Causes Of The Civil War

Casus Belli

I'm just going to leave this here:


The horrific events in Charleston, South Carolina have ignited renewed debate about the Confederate battle flag that flies at South Carolina’s capitol building in Columbia. It’s an opportunity for educators to revisit the nature of the Confederacy that the flag represented. As Ta-Nehisi Coates points out in this article, originally published by The Atlantic, the secession of Southern states was triggered by one thing: the desperate quest to preserve slavery. So often, textbooks have repeated the propaganda of Confederate apologists: “The Civil War was fought to preserve states rights.” Oh, really? Where was this love for states rights when the South demanded strict enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act, so that Northern states could not become a haven for people escaping slavery?

Coates returns us to the documents that articulated the “Cause” of the Confederacy. From the moment in December of 1860 when South Carolina became the first state to secede from the Union to the post-war terror of the Ku Klux Klan to the era of Jim Crow to today’s voter-suppression efforts, the Confederate flag has stood for white supremacy. Coates’ article—clear and hard-hitting—is a good place for educators to begin rethinking the meaning of this symbol of domination.

By Ta-Nehisi Coates
From The Atlantic Monthly, June 22, 2015

This afternoon, in announcing her support for removing the Confederate flag from the capitol grounds, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley asserted that killer Dylann Roof had “a sick and twisted view of the flag” which did not reflect “the people in our state who respect and in many ways revere it.” If the governor meant that very few of the flag’s supporters believe in mass murder, she is surely right. But on the question of whose view of the Confederate Flag is more twisted, she is almost certainly wrong.Roof’s belief that black life had no purpose beyond subjugation is “sick and twisted” in the exact same manner as the beliefs of those who created the Confederate flag were “sick and twisted.” The Confederate flag is directly tied to the Confederate cause, and the Confederate cause was white supremacy. This claim is not the result of revisionism. It does not require reading between the lines. It is the plain meaning of the words of those who bore the Confederate flag across history. These words must never be forgotten. Over the next few months the word “heritage” will be repeatedly invoked. It would be derelict to not examine the exact contents of that heritage.

This examination should begin in South Carolina, the site of our present and past catastrophe. South Carolina was the first state to secede, two months after the election of Abraham Lincoln. It was in South Carolina that the Civil War began, when the Confederacy fired on Fort Sumter. The state’s casus belli was neither vague nor hard to comprehend:

…A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.

In citing slavery, South Carolina was less an outlier than a leader, setting the tone for other states, including Mississippi:

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin…

Louisiana:

As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of an*nexation not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country. The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery.

Alabama:

Upon the principles then announced by Mr. Lincoln and his leading friends, we are bound to expect his administration to be conducted. Hence it is, that in high places, among the Republi*can party, the election of Mr. Lincoln is hailed, not simply as it change of Administration, but as the inauguration of new princi*ples, and a new theory of Government, and even as the downfall of slavery. Therefore it is that the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than a solemn declaration, on the part of a great majority of the Northern people, of hostility to the South, her property and her institutions—nothing less than an open declaration of war—for the triumph of this new theory of Government destroys the property of the South, lays waste her fields, and inaugurates all the horrors of a San Domingo servile insurrection, consigning her citizens to assassinations, and. her wives and daughters to pollution and violation, to gratify the lust of half-civilized Africans.

Texas:

…in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states….
 
I've studied the Civil War for 54 years, and many of the conclusions about the war, and the meanings of events, are as valid as Hillary or Bills testimony in Congress or in any court.

Most of the Original 13 States added conditions to their ratifications of the Constitution, and Madison is on record assuring Patrick Henry that Union wasn't the same as Nationalization of every person and State. We are The United STATES of America NOT The United STATE of America. At the time South Carolina seceded, secession was a viable, peaceful political outcome for domestic strife. Neither James Buchanan or Lincoln ever tested this secession theory in the Supreme Court. What Lincoln did was recruit and organize an army to force the Gulf States to become Federal property. Lincoln wasn't a mystery to anyone, his efforts on behalf of Northern railroads during the Bloody Kansas Crisis were well known. Lawyer Lincoln used railroad money to foment violence along the Missouri-Kansas border. He bought weapons and recruited violent men to come and agitate. The Gulf States were out of the Union weeks and months before Lincoln took office, and the Congress had President Buchanan had done little about the crisis. Lincoln came in and started a civil war by re-supplying a fort on foreign soil without SCOTUS approval. The Gulf States had reason to believe he couldn't be trusted, and he never was.
 
I read somewhere that Abraham Lincoln was a racist shitstain. I suppose he was secretly wishing his side would lose so he could get some of those African slaves for hisself.
 
Here you go, in their exact words:
\

You are claiming that South Carolina represented the entirety of the CSA and all of the secession states. It's noticeable that their declaration provides many reasons, not just slavery - it is almost a minor point. I always prefer originals, not the edited versions that are posted online and sometimes edited or rewritten. Here is the original;
https://archive.org/details/declarationofim00sout



What of the others which seceded? Arizona seceded as well, and they didn't have slavery. Most of the seceding states also mention that murderers were being allowed to escape justice by fleeing to states such as Iowa and Ohio. The compact between the states that was agreed upon was being broken. Only Mississippi specifically mentions the importance of slavery as critical to their economy, and they wanted fairness and compensation in the same manner as the British government had done when abolishing slavery.

Slavery was legal in the Union too, several Northern states were slave-holding.

Lincoln proposed the Corwin Amendment - and signed it. This would've guaranteed slavery permanently it if had passed.

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

Lincoln's proclamation in 1864 exempted all of the slavery in the Northern states. The Union had laws preventing “free” black people from having rights as citizens. Two acts of the USA Congress were passed during the Civil War, one in 1864 and one in 1866, which allowed slave-owners whose slaves enlisted or were drafted into the Union military to file a claim against the Federal government for loss of the slave’s services. In areas loyal to the Union, slaves were not emancipated until 3 years after the war.

Union General Ulysses S Grant kept his slaves until well after the War ended. Union soldiers were permitted to confiscate slaves in rebel territory and put them to work for the Union army; still as slaves, they didn't "free" them.

In 1861, when Gen. John Fremont (who was commanding the Union occupation of Missouri) issued an order that freed some slaves in Missouri, Lincoln fired Fremont and rescinded the order.

There were 300,000 slave-holders on the Union side.

The war over slavery claim begins to fail when examined deeply. Not that this will stop the propaganda that portrays the Union as the good guys and the Southerners as evil.
 
Get over it Jethro, your boys lost.

Even General Lee himself said that the flag should be folded up, stored in an attic somewhere and never see the light of day again.

Oh and you misspelled BigDumb.
 
Get over it Jethro, your boys lost.
Win or lose isn't relevant to a discussion of what the causes of the secessions were. Nor to the reasons for the war that came afterwards.

The 'Charleston Mercury' stated two days before Lincoln was elected:

“The real causes of dissatisfaction in the South with the North, are in the unjust taxation and expenditure of the taxes by the Government of the United States, and in the revolution the North has effected in this government, from a confederated republic, to a national sectional despotism.”

On December 28, 1861 Charles Dickens published a lengthy article, believed to be written by Henry Morley, which blamed the American Civil War on the Morrill Tariff:

“If it be not slavery, where lies the partition of the interests that has led at last to actual separation of the Southern from the Northern States? …Every year, for some years back, this or that Southern state had declared that it would submit to this extortion only while it had not the strength for resistance. With the election of Lincoln and an exclusive Northern party taking over the federal government, the time for withdrawal had arrived … The conflict is between semi-independent communities [in which] every feeling and interest [in the South] calls for political partition, and every pocket interest [in the North] calls for union … So the case stands, and under all the passion of the parties and the cries of battle lie the two chief moving causes of the struggle. Union means so many millions a year lost to the South; secession means the loss of the same millions to the North. The love of money is the root of this, as of many other evils... [T]he quarrel between the North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel.”

In other words, for the simple mind such as yourself, the primary reason for the secessions and the real reason for the war as the same it usually is; M O N E Y.


Even General Lee himself said that the flag should be folded up, stored in an attic somewhere and never see the light of day again.

I'd like to see that quote, can you provide it?
 
I read somewhere that Abraham Lincoln was a racist shitstain. I suppose he was secretly wishing his side would lose so he could get some of those African slaves for hisself.

He was - and the North already had slavery. What makes you believe it didn't? Who taught you otherwise? Slavery was legal in the Union during the whole of the civil war period.

He supported the Corwin Amendment.


The Truth About Abraham Lincoln
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-W5fGCAzOk

Abraham Lincoln: What They Won't Teach You in School
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyNS1PMHPqo

Abraham Lincoln The Treasonous TYRANT - Judge Napolitano
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgA4qYpR5aI
 
In 1865, Lee wrote in a letter to the Gettysburg Identification Meeting committee that the flag should be put away — and hinted at the negative emotions it evokes to this day:

"I think it wisest not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the example of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, and to commit to oblivion the feelings it engendered."
-Robert E. Lee 1865, letter to the Gettysburg Identification Meeting

He refused to be buried in his confederate uniform and none of his pall bearers wore theirs because he considered it treasonous.

He wasn't alone.

"My pride is that that flag shall not set between contending brothers; and that, when it shall no longer be the common flag of the country, it shall be folded up and laid away like a vesture no longer used."
- Jefferson Davis "The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government"


Your revisionism aside, almost every single state in their letters of secession mention their right to slave ownership first and foremost, not a minor point among others. You can look them up if you're so inclined. they were enumerated in this thread earlier.
 
Last edited:
He was - and the North already had slavery. What makes you believe it didn't? Who taught you otherwise? Slavery was legal in the Union during the whole of the civil war period.

He supported the Corwin Amendment.

So, if Secession wasn't about slavery then why would the Corwin Amendment, which would have enshrined slavery into the Constitution, have stopped the Southern States from seceding?

That was the intent of the phasing included to deny “to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.”

Your assertion that Lincoln supported it is hazy at best. Lincoln sent the amendment to the states for consideration as he should have since it had already been approved by his predecessor James Buchanan. Only Ohio and Maryland ratified it and so it was rejected.
Your argument that secession wasn't about slavery doesn't hold water. The Southern States started seceding after Lincoln's election, fearing that his inauguration would mean the end of slavery.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top