So I understand why the south would go war to preserve slavery...

To preserve the Union. Clay is money. Obviously, there would be some harcore abolitionists (like black soldiers in the army and Radical Republicans in Congress), but even War Democrats in Congress were for the war to prevent secession and they were pretty pro-slavery for starters.

It boils down to economics. I'll fite anyone IRL who says otherwise.

The narrative in the South is that slavery was the staple of the Confederate economy, and that the North insisted on their converting to an industrial base overnight. Which as we know, is fucking impossible in a time when an entire global trade market relies on your participation in order to function. The slave trade was the Souths biggest export/import and the teachers say that the North walked up and in the span of 10 years, demanded that they convert to machinery instead.

That's a tall order for most nations, but at least they have unity. The Texan republic wasn't encorporated into the US until 1845. Up until that point, most of TX was still involved in a war with Mexico and they didn't have time to do much of anything else. Including economic development of trade practices. And most of the Texan economy relied on Mexican labor to keep afloat during the war as well, since most Texans were Tejanos descended from the Mexicans that settled the land. So imagine you, a brand new Republic, emerging from the Mexican American war and forming your own constitution, JUST now letting the dust settle on your brand new plantations etc.

Now imagine someone walks up and forces your hand into joining a union, with a specific set of requirements to stay. Requirements that weren't included in your own constitution, and that include taxes and a whole mess of bureaucracy that you simply didn't have to fuck with before. Texas (the seat of economic power in the south) reluctantly joined the union because it simply didn't have the manpower to resist ANOTHER armed conflict so soon, this time with America.

The narrative relies a lot on "the story is more complex than just slavery", which ends up getting riled down to "i like slavery" by sensationalists. But you honestly can't look at the Confederacy without also mentioning the history of the Texan republic.

Now with all that being said--

They were fighting to keep slavery. That part is true. But the practice of slavery wasn't nearly this demonized as it was back then. People didn't LIKE it, and freed slaves well before they were required to. But in general it was just another practice some rural areas used.

So the argument, in essence, is that when you hear Robert E Lee saying "fucked up" shit like "I'll defend slavery with my dying breath" etc, what you're hearing is "I'll defend our biggest economic staple with my life". In theory.

It wasn't until AFTER the Civil War ended that the South was slewn as traitors etc, and slavery was finally acknowledged by the entire world to be a "bad" thing.

Many in the south agree that slavery is bad, that it should never have been practiced. But they're not pissed because blacks deserve to be enslaved. They're pissed because they entered into an agreement they were promised they could back out of at any time (the union), and then when they tried to take them up on it the North took up arms and forced them to do something they ultimately didn't want to/couldn't do.

That's a message that gets lost on most yanks, I think. And while there is confederate culture here where racism does still exist- when we say "My ancestors" we mean "my great great grandfather died for this?!" Because that's literally how close it is to us.

My great great grandfather fought for the confederacy, cause aside. His life still deserves to be honored, even if what he was fighting for is now taboo.

National integrity you fuck. The same reason why Russia fought Chechens.

This.

The South seceded to keep slavery, the North invaded to prevent them from seceding.

>800,000 REBELS

>and then when they tried to take them up on it the North took up arms and forced them to do something they ultimately didn't want to/couldn't do.
In essence, the North invaded the South by forcing them to stay.

They wanted the South for its cotton production you dolt.

>US
>A country before 1865
The north was called the union and not the loyalists or nationalists or even federalists for a reason.

The South was refusing to industrialize because holding slaves was the lazier solution

fucking revisionists.

Boy you're about at sharp as a throw pillow. I'm revoking that 1776 get of yours because you don't even have even a basic understanding of US history

Texas was not the seat of economic power in the South in the 1860s. That would probably have been Virginia.

What did you understand by "clay is money"?

Each side comprised a massive rabble with no understanding of the constitution. The North happened to be on the wrong side, but it had a large enough military force to compensate for its lack of a genuine aristocracy and good leadership, so it won.

...

>North
>wrong

Funny how the wrong side was favoured by God to win.

So if I get this right. The south uses dialectical materialism to defend their position?

Very good posts, would go shooting and drink with/10

t. commie yankee philadelphian

1 7 7 6
7
7
6

>ctrl f fort sumter
>0/0

The CSA attacked the US and bombed the fuck out of American soldiers; golly jeepers gee I wonder why the US responded by fighting back.

You got it totally backwards from what actually happened; the South was the aggressor in that conflict.

SPBP