The American Civil War

>The South was basically just insecure that the North was industrializing and becoming economically dominant.

WRONG. just as retarded as the states rights fucks.

It was about slave states being out numbered by free states

That and the desire of the South to continue to dominate the North politically and impose their will on northern free states via the federal government and the Supreme Court. They only cared about their own state's rights, they didn't care about northern anti-slavery state laws being ignored and violated by the federal government with the Fugitive Slave Act, the Dred Scott decision and other cases.

it was about states rights

the states' rights to legislate on one very specific issue

>It was about slave states being out numbered by free states
Which they feared the north (which was the economic powerhouse, not the free western states) would use to outlaw slavery.

shouldn't USA have the red hair considering the mass importation of Irish to serve as quite excellent cannon fodder

The fact that there isn't a better drawn version of this is criminal.

>Lincoln knew very well that he was instigating aggression against the South and made clear of that in his letter to Pope Pius IX
I'm just paraphrasing that but it was something I got off of normalfagbook from those historical ads centered to me. I tried finding it online but I think I'm using the wrong keywords. Anybody know if it's true and where I can find the letter?

pretty interesting to go back and read the 1860 republican party platform
presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29620

>3. That to the Union of the States this nation owes its unprecedented increase in population, its surprising development of material resources, its rapid augmentation of wealth, its happiness at home and its honor abroad; and we hold in abhorrence all schemes for disunion, come from whatever source they may. And we congratulate the country that no Republican member of Congress has uttered or countenanced the threats of disunion so often made by Democratic members, without rebuke and with applause from their political associates; and we denounce those threats of disunion, in case of a popular overthrow of their ascendency as denying the vital principles of a free government, and as an avowal of contemplated treason, which it is the imperative duty of an indignant people sternly to rebuke and forever silence.

That makes things pretty damn clear, a republican president will treat secession as an act of treason.

Because it wasn't.

>On May 1, 1833 Jackson wrote, "the tariff was only a pretext, and disunion and southern confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro, or slavery question."

Are you implying the South was gonna secede eventually anyway?

Yes, because it was about a desire to separate from people (Yankees) that they considered too different from themselves to be able to live together in harmony. It's pretty clear when you read quotes and memoirs from confederate soldiers and generals that none of them actually cared about slavery. They cared about the state they were from and about freedom from what they perceived as northern oppression. Did you know that Stonewall Jackson referred to the war as "our second war of independence"? After reading much on the subject, I realized that he was right.

I really wish you retards would have left permanently. Next time around, I don't think many people will try to prevent you from leaving.

youtube.com/watch?v=VZgXH8IJGgg

Probably focusing on the New England power overlooking the Union through the English Americans I'm guessing. I myself am unsure as to why the South is depicted with red hair though.

Remember that battle where a bunch of northern Irishmen got murdered by a bunch of southern Irishmen?

Fredericksburg?

Yeah shit was great. ((I legit forgot which divisions they were, I was gonna include it in my post but I can't find my source.))

White American Southerners are primarily of Scots-Irish extraction.

only true for appallachians, not the deep south

The saltire speaks for itself.

til russians are actually glaswegians.

And the "Scots-Irish" that settled Appallachia aren't normal Scots. Their culture is based on borderers who were neither English nor Scottish and were hated by both.

>an entire country of bellicose, untelligible, heroin and booze loving nutters who love tracksuits and making orky shit to blow other shit up.

explains a lot.

Their history is basically this

>be niggers on the English/Scottish borders
>King decides he wants to get rid of you and that you might be savage enough to survive In Ireland so he sends you there.
>be niggers for the next 400 years in Ireland
>Move to America in large numbers
>Quakerfags, Puritans and Virginians take one look and collectively say fuck no so you get sent to Appallachia
>proceed to act like niggers until the present.

>tfw hated by all

nice doubles btw

technically, yes, but we shouldn't be happy about it. people died; that's terrible, even if they died for a bad cause.

>People who know a lot about the Civil War know it was about trade and electoral politics.

FTFY.

Specifically, the electoral politics of slavery.

>gets completely annihilated and proven wrong
>HURR YOUR A RETARD LEAVE

Historians that study the south during that time period say it was about states rights.

People who read primary sources and the actual instruments of secession say it was about slavery.

civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html

Here, I'll get some for you.

Not really, considering that southern states had fewer rights than northern ones.

Confederate soldiers and generals didn't run the Confederacy. They were fodder in the Southern aristocracy's plan to hang onto their wealth, power and completely unAmerican place in society.

>"second war of independence"
>first side to institute a mandatory draft
>suspension of rights across the board for the duration of the war
>attempts to ally with the British constantly until the British tell them to fuck off

Yeah, so brave.

>Confederate soldiers and generals didn't run the Confederacy.
Maybe not, but they still supported the country and fought like devils for their independence. They didn't fight to preserve slavery.

>and completely unAmerican place in society.
The founding fathers believed and letting states decide if they wanted slavery or not. Nothing unAmerican about it.
They were vastly outnumbered and needed all the help they could get. The relatively low desertion rate and brave performance in battle proves that most wanted to fight.

>The relatively low desertion rate and brave performance in battle proves that most wanted to fight.

>Confederate Virginians fled military service at a rate of between 10 and 15 percent, more or less comparable to the desertion rate among Union troops, which stood between 9 and 12 percent.

>A careful study of the 44th Virginia Infantry Regiment revealed a shockingly high desertion rate of nearly 30 percent

>The government and military also used methods other than execution to battle desertion. Detachments of troops scoured the countryside in an effort to find stragglers and deserters and return them to the ranks. In the mountains of southwestern Virginia, bands of deserters resisted capture by the government, and by late in 1864 they posed a serious enough threat that the Confederate government sent regular soldiers to Floyd County to restore order. In that region, at least, desertion did in fact represent a rejection of the Confederacy.

>Desertions escalated substantially in the final months of the war, as Union general-in-chief Ulysses S. Grant finally broke through Lee's defense of Richmond and Petersburg, on April 2, 1865, and sent the Confederate army west in retreat. As many as several hundred men per night fled the army even before Richmond fell. On the march toward Appomattox, thousands more also deserted—mostly Virginians and North Carolinians, whose homes were already temptingly close.

That's actually pretty awful for desertion rates, especially considering they deserted in droves towards the end of the war.

encyclopediavirginia.org/Desertion_Confederate_during_the_Civil_War#start_entry

gotta love that texas one

>We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

You just went full racist Texas, never go full racist. Though I have to say that document is the best written of all the declarations of secession.

>That's actually pretty awful for desertion rates, especially considering they deserted in droves towards the end of the war.
Desertion on the losing side of a war always happens at the end as armies are scattered and skews the statistics. When you consider that proportionally more men of the south than men of the north fought, that they were almost always outnumbered, under-supplied and under-equipped (many didn't even have shoes), that they resisted for almost half a decade, and that the data is skewed by the collapse at the end, I'd say that they fought pretty bravely overall.

There are no "good guys" in war. Only winners and losers.

I love this meme. Yes they just decided to up and leave, got all their nigger money and set forth to America. They definitely didn't go as slaves, or at best indentured servants, no no no. Because only blacks were slaves in the south. No people from Ireland anywhere.

>Following the Battle of Bothwell Brig on June 22, 1679, some 1200 prisoners were taken and incarcerated in a make shift, open air prison next to the Greyfriars Kirk in Edinburgh. Of these prisoners, 257 erstwhile ringleaders and ministers were sentenced to be transported to the West Indies or Virginia as white slaves.

thereformation.info/covenanters4.htm

Not an argument.

"""""""""""""""""historians"""""""""""""""""

First post is best post.

>South fires upon federal property that undeniably still belonged to the Union
>SOUTH DINDU NUFFIN LINCOLN WAS ANTAGAONIZING US

This is the correct answer.

Master-race border reiver here. Daily reminder we provided first man on the moon.

The slavery issue is a little messed up.

It may have been started over slavery and the right to keep others, but I'm 100% sure a good amount of southerners that fought were fighting for their homes and their states despite not owning slaves.

Propaganda is a hell of a thing.

>en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Clause

The south was trying to impose their will on the north by wanting them to follow the Constitution?

If that's not a quote, it may be one of the most insightful posts I've ever read on all of Veeky Forums.

>lets kill 1/5 men in the country cause of a border skirmish where nobody was even hurt

Lincoln was a bad president. Couldn't even negotiate with half the fucking country before trying to kill them all.

>the south killed 600,000 people

It was the North that kept invading Southern land, not the other way around.

Terrible thread. It's impossible to have an intelligent conversation about the civil war without idiots spamming
>Lincoln was a good boy who didndu nuffin
>all southerners are racists who deserved to be murdered
>the south had no right to secede because I disagree with their opinions on race relations
Civil war discussion is nothing more than a delusional yankee circlejerk.

AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH

I LOVE DIXIE TEARS

I live in a country you probably haven't even heard of, and I can basically promise you you're the butt of every joke about America. Southerners are so pathetic its funny.

all wars are economic

You just proved my point friend. These threads are filled with (unanimously pro-northern) shit flinging and other off topic posts. All of your "hilarious" banter about the south belongs in /int/ along with threads shitposting about the Yugoslav wars. Veeky Forums is NOT /pol/ with dates.

No, you're just buttblasted because the "hurr states rights" argument hasn't been valid since the Dylann Roof incident brought the heat down on your little "lost cause of the south" meme and actual historians rolled out a few primary sources which more or less conclusively proved that the southerners seceded over the issue of slavery.

>Lincoln was a good boy who didndu nuffin
The consensus is that Lincoln was a compromise moderate who specifically ran on a platform of keeping the union intact and preventing new slave states from being made, but that these were political concessions and in all of his private correspondences he detested slavery.

And Jefferson Davis swore up and down that could he have exercised executive authority the way Lincoln could, the south could have won, so no tears about Lincoln's emergency wartime powers, the goal in war is to win, not preserve the other side's feelings and sense of honor.

>all southerners are racists who deserved to be murdered
This is obviously not true. Most southerners were fighting for the simple reason that there were soldiers in their backyard and the problem was almost exclusively with the ruling class. But this is also the case for ISIS, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, etc.

>the south had no right to secede because I disagree with their opinions on race relations
Not only was there never any legal precedent for secession, but their end goal was to turn the southern United States into an old European style feudal state ruled by a privileged aristocracy of landowners who justified themselves with pseudoscience and took your grandpappy and all his friends for a ride.

>Civil war discussion is nothing more than a delusional yankee circlejerk.
You're just sad because your argument has no water

The confederate leaders like Davis started it for slavery, and told his men lies that it was for freedom. Stonewall Jackson is a good example of this.

No, we're having fun and laughing at you. You're /pol/ here, not me.

>the goal of war is to win, even at the expense of the consitution you are sworn to defend
Go to bed Abraham

>everything I don't like is /pol/

War is a racket!

Yeah. Propaganda.

You literally said the same thing lmao

go fuck your dad, cletus.

>the goal of war is to win, even at the expense of the consitution you are sworn to defend
First of all, if you're going to defend the "constitution" you can at least spell it right.

Second of all, Lincoln preserved the constitution which your confederates wanted to shred up and start over, but without all of that "provide for the general welfare" business.

third of all, what part of 'emergency wartime powers' is difficult for you to comprehend? Yes, it was in fact an emergency, allowing Lincoln far more reaching powers than what are normally granted to a president. Once the war was over these emergency powers went away and the status quo reasserted itself

>Habeus Corpus can be suspended in periods of rebellion
>the South was not in open rebellion

I said you were /pol/ because you made a retarded shitpost about regional differences. You claimed that I was /pol/ because you disagreed with my opinion.

haha, no. you're pol because you're defending a nation founded on defending slavery

>I didn't call you /pol/ because I disagree with your opinions, I called you /pol/ because I disagree with your opinions
This thread belongs on /int/

Commenting on your pic, and nothing else: In all fairness, no one in the Confederacy gave two shits about what Little Aleck said or did.

The same thing can be said about any vice-president because it's not like they have much in the way of official powers.

But unofficially they're often key wheeling and dealing power brokers so their influence is usually way understated

For the south, it was about states rights over federal rights. For the north it was about preserving the union.

I'm /pol/ and Idislike the CSA because it was a bunch of mulattoes and nigger lovers creating their own nigger paradise of a country.

>democratic election
>literally nobody in the South voted for Lincoln

>These are the rules for the election, okay?
>Okay
>Wait we lost I don't like this anymore
Hillary tier.

Dred Scott was not fleeing

>nobody on my street voted for X so this isn't democratic!

Good guys = South
Bad guys = North

>southern jigaboo connoisseurs
>good guys

This.

>people ignore the fact that the Confederacy took advantage of the Civil War to flout the ban on importing new slaves and ship even more black people into the US

...

Literally nobody voted for him because he literally wasn't on the ballet, which is literally illegal.

The South tried to rig the election, lost anyway, threw a tantrum over it, then lost that. It would be difficult to find a region more cucked than the South.

It's not rigging at all. Lincoln was just so unpopular that it didn't even make sense to put him.

The South has the largest percentage of African Americans of all regions in the country. This makes demographic sense with all the blacks in the South. New Yorkers are obviously the real nigger lovers.

ibtimes.com/white-southerners-likely-have-more-black-dna-whites-elsewhere-us-study-1765498

No

BLACKED: The Actual Southern Tradition

>Several states, which have been the focal points of racial tensions in the U.S. over the years, are made up of self-described white people whose ancestors are black
>In addition, the study found that African-Americans are more likely to have a European male ancestor (19 percent) than a European female one (5 percent)
>Tfw your culture's men have a history of jungle fever, spawning little black chilluns who desperately want to identify with their white daddy.

>changing ballot papers to exclude a candidate
>"no one was going to vote for him anyway so it doesn't count"
Yeah sure thing dude

fpbp

Because they find it very hard to defend the indefensible. Their preconcieved notion is that the South were the good guys and they'll do mental gymnastics in any way possible to justify it.

Fuck off. That response is meme tier.