When I read Professor Thomas DiLorenzo’s article the question that lept to mind was, “How come the South is said to have fought for slavery when the North wasn’t fighting against slavery?”
Two days before Lincoln’s inauguration as the 16th President, Congress, consisting only of the Northern states, passed overwhelmingly on March 2, 1861, the Corwin Amendment that gave constitutional protection to slavery. Lincoln endorsed the amendment in his inaugural address, saying “I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.”
Quite clearly, the North was not prepared to go to war in order to end slavery when on the very eve of war the US Congress and incoming president were in the process of making it unconstitutional to abolish slavery.
Here we have absolute total proof that the North wanted the South kept in the Union far more than the North wanted to abolish slavery.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
9 comments:
Quite interesting.....a very good read. Thanks!!
What ever helps you sleep at night with the losing side's flag on your front porch...
I've always viewed the reason for the war more complicated than many people express. The North's objection may have been to outlaw slavery but, to the South, their entire economy (agriculture) was built upon the availability of cheap labor and nobody could offer a replacement to slavery. It was not just a phase out. It was a stop now.
How do you tell someone to stop their livelyhood?
@11:11 AM
How about like this : "It is immoral to own other people as property".
There that was pretty simple.
"Phase out" owning other people as property? What is wrong with you?
The Civil War was about slavery, it was the driving factor. The "states rights" argument would not even be one for the Civil War were it not for the South wanting to keep institutionalized slavery, you know, owning other people as property.
For those choosing to remain ignorant, please see the declaration of Alexander Stephens, the Vice President of the Confederacy. I can't wait for the sorry defence of that.
It was a communication problem back then. "Networks and servers" were not as advanced - hence the war started prior to the north receiving their email!
(snicker snicker!!!)
There were a lot of poor white men with families that did not even have it as good as slaves. It was not all rich Planters and Gone with the Wind many were descendants of indentured immigrants that wound up share cropping. They did not go to West Point or VMI. They were fighting for the foolishly simple dignity of being free men better off than Slaves. Generations later some still are no better off yet still feel entitled to the dream they bought into. I don't care if you came over on the Mayflower if your people are still poor and stupid and contributed nothing more that cannon fodder in our conflicts you should be seen and not heard and keep your toothless pie hole shut and behave like a black man on the streets in the 1950"s. This awe shucks common nonsense
is not sense at all. It is just very common. There is no divine right just natural selection and HARD WORK white black or otherwise and if you feel short changed and butt hurt in your circumstances. It's not history the State or the Federal Government that failed YOU.
Slavery certainly was part of the mix but the States' Rights argument was the larger question. Bear in mind we're called the United States; it was a group of colonies banding together against the British and then deciding to work together as one nation rather than 13 separate ones that gave us our national name and identity.
The Constitution identifies what powers the Federal government has; all others remain the powers of the states. That's where the rub originated. Those questions continue to vex us today.
It was about COTTON ......grown in the South and wanted by
The Jealous North ..........
Post a Comment