user.
These are primary documents from the founders of the confederacy and the states which formed it. They spelled out their intentions and reasoning clear as day and in their own words, they did it because of slavery.
The South in all of its uneducated glory has tried and sadly succeeded for generations now to dilute this once-obvious and undebated truth and to peddle this stupid historical revisionism about confederate intentions. WE DON'T NEED TO GUESS WHAT THE WAR WAS ABOUT 150 YEARS LATER, THEY SPELLED IT OUT WHEN IT HAPPENED (its a 7 letter word, starts with S ends with LAVERY)
California is being punished by God right now.
This:
Just look at the North's/Lincoln's view on niggers to see that it was in now way a war over the morality of slavery.
North was bullying the south
Meme flags were a mistake
1/2 Slavery and the states individual right to own them
1/4 cultural differences (north and south people are very different and in some cases have opposing values)
1/4 Economic reasons
Slavery was a big part of it, but not all of it. What pisses us off is how they only want to focus on slavery, while the other shit that pissed us off just got worse for everyone as time went on but everyone wants to act like its a-OK
t.Historian.
Its alot like saying civil war 2 will be fought over lgbt rights and ignoring everything else
A states right to own slaves is a states rights issue. One not threatened in 1861. The South Carolina secession ordinance goes into a long list of grievances some slavery related others not. The war was fought over the same shit we argue about today. What is the limit of federal authority.
Republicans were actually the ones who wanted equal rights the most.
>picture related
One thing you need to know that there were more than 2 sides and republicans/democrats weren't confederates, since they were pro-federalism. Confederates didn't want constitution, so modern republicans might claim they are following constitution like good boys, but that's not what confederates were about.
>The other problems just got worse
You started a war you couldn't win, didn't surrender, and necessitated the destruction of much of the south.
Of course the southern economy came out shit and the south in general came out of the war even more cucked than it was before.
That's what you get for starting and losing a civil war.
It wasn't any of it. Lincoln told they south that they could keep slavery if they remained in the union.
And you know what? I can't wait for the next one that is almost a certainty within my lifetime. Times have changed. Allegiances have changed. Weapons and tactics have changed.
Things will either result in our freedom or everyone's death. If we burn, you will burn too.
>Post War
Well, no shit Republicans wanted the black vote. Like if the the modern congress could effectively neuter their opposition they would, well, they would if (((They))) weren't on the same side.
This. White people always do this when they defend the Confederacy, when the reality is the only reason why they defend it is because they fought for slavery.
We will literally never get rid of their bullshit until the situation is reversed and whites are made into slaves.
Yet the South was offered to keep all of it's slaves if it remained in the union but it seceeded anyways. The Emancipation Proclamation didn't include border states and guess what? Those states had slaves. Also 3 Northern states rejected the 13 amendment and 5 Northern States had slaves and continued to have slaves even after the war was over....So how the fuck was this about slavery again?
Checked
>One not threatened in 1861
>The South Carolina secession ordinance goes into a long list of grievances some slavery related others not.
I posted the South Carolina declaration of causes here, user
Its 100% about slavery. Every single constitutional reference included in the document is a reference to Article 4 (the fugitive slave act)
It also spells out very clearly that South Carolina felt that their right to own slaves was very much under attack.
To be fair though, there was nothing wrong with slavery.
>The South will Rise again
Both confederates and anti-confederates wanted United States of America and congress, but confederates didn't want this United States of America where federal congress system taxes, controls trade with stocks and controls military.
tariffs on import goods
Sure will, Le'monjello Al-Detroiti.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with enslaving other races.
Its a lot more honest to enslave someone than to riddle them with debt burdens that they have no way of ever paying off, which is the modern western method with Africa.
Lincoln was a tyrant who sacrificed hundreds of thousands of his loyal people and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of their peers for the sake of a powerful federal state.
Lincoln enforced the Federal Law that was already in place that banned the importation of slaves.
He also gave the Royal Navy the green light to intercept all slaver ships en route to the Americas. Gotta be damaging for profits that. You spend money kitting out a ship, getting the crew, getting an advance on your predicted income from each worker. Yeah that's gotta sting like a bitch. It would make me want to put a bullet in Lincoln's head too.
Its about slavery because that's exactly what the fucking Confederacy said it was about.
The seceded form the Union because the north refused to honor the fugitive slave act, because abolitionist culture was bleeding into the south, and because the expanding territories wanted to be new slave states and the federal government wasn't having it.
The Lincoln administration wasn't in any position to start reinforcing the fugitive slave act throughout the north, nor could it reverse public opinion on the topic.
"keeping the slaves it had" wasn't the fucking point of the civil war, user. Nobody is telling you that the North started the civil war to end slavery, and the south responded to defend it. It was the other fucking way around.
Slavery wasn't a motivating factor for the north, it was a motivating factor for the south. Actually read any of the primary documents i've posted in this thread and try telling me that the Confederacy wasn't about maintaining slavery.
Lincoln refused to accept the South's secession. His sole reason for the war was for the Union to remain whole. He literally said that he didn't give two shits about slavery, and if slavery was necessary in order to keep the Union whole, then he would support slavery. Likewise, if abolition of slavery was necessary to keep the Union whole, he'd support that too.
>Source: Lincoln's open letter to Horace Greeley
abrahamlincolnonline.org
Slavery was ONLY made an issue in the war because the European countries demanded it abolished, in order to render their aid to the North.
The confederates thought that their territories should be treated more like countries then provinces=war
>The South didn't want a strong federal government in which they had little say
Really makes you think.
avalon.law.yale.edu
Your version left out quite a bit.
But Lincoln didn't screw up federal system to fall into private hands, it's aim was to not be influenced by private free trade, like Alexander Hamilton defined.
wut
Poortugal an Greece, massive unemployment and social services collapsing
>we need more migrants...
Gotta feel some pity for the South, Lincoln could have resolved this issue with diplomacy, instead he marched men from the North to kill their own brothers and sisters.
What an absolute cunt, what ever side you support both sides should be more humble and graceful. There is no glory or pride in killing your own countrymen, in fact it's rather shameful that it comes down to that.
>What exactly exactly was the war fought about?
Unionization and federalization of the Southern Confederate states. It was literally much less about slavery than the crybabies are trying to make it out to be.
t. Southerner
Note that the plural verb "are" was used before and a little while longer after the Civil War, providing further evidence that the "United States of America" are plural. State's Rights WAS paramount.
as implied by the plural term "States"
This should put this topic to rest.
They wanted equal rights across USA, confederates wanted different laws across states.
>oldfag who remembers when Sup Forums was a libertarian board
Eighty replies and no one mentions free trade and tariffs. Oh well.
OP, the South want free trade with Europe to sell their cotton. The North wanted tariffs to protect Northern industry. In that sense, the Confederacy proved to be more long term in lined with the course of world history. WW1 was also mostly about (the lack) of free trade with superior German products.
>Slavery was ONLY made an issue in the war because the European countries demanded it abolished, in order to render their aid to the North.
Lincolns motivations aren't the ones that define why the war happened, user.
The south didn't just want to keep its slaves. They wanted their fugitive slaves back, and they wanted to expand slavery into the new territories, and they wanted abolitionism to stop bleeding past into the south.
Lincoln couldn't make those consessions even if he wanted to.
The south formed the Confederacy and seceded from the Union 100% in defense of slavery
The North went to war with the Confederacy to maintain the union.
Its really not that hard to understand, user.
Which part didn't you understand?
I cannot watch this guys show. I just cannot. I do not know what it is but I cringe so hard everytime he opens his mouth.
Is it the fact that he has this vibe of the mentally retarded kid in class who still thinks he has to educate everyone?
Is it the fact that he blabbers bullshit and that I know that liberal people at my Uni will quote him?
Why do I actually find him so insufferable, its the same with German TV "Comedy"