The Confederacy was About Slavery

I like engaging with you...until you become a pompous ass

Quote:

If there were reasons other than abolition that led to the war, they didn't all magically disappear once Lincoln issued the Emanicipation Proclamation.

Im really not being Pompous, This above statement just doesnt make any sense. Th Confederacy was based upon slavery as Snood stated in his thread title. The WAR was begun by the states that seceded . When the states seceded, the war did not yet happen and the US Congress was busy trying to cobble several compromises..

Precise and concise thats all I ask. Stop being a damn rattlesnake

Those who defend the right of people to display the confederate flag, and decry the "pride in heritage" indicated thereby, and do civil war reenactments, and generally lionize the Confederacy and its memory, seem always to be in denial that the war was fought because some wanted to preserve the right to enslave. The following is taken from an article from Salon Magazine by Michael Lind.

Rather than insulting wveryon who tries to patiently discuss the point,

you come in rather late when the discussion of the fact that the Confederacy was bsed on slavery and the war as it began , was about
1responding to the cowardly attacks by the CSA states of Fla and SC(It was a bit of "Pearl Harbor"

2 As the war got to 1862 andthe union won at Antietam, Lincolns Emancipation Poclamation changed the tenor of the war.

Qe discussed all this many many pages bak. Rather than insulting wveryon who tries to patiently discuss the point, why not go back nd reread some of the early stuff.
Kinda gets annoying to be refed stuff weve already stipulated to ges go.
It usually means that youve not vailed yourself of the rich data (even JTT's point in this thread at least (absent all its insane denunciations) i not unreasonable .

(Tht i, unless he/ she/it) asserts that Fort Sumter was a false flag

At its most fundamental basis, the Civil War was about power.

Powerful interests in the South were not prepared to allow powerful interests in the North to eliminate an essential component of their power: Slavery.

Without slavery, the entrenched power base of the South would have been greatly reduced.

The agrarian economy of the South would never have weathered the elimination of slavery. It might have reestablished itself in some semblance of the eventual agrarian society of the Midwest, but not, most assuredly, without a reshuffling of the individual Southern powers. They weren't about to take the chance that they would survive the tumult intact.

Notwithstanding the inane rhetoric of the Confederate VP, the Civil War was not about a bunch of Southerners risking all because they were committed to a notion that it was God's will that blacks serve whites.

If there had been an alternative to war that allowed the Southern powerful to retain their power, while still eliminating slavery, there would have been no Civil War. Of course, there wasn't.

The notion that the South and all who fought for the Confederacy were the personification of evil, is silly, not to mention Manchean --- the bane of Liberals everywhere.

However, it should not be minimized that the Southern powers were quite easily prepared to continue to enslave people to preserve their power, and it is this fact that utterly corrupts any romantic notion that the South fought the war for state's rights or freedom in any sense of the word.

The Civil War was about power, but it is impossible to set the issue of slavery to the margins of any consideration.

However...this doesn't mean the Confederate Flag is a symbol of slavery and racism.