What was the USA's Civil War All About?

[Suki]

What was the United States Civil war about? (1861-1865)

Many thought to liberate the slaves. But was it about liberating the slaves? And Harriet Beecher Stowe's book "Uncle Tom's Cabin" all that influential?

I don't think the North was overwhelmingly concerned about liberating the slaves. Though the abolitionist movement I am sure had some propagandistic interest in siding with the North. To make it brief. The Civil War of the United States was about the destiny the USA would take into its future. Would it stay as its main raison d'etre as an agriculturally centered and productive society, with a feudal economic system at its core....or would it go for wage laborers and immigrant exploitation and capitalist centered modes of production, and industrialization and its accompanying Industrial Revolution model as the pillar of USA economic and political manifestation in the future? That was the crossroads. And the Civil war was by far the bloodiest, longest and most horrific war in the USA's entire history. The Yankees and the Confederacy were the two groups vying for supremacy of the Destiny of the USA. Ofcourse the Carpetbaggers won. The North won, the capitalists/industrialists won.

Many NOrtherners had serious doubts about African slaves even being human. And many Southerners felt the Northerners were after their wealth and attacking 'their way of life' and the seed of basic philosophical and religious and political differences between both camps were irreconcilable. Adams vs. Jefferson. Adams was against slavery and knew it would split the USA in half. Because you can't write a constitution where you state all men are created equal, and being so deeply republican and democratic and exclude so many. But Jefferson had it all worked out in his head. He could have his cake and eat it too. Monticello, the presidency, high stature and intellectual life, and have slaves too...including, ones who looked exactly like him with Sally Hemmings. No contradiction there. Blacks were not white people's equals, but they were useful, just not to trusted with running something as precious and important as a democracy...for white, literate, property-owning men only.

La Historia...it teaches us many things.

[El_Jibaro]

[i]Right ?

Yep, it is all hot empty air on your part .

By the way, the United States did pay a hefty price to ABOLISH SLAVERY, since that is WHY the South SECEDED from the UNION and attacked Fort Sumter in the first place. Don't you KNOW why Southerners hated Abraham Lincoln when he was ELECTED in 1860? Or do you get your "facts" from Mao's LITTLE RED BOOK which you found in a box of CRACKER JACKS ?

[ojosverdes16]

Suki, mi pana, I bet you know your history, both US and Cuban,
[b][i]Right ?

Yep, don't pay much attention to these clowns on PR.com it is all hot empty air on their little pitipois minds ....

By the way, what would a Jibaro know about the United States and the people who paid a hefty price to ABOLISH SLAVERY, since those are the AFRO-AMERICAN South. What does the Jibaro know about the UNION or DIXIE?
Go for it, Suki, teach this Jibaro a thing or two about history, I know you can do it!
? [/quote]

Your Ojosverdes16

[El_Jibaro]

I just have to drive 4 hours to see the Gettysburg Memorial to see where 51,000 men died, and that was a LARGE NUMBER of Americans dying in only one battle to set Slaves Free.

Now, if the ABOLITION OF SLAVERY was not what ticked off the South when Abraham Lincoln was elected, I don't know what else would.

• Perhaps you can enlighten me, since you sound to be ticked off too with George Bush being elected for President ...

[EL_BORICUA]

You should learn the history before spouting whatever it is
you spout.
First of all the CIVIL WAR was not a war to free slaves it was a war to save the UNION Pres.Lincoln once said that if
he could save the union without setting free one he would
do it,if he could save it by setting free some but not all
he would,and if he could do it setting free all he would.
Pres.Lincoln main concern was to save the union not free
the slaves,his platform when he ran for president was that
he would oppose the spread of slavery,or that there would be
no more slave states.
The emancipation proclamation was a strategic not humanitarian move by setting the slaves free he knew that
the slaves left in droves and undermined the southern cause
it also more importantly gave the north more troops.

[El_Jibaro]

The only reason why the SOUTH decided to break away was because LINCOLN was elected President to begin with, because he had an ABOLITIONIST Platform. It would be the same as if California and New York seceded over a Pro-Life Republican being elected.

• IF THAT DOES NOT MAKE THE CIVIL WAR A WAR OVER SLAVERY, THEN YOU MUST BE A FUGITIVE MACHETERO ...

[EL_BORICUA]

Once again Lincoln was not an abolitionist I am sure he was against slavery but his platform was to oppose the spread of slavery to any new states.
He never once while campaigning for president call for the abolition of slavery.
The fighting over the spread of slavery had been going on in Kansas and Missouri long before the Civil War started.
In fact Lincoln favored sending freed slave to Central America or back to Africa.
Now dont get me wrong I dont say this to take anything away from Abraham Lincoln I greatly admire this man and he is among the greatest leaders the U.S. has ever had but lets
tell history as it was not a politically correct version that makes us feel good.