Was it about slavery?

Was it about slavery?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=PWJpwc21Ft4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

No, it was about state's rights. You absolute nigger.

State's rights to defend a slave system.

It was about people arguing about it on a Chinese rice eating board 151 years later.

Yes, but it was also about other things.

Well, why would you want niggers roaming around freely?

Putting them in chains is a much better alternative imo then letting them go.

Of course we could always send them back to Africa, and that's what Lincoln proposed up until Booth shot him in the head.

...

>states rights
>slavery
>pent up disdain between North and South

All of these are equally correct.

/thread

it was about the slave economy and whether states would or would not have one.

Does anyone have the green text

>states rights
That's what the landlords told the dumbass Scotts/Irish tenant farmers that were dirt poor because labour was free.
The same dumb fuckers that probably fucked to make your great gran pappy.
States rights is the historical equivalent of "der gunna take ur guns/jobs"
Tbh it hurts to see the same demographic tricked into serving against their own interests(and the common good) again and again.
The worst part about the American working class is if you try to set them down and explain to them in polite terms how retarded they are, they think you are an elitist douchebag that talks like a fag.
X sad

No it was about state's rights, trade wars and Federal vs State suppression. Slavery only mattered to the agriculture kingpins, the common people didn't own slaves and only thought of blacks as savage animals who were only good for menial tasks.

It wasn't necessarily the right to own slaves as it was the Federal government basically trying to undermine the Southern economy since most of their crop exports were manned by unmanned labor and the Northerners wanting to abolish slavery and send them all back to Africa on the public dollar was seen as a direct attack by the South on the livelihoods of the people living in the Southern states. The whole slavery and human rights aspect was added later in order to justify the atrocities committed by the Union forces during the war, the blacks meant nothing to either side other then useful idiots and they likely still do in the modern US political sphere.

sorry unmanned should say "unpaid."

>Federal government basically trying to undermine the Southern economy

Why do some Americans say things like this? I'm not one so I don't undestand.
What was there to "undermine"? It was mostly agricultural and poor. The North had the industry and the infrastructure.
What was the master plan of this "evil" Federal goverment?

They South seemed very efficient at undermining its own economy by not industrializing and/or diversifying the economy.

>Undermine economy of parts of your own federation
>Somehow the whole federation profits from this

I don't think you understand economy.

Also the slavery thing is explicitly mentioned in the declarations of independence of at least 5 of the CSA states, it was even in the acceptance speech of the CSA vice-president.

yes.


youtube.com/watch?v=PWJpwc21Ft4

Thanks user

>I'm not one so I don't undestand.
What was there to "undermine"?
Basically all the new infrastructure went to the north and along with all new tech from the industrial revolution - The Fed spent the far majority industrializing the North and kinda gave the South the blind eye.

>What was the master plan of this "evil" Federal goverment?
Crashing state rights with no survivors

>They South seemed very efficient at undermining its own economy by not industrializing and/or diversifying the economy
How do you do that if you are just a simple farmer?

>not states' rights to determine how much they are taxed via tariffs
Get edumacated.

read lysander spooners ''no treason''
he answer it perfectly there. theres a pdf of the book if you google it, its quite short

Principally determined by the differing economic structures produced by slavery