yeah it was that black and white.
If any war ever was…
I don’t think when you’re talking to intellectually dishonest racists that you need to entertain the idea they are arguing in good faith about the primary motivation for the civil war. The point is that they’re mad racists and it’s fun to rile them up about a conflict the south started and then lost.
Ive called it the “Slaveholders Rebellion” because that’s what it was all about 🫡
Yes, it was a complex war, and worthy of study.
No, the South wasn’t fighting for (much of) anything more than keeping slavery. You are free to read the letters of succession that every state sent Congress and see for yourself, draw your own conclusions. My take away is that slavery was clearly the top concern, but they had other gripes as well.
No, the North wasn’t fighting so much for the rights of blacks. The North was hardly the “good guys” regarding that, but it’s damned fortuitous they won or we would have been split and weakened.
What happened after the war is perhaps more interesting than the casus belli.
If you know nothing about the civil war, you know it was about slavery.
If you know a little about the civil war you know it was abouts states rights.
If you know a lot about the civil war, you know it was about slavery.
it was about states rights to have slavery.
The war of southern white traitors failure to consider the very basics of supply and logistics that resulted the ruthless savagery being struck from the land by a cleansing march of fire to the sea?
The backstreet boys lasted longer than the confederacy.
It’s almost harder to find things that didn’t make it as long as the confederacy. Things like beanie babies, fruit stripe gum, slap bracelets, the tamagotchi, and New Coke all outlasted it.
deleted by creator
The Backstreet Boys are still touring.
I fucking dare you to tell me why
DuBois also described Northern Liberals like this:
they say, I know an excellent colored man in my town; or, I fought at Mechanicsville; or, Do not these Southern outrages make your blood boil?
https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/408/pg408-images.html
They’re just pretending to have hated slavery all along. The South fought for slavery but the North didn’t fight against it. The North fought because they wanted to “preserve the Union”. They didn’t really care about slavery, or black people.
The fact that in 2024 anyone at all can look at the American Civil War and be like “um Akshully it’s really the North’s fault! It was about our heritage!” is pathetic. And racist.
So the North invaded the south to, literally, stop slavery, stop the south from breaking away from the United States to become a slaver state because the USA wanted to abolish slavery, and your response is that “well the North wasn’t woke enough, and means all the southern racists and slavers got a bad rap.”
Get your head examined.
Who fired the first shots?
South Carolina
They’re just pretending to have hated slavery all along.
You do realize that the abolitionist movement was a huge part of the Union war effort?
And your source for that is? Abolitionists were inherently secretive, due to the nature of their work freeing slaves. It’s impossible to know their exact numbers, as no one would admit to it even after the war.
So any source you might find is just guessing as to their numbers.
Abolitionists were inherently secretive, due to the nature of their work freeing slaves
You seem to be confusing the abolitionist movement, which involved public meetings and newspapers, with the “conductors” of the underground railroad, who were mostly free African-Americans who risked being enslaved by slave catchers (even if they had never been enslaved in their lives.)
They were the same people. And no, I meant the white abolitionists. They lived publicly in the North and South, but didn’t reveal their identities.
https://www.historynet.com/how-many-abolitionists-were-there/
John Brown and Bleeding Kansas have entered the chat…
