I need well-sourced reasons why the civil war was fought to redpill my family.
The mere fact that almost all southern soldiers owned zero slaves (backed by census data) is being ignored. They want to know why it was started rather than my reasons for why it wasn’t started.
Give me other reasons reasons the civil war was fought backed by sources. What acts or laws caused this rebellions?
Civil war
Sebastian Cooper
Other urls found in this thread:
civilwar.org
paulcraigroberts.org
marottaonmoney.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Samuel Reyes
NYC Jews had a monopoly on the republics politics, they penalized each state they could with trade and tariff. It was an economic war, a states rights war (dont tell me what to do even if you're right!) and a war on immigration (fought and won by foreigners mostly Irish).
I believe if a similar war broke out the same tactic would be used, opening the flood gates to Mexican and other immigrants with a train ride to the front lines to kill patriots. That is how against the people the govt is was and will be.
Thomas Hughes
Got a reputable source I can use for this?
Google is kiked
Camden Gomez
civilwar.org
Every single declaration of war states defense of slavery as an institution as primary cause
Josiah Morgan
The north offered the south indefinite slavery if they agreed to stay in the union.
The war was not about slavery, but about money. The south generated much of the country's revenue, yet the money was spent disproportionately on improving northern infrastructure, while the south remained impoverished.
paulcraigroberts.org
marottaonmoney.com
Christian Walker
fighting for slave is a good reason why tell them otherwise
Jason Stewart
>civilwar.org
>implying we weren’t all taught this in 2nd grade.
Looking for alternative motives for poor white people with no slaves to throw their life away in order to keep their wages low.
Kayden Hall
Bump
Jack Wilson
States rights
Isaiah Russell
Someone on this thread inadvertently led me to the
>Corwin amendment
Mason Gomez
I don't have a source, because this isn't a hard specific fact but still: the Civil War happened because the North and the South were allowed to develop along separate economic and cultural lines since before the revolution. Northerners and Southerners became separate peoples with separate identities, while economic differences became entrenched (the south being agricultural and the north industrializing). Slavery was only one facet of this divide. You cannot have such a clear divide between two halves of a country without war resulting, it was inevitable. The Founders doomed the country to that split by largely hand-waving away racial/national identity as a problem, as well as by not solving the negro question when they had the chance. They were too caught up in their Enlightenment ideals and thought America would not become subject to ethnic conflict like in Europe. Reconstruction was a failure in many ways, but it actually did go a long way to putting the two halves in the same identity group again, although the shock of the war helped too. Also westward expansion and rapidly developing high speed communications helped too. But we never solved the national question, only put it aside. And then we let in hordes of non-Whites and, worst of all, Jews who proceeded to subvert our identity further. The divide is not so clearly geographic anymore, but America is due for another civil war.
Gabriel Fisher
Lincoln supported high tariffs which would have wrecked the South’s agrarian based economy. Stress the fact that NOT A SINGLE southern state put in a single electoral vote for him and he still won, therefore the south was being ruled by a man that they overwhelmingly did not want. Tell them if California wanted to secede today because of president trump would they be willing to fight themselves? And if they aren’t then why would they be willing to vote for somebody else to do it? And if they are not, why wouldn’t they support the southern states rights to do it? You can also google the column by “Walter Williams” he is a black man who supports the souths right to secede, basically a conservative libertarian economist. He makes a great argument for it, print it out and show it to them.
Asher Sanders
Also OP, find an article that talks about the English civil war and how it relates to the American civil war and show it to your family. The southerners were descendants of Royalist Cavaliers that supported King Charles and absolute monarchy, versus the roundheads who supported Oliver Cromwell and the Parliament. Puritans who settled the northern states are descendants of Roundheads. You should be able to find a good article about this to print out.
Parker Mitchell
>the founders doomed
This is where we disagree. The founders envisioned a federal government that barely fucking existed outside of defense and contract disputes. It was the growth of the federal government that caused the civil war (but an unacceptable answer for my family).
The Corwin amendment did it. They accepted there must have been other reasons since a concession of slavery by the north was offered.
If slavery was the only or primary motivator, the Corwin amendment would have avoided war. I would still like to see more (cited) evidence of WHY we fought the war, but I am satisfied showing good, documented reason the war could NOT have been about slavery as a primary focus.
>I clicked 49 signs to post this reply
Fuck you hiroshimoot give me my fucking legacy captcha.
Nathan Cook
Questions of identity supersede questions of institutions. A smaller government wouldn't have been able invade the South, but the South and the North would have split even sooner without a large joint government they were both invested in economically.
Also the captcha is fucking terrible.
Sebastian Williams
Checked
Camden Taylor
Tariffs, Blockades, and Inflation: The Economics of the Civil War
By Robert B. Ekelund Jr., Mark Thornton
Hunter Robinson
The United States was just as big of a mistake as the EU. Bigger, even, since we couldn’t point at a historical success to justify it.
Nicholas Thompson
John Watson
I dont care what you need
you and your family are meaningless
let your family continue to believe what they want to believe and be irrelevant
Charles Hill
Th-thanks for the bump senpai
Connor Nguyen
North had federal/national bank
South had agricultural, exported goods for money
North was making profit
South was getting robbed
South wanted to secede
North depended economy on South
Federal Bank in North was connected to the Bank of England which was controlled by the Rothschild
North had to make sure the South reunited, or else the Union would collapse
South refuse
War breaks out
Jews fund both sides of war like they always do. They profit from the war.
The South is back with the North. Jews profit again
Lincoln wanted to ship the slaves back to Africa. Before doing so, he was assassinated. Slaves were practically working for free and the exports of the US depended completely on their labor.
Owen Lee
I get it bro, but I need fucking SOURCES.
So far the Corwin amendment has won the fight.
Gabriel Kelly
>I get it bro, but I need fucking SOURCES.
>Tariffs, Blockades, and Inflation: The Economics of the Civil War
>By Robert B. Ekelund Jr., Mark Thornton
Charles Sullivan
>The mere fact that almost all southern soldiers owned zero slaves (backed by census data) is being ignored.
This fact gets misinterpreted a lot. While the number of people who actually owned slaves was very low, a single slave owning man could support an extended family of many more people. The proportion of people in slave owning states who depended on the greater system of slavery to make a living was reasonable high.
That's not to say that defending slavery was the only or even the main reason for the south's secession, but the idea that their soldiers would not want to defend their system as a whole simply because they personally didn't own slaves doesn't really add up.