Uh no they weren't. That's what the leftist fags want you to think. They were in fact standing up for their states and the meaning of the constitution against northern tyrants. I would argue that what we're all fighting against on here is what the north represented back then, and the south was fighting against.
It was mostly about slavery. Only revisionist leftist claim otherwise.
GOP was formed to speed up the end of slavery.
The democrats freaked out. Some called for more states right, primarily so they could continue slavery.
Every single state of the original 7 that seceded the union, named slavery as one of, if not THE, reason they left. All but one put it in writing stating this is why we are leaving.
Georgia:
"The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. [...] Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and firmness by the South. [...] The Presidential election of 1852 resulted in the total overthrow of the advocates of restriction and their party friends. Immediately after this result the anti-slavery portion of the defeated party resolved to unite all the elements in the North opposed to slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their hostility to slavery everywhere."
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. [...] It [GOP] seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better."
South Carolina:
"...an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. [...] The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor."
Texas:
"For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States.
By consolidating their strength, they have placed the slave-holding States in a hopeless minority in the federal congress, and rendered representation of no avail in protecting Southern rights against their exactions and encroachments. They have proclaimed, and at the ballot box sustained, the revolutionary doctrine that there is a 'higher law' than the constitution and laws of our Federal Union, and virtually that they will disregard their oaths and trample upon our rights.
They have for years past encouraged and sustained lawless organizations to steal our slaves and prevent their recapture, and have repeatedly murdered Southern citizens while lawfully seeking their rendition."
Virginia:
"...and the Federal Government, having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern Slaveholding States." And in a speech shortly thereafter: "The Republican party is the permanent, dominant party at the North, and it is vain to think that you can put it down. It is true that the Republican party hates slavery, and that it is to be the permanent, dominant party at the North; and the majority being equivalent to the whole, as I have already stated, we cannot doubt the result."
Alabama:
"And as it is the desire and purpose of the people of Alabama to meet the slaveholding States of the South, who may approve such purpose, in order to frame a provisional as well as permanent Government upon the principles of the Constitution of the United States..."
Florida:
"It is denied that it is the purpose of the party soon to enter into the possession of the powers of the Federal Government to abolish slavery by any direct legislative act. This has never been charged by any one. But it has been announced by all the leading men and presses of the party that the ultimate accomplishment of this result is its settled purpose and great central principle. That no more slave States shall be admitted into the confederacy and that the slaves from their rapid increase (the highest evidence of the humanity of their owners will become value less. Nothing is more certain than this and at no distant day. What must be the condition of the slaves themselves when their number becomes so large that their labor will be of no value to their owners. Their natural tendency every where shown where the race has existed to idleness vagrancy and crime increased by an inability to procure subsistence. [...] It is in so many words saying to you we will not burn you at the stake but we will torture you to death by a slow fire we will not confiscate your property and consign you to a residence and equality with the african but that destiny certainly awaits your children – and you must quietly submit or we will force you to submission – men who can hesitate to resist such aggressions are slaves already and deserve their destiny. The members of the Republican party has denied that the party will oppose the admission of any new state where slavery shall be tolerated. But on the contrary they declare that on this point they will make no concession or compromise. It is manifest that they will not because to do so would be the dissolution of the party."
These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. [...] It [GOP] seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better." A quote from your post.
The north wasn't anti-slavery because of their moral superiority, they wanted only to remove slaves to destroy the south's economy, which was superior to the north's. The south was pissed about not being represented in congress appropriately and having to pay way more than their share of the tax burden, which primarily benefited the north.
We were not there, my understanding is that it was not all about slavery, the South had no say in Congress because the North had control and had excluded the South from any say in Governance.
And from recently seeing the above, how was slavery approached? Did the North want to end slavery to hurt the South financially? Was there any plan to minimize pain? Slavery was wrong, but people were dependent on it. Thankfully the cotton gin was invented soon after, now America just gets the Chinese to make all their shoes in sweatshops. Some Negroes were better treated than the Chinese doing 12 hr days sleeping in little cubicles at night and paid just enough to keep them alive.
Abraham Lincoln had insisted from the beginning that since war is a condition that exists only between two sovereign nations, and since the Confederacy was in his view only an insurrection, no actual war legally existed between the North and the South. (The United States, for instance, never declared war against the Confederacy.) So it was not quite clear that Lee could be, by Lincoln’s definition, guilty of levying war.
Wasn't Robert E Lee the textbook definition of a traitor?
Uh no they weren't. That's what the leftist fags want you to think. They were in fact standing up for their states and the meaning of the constitution against northern tyrants. I would argue that what we're all fighting against on here is what the north represented back then, and the south was fighting against.
It was mostly about slavery. Only revisionist leftist claim otherwise.
GOP was formed to speed up the end of slavery.
The democrats freaked out. Some called for more states right, primarily so they could continue slavery.
Every single state of the original 7 that seceded the union, named slavery as one of, if not THE, reason they left. All but one put it in writing stating this is why we are leaving.
Georgia: "The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. [...] Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and firmness by the South. [...] The Presidential election of 1852 resulted in the total overthrow of the advocates of restriction and their party friends. Immediately after this result the anti-slavery portion of the defeated party resolved to unite all the elements in the North opposed to slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their hostility to slavery everywhere."
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. [...] It [GOP] seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better."
South Carolina: "...an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. [...] The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor."
Texas: "For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States.
By consolidating their strength, they have placed the slave-holding States in a hopeless minority in the federal congress, and rendered representation of no avail in protecting Southern rights against their exactions and encroachments. They have proclaimed, and at the ballot box sustained, the revolutionary doctrine that there is a 'higher law' than the constitution and laws of our Federal Union, and virtually that they will disregard their oaths and trample upon our rights.
They have for years past encouraged and sustained lawless organizations to steal our slaves and prevent their recapture, and have repeatedly murdered Southern citizens while lawfully seeking their rendition."
Virginia: "...and the Federal Government, having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern Slaveholding States." And in a speech shortly thereafter: "The Republican party is the permanent, dominant party at the North, and it is vain to think that you can put it down. It is true that the Republican party hates slavery, and that it is to be the permanent, dominant party at the North; and the majority being equivalent to the whole, as I have already stated, we cannot doubt the result."
Alabama: "And as it is the desire and purpose of the people of Alabama to meet the slaveholding States of the South, who may approve such purpose, in order to frame a provisional as well as permanent Government upon the principles of the Constitution of the United States..."
Florida: "It is denied that it is the purpose of the party soon to enter into the possession of the powers of the Federal Government to abolish slavery by any direct legislative act. This has never been charged by any one. But it has been announced by all the leading men and presses of the party that the ultimate accomplishment of this result is its settled purpose and great central principle. That no more slave States shall be admitted into the confederacy and that the slaves from their rapid increase (the highest evidence of the humanity of their owners will become value less. Nothing is more certain than this and at no distant day. What must be the condition of the slaves themselves when their number becomes so large that their labor will be of no value to their owners. Their natural tendency every where shown where the race has existed to idleness vagrancy and crime increased by an inability to procure subsistence. [...] It is in so many words saying to you we will not burn you at the stake but we will torture you to death by a slow fire we will not confiscate your property and consign you to a residence and equality with the african but that destiny certainly awaits your children – and you must quietly submit or we will force you to submission – men who can hesitate to resist such aggressions are slaves already and deserve their destiny. The members of the Republican party has denied that the party will oppose the admission of any new state where slavery shall be tolerated. But on the contrary they declare that on this point they will make no concession or compromise. It is manifest that they will not because to do so would be the dissolution of the party."
So yeah... slavery.
These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. [...] It [GOP] seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better." A quote from your post. The north wasn't anti-slavery because of their moral superiority, they wanted only to remove slaves to destroy the south's economy, which was superior to the north's. The south was pissed about not being represented in congress appropriately and having to pay way more than their share of the tax burden, which primarily benefited the north.
Ok democrat.
We were not there, my understanding is that it was not all about slavery, the South had no say in Congress because the North had control and had excluded the South from any say in Governance.
And from recently seeing the above, how was slavery approached? Did the North want to end slavery to hurt the South financially? Was there any plan to minimize pain? Slavery was wrong, but people were dependent on it. Thankfully the cotton gin was invented soon after, now America just gets the Chinese to make all their shoes in sweatshops. Some Negroes were better treated than the Chinese doing 12 hr days sleeping in little cubicles at night and paid just enough to keep them alive.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard/the-trial-that-didnt-happen
Yeah. And Stoner Jackson.
Good military generals? Sure.
The cause they were fighting for? No.