Cause of Civil War

Along with citations of a long chain of abuses.

---

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

I've followed this thread with great interest, learning many new details. But I have to say, I don't really care why the Civil War was fought--regardless of why it began, the outcome had the effect of ending slavery in the U.S.The South would not have abandoned slavery on its own: indeed, southern agrarian interests were intent on expanding slavery into new states and protecting their state citizens' "right" to practice slavery in free states. It was good to see AE's revisionism rebutted, but for me the bottom line is the Civil War did end slavery. While the war didn't fully emancipate African-Americans, it was a necessary beginning.I wouldn't care if they fought over Virginia juleps vs. Vermont cider.

---

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

Maybe--but we still use plenty of stoop labor in U.S. agriculture, with workers who enjoy a status little better than slavery in many cases.Despite our motorhead culture, we regularly discover domestics and sex workers brought into this country to serve as slaves.Where slavery is legal, it will prosper.Indeed, after a feeble Reconstruction, the South merely began criminalizing blacks and then exploited them as penal labor.But, sure, let's assume you're right. In that case, I'm happy they fought a war that ended slavery in 1865 instead of 50 years later, regardless of why.

---

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

Good point. I agree.And I'm still glad the war ended the legal institution of slavery when it did, whatever its cause. Post-emancipation would always have been hell on earth.True emancipation in the U.S. is a long journey, one sooner begun, better ended.

---

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

There are an awful lot of feelings in that statement.I agree an oppressed people have the right to revolution. But often revolutions don't succeed without outside help, and to win that support you need more than feelings--you have to make a case.Slavery was primarily an economic institution of the landed gentry/large agrarian interests in the south. They weren't turning to armed resistance because they felt oppressed, they were going to war to protect their slave-based privilege and wealth.The slave system considerably disadvantaged the small farmer in the south, who struggled to compete with slave labor. As is too often the case, their feelings of oppression were exploited by the moneyed classes to persuade the lower classes to die for them--so they could remain disadvantaged.Working Americans even today regularly elect people who mostly serve the interests of other classes. It is a defining sorrow of our time, imho.

---

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio

​

Real things always push back.
-William James