Causes of the War

Heh most countries are just flooded with the propaganda that says "Slavery was the caused Civil War" and all, but it's amazing what you can find out just by spending some time in a library.

IMHO, Books should be considered a true treasure to mankind.

It is propoganda. It's just too easy to simplify the war like that, that's why everyone clings to it.

Man i am liking this conversation. I think you guys are all right. Slavery wasnt the cause of the war, but you could say it was A cause. One of many. And yes, slavery has been in exsistance for thousands of years. The south didnt start it, they just picked up on the routine. And even some of the northern states had slaves,even during the war, as someone posted earlier. But, one thing that stands out is that the north and south really didnt like each other at ALL. The north manufactered everything and the south was the source of crops,produce, many things that brought in a large revenue for the states. They were very dependant on each other at the time. In some important ways. They couldent live without each other, and they couldent live with each other. If you ask me it was a ticking time bomb. It was bound to happen sooner or later. Also maybe the fact the Lincoln was seven feet tall just creeped the southerns out. Lol.

I don't believe some of the other countries prospective of the war. It was Constituition to succed. That's what one guy from Brazil said. I told him when he can provide evidence that it was part of the constitution, then he could say that. So far, he hasn't.

If you want evidence, you're going to be waiting a long time. Do you really think that the Constitutional Convention is going to include a "seccesion clause"? I can see it now:"Ya, y'all can leave this stupid government any ol' time ya wanna!" Heck no. But one very important thing to remember when it comes to the constitution, is that the rights specified within it are by no means absolute and limiting. The Constitution does not specify the rights granted to the people, it specifies the constraints on government. The people already have their God-given rights as clarified in the Declaration of Independence, and by the principles of the Enlightenment. The whole point of the Constitution is to make sure that government has clear, known limits, so that it can not infringe on the rights of the people. The Constitutional Convention met to decide what powers to grant to the central, federal government; they were not at all concerned about limiting the powers of the states themselves. If not from the states, where does the federal government get its power from? Maintaining the soverign rights of the states was of utmost importance, and only behind protecting the rights of the people. Just one more thing; the Constitution is not of the nature 'You are only alowed to do what is on paper', not at all. The southern states felt they deserved the same natural rights, only as a group of collective individuals.
Can you show me a place in the Constitution that clearly says the original union of the states was of a permanent, eternal nature? I doubt you'll find one; can you imagine anything more naive than trying to bind a state that has just fought an 8-year war for its independence?

Wonderfully said Jeb! (Stuart)

thank you very much gen'ral! good to see you back

I was going over a few causes in my head, and i was just curious why taxes wasnt put as a cause in the poll? After all it did play a part.

good point, when you concider that one reason for people leaving England was they didn't want to pay the heavy taxes they were under

If you're talking about tarrifs, I suppose that would fit under "too many to count." But port taxes were a huge part of southern discontent; it played a major role in deciding the profits of exporting cotton and tobacco. The north wanted tarriffs high, since they were getting pretty industrialized and self-sufficient, so they had more importation. And naturally the south wanted them low because they were mainly an export-based economy.

Well, either way the North was able to pay for them. The South wasn't. Tarrifs were pretty much kicking the tar out of the North and they thought the South was getting fat off of thier tarrifs.

I was looking through another civil war forum(dont worry guys just for some info on a few things posted by veterans of wwII and other's), and I found out that the south actually made the first move in the direction of war. South Carolina I believe it was, fired upon a union fort and thus started the plunge of the southern states into what's known as the civil war. S C had tried this previouslly(1832), and Jaskson backed them down with the threat of federal troops. That was about tarrifs. It seems to me that the South wanted federal protection without paying what was legally owed on both occasions. Except the second time they were whining about congress.

You just barely found that out?

Iron Brigade General wrote:

You just barely found that out?

Hey! I dont want to hear it. BESIDES there are people in this world who dont even know what a napkin is, like you IBG.

A napkin is a cloth or paper that is used to wipe your face with or snezze in it.

Iron Brigade General wrote:

A napkin is a cloth or paper that is used to wipe your face with or snezze in it.

You just looked it up i saw you.

No, I saw him look it up actully.

coby wrote:

No, I saw him look it up actully.

See, Coby and I might no know everything about the CW, but we know eveything else.

Yaaaaaaaay!!!!!!!!!!

Well Coby we have strayed of topic once again.

looks like it, dosn't it.

Wellllllllll, causes causes causes. Hmmm. How about Preston Brooks:lol!:

Oppie, you really killed this topic lol.

BACK ON TOPIC SLACKER!


Eh hem, now then causes causes causes, hmmm, how about the claims for "states rights" some of which were just, others of which were completely ridiculous.

hay, you're one of those slackers oppie, so I wouldn't be talking, even though you are a mod now.