According to who? History taught by an education system dominated by the north after the war, wanting to be morally superior and justified in their invasion and war crimes against their fellow countrymen? In that time, allegiance was more prominent towards one's state, not as much nationally.
Sure slavery was an issue, but I would argue it wasn't the only issue nor the dominant one. In fact, the north was responsible for bringing slaves over here. In turn, they reaped most of the profit from the heavy taxes paid by the south, which received little in return. Many northerners owned slaves, including the officers, even after the war.
The south embodied the spirit of state sovereignty as our founders intended, whereas the north was pushing for a more powerful centralized federal government.
Many of the problems we are currently dealing with regarding centralized gvt tyranny can be traced back to the north's actions during and after the Civil War.
The argument that the civil war was to free southern slaves, was media propaganda then as it is now.
Democrats didn't hold the monopoly on owning slaves. They were the predominant party of the day. As for BLM, they can fuck right off. If they want to be mad or place blame on anybody, they can look in the mirror. Blacks have been afforded more opportunities and have it better in this country than anywhere on earth. Many want to claim victim status, when every culture has been a slave at some point. BLM just wants an excuse to justify their criminal and uncivilized ways.
The Civil War wasn't just about slavery. It was mostly an economic war. Lincoln was the first president with a foreign title - esquire, which was unconstitutional. Now there are many such office holders, and dual citizens too.
Disagree
If you must ask such a fundamentally obvious answer to the question of why erasing History, good or bad, is incredibly stupid...
....perhaps you do not belong here, Komrade.
Again a question with obvious answer. Learn History, stop being a muppet.
Dogs gotta pee somewhere.
According to who? History taught by an education system dominated by the north after the war, wanting to be morally superior and justified in their invasion and war crimes against their fellow countrymen? In that time, allegiance was more prominent towards one's state, not as much nationally.
Sure slavery was an issue, but I would argue it wasn't the only issue nor the dominant one. In fact, the north was responsible for bringing slaves over here. In turn, they reaped most of the profit from the heavy taxes paid by the south, which received little in return. Many northerners owned slaves, including the officers, even after the war.
The south embodied the spirit of state sovereignty as our founders intended, whereas the north was pushing for a more powerful centralized federal government.
Many of the problems we are currently dealing with regarding centralized gvt tyranny can be traced back to the north's actions during and after the Civil War.
The argument that the civil war was to free southern slaves, was media propaganda then as it is now.
Democrats didn't hold the monopoly on owning slaves. They were the predominant party of the day. As for BLM, they can fuck right off. If they want to be mad or place blame on anybody, they can look in the mirror. Blacks have been afforded more opportunities and have it better in this country than anywhere on earth. Many want to claim victim status, when every culture has been a slave at some point. BLM just wants an excuse to justify their criminal and uncivilized ways.
The Civil War wasn't just about slavery. It was mostly an economic war. Lincoln was the first president with a foreign title - esquire, which was unconstitutional. Now there are many such office holders, and dual citizens too.
Something something war of northern aggression.