{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/6/2012 1:46:54 AM
28
Why did the Southern States of the U.S. seceded?
I know the main focus was slavery and the fact that Lincoln didn't win in a single Southern State, but was there more to it than that?
Could Americans please elaborate?
-
The most famous secession movement was the case of the Southern states of the United States. Secession from the United States was declared in eleven states (and failed in two others); they joined together to form the Confederate States of America (CSA). The eleven states of the CSA, in order of secession, were: South Carolina (seceded December 20, 1860), Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, North Carolina, Virginia, and Tennessee (seceded June 8, 1861). Secession was declared by its supporters in Missouri and Kentucky, but did not become effective as it was opposed by their pro-Union state governments. This secession movement brought about the American Civil War. The position of the Union was that the Confederacy was not a sovereign nation-- and never had been, but that "the Union" was always a single nation by intent of the states themselves, from 1776 onward-- and thus that a rebellion had been initiated by individuals. Historian Bruce Catton described President Abraham Lincoln's April 15, 1861, proclamation after the attack on Fort Sumter, which defined the Union's position on the hostitalities: After reciting the obvious fact that "combinations too powerful to be suppressed" by ordinary law courts and marshalls had taken charge of affairs in the seven secessionist states, it announced that the several states of the Union were called on to contribute 75,000 militia "...to suppress said combinations and to cause the laws to be duly executed." ... "And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peacefully to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.
-
well I can tell you that it was more political than anything. And slavery was only a minor part. But the north made it seem bigger than it was because it made them look better. Other than that I suggest researching on your own, and beware the first casualty of war. Truth.
-
The Confederdate States had an economy largely based around cotton, which was driven by mostly slave labor. The South felt threatened by the North because every Southern state could vote against the abololition of slavery and the Northern states could still pass the laws to get rid of it. So, between their wanting to preserve their economy and avoid a collapse, and the loss of power in Congress, they had some pretty good reasons to secede. (The benefits of just recently doing a 15 page paper on this very topic.) [Edited on 12.05.2012 6:16 PM PST]
-
-Northern states were pushing to end slavery which the South didn't want -Most changes the North were trying to make mostly benefited the North. Example: The North didn't want the South ordering products directly from England. The shipments went to the North and the South paid more to get them from the North when they could pay less by buying directly from England. TL:DR North paid less for goods and made the South pay more to get them. This is what I learned from my teacher. There were more reason thanthis however.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] iRdACheef619 It was largely about slavery. They had a 'good' thing going for them, they didn't want to give something up that was so beneficial to them - which was slavery. [/quote] not true at all It was states rights, lincoln want even on the ballet in most southern states and he still won due to unfair voting because the north had so much more voting power than the south. removing slavery was a punishment for suceeding
-
They passed writs of secession that explained their reasoning; start by reading those.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sgt Mag1 States' rights. [/quote] You also have to ask yourself: If a group of people don't want to be a part of a country, does the government have a right to wage war on said group of people? [Edited on 12.05.2012 6:09 PM PST]
-
I like the Tenth Amendment.
-
The south actually had valid reasons for leaving I can agree with. Besides, you know, slavery. That kind of killed support for them...
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] l Wersonian l Do you guys think that the Southerners were right about defending their style? I know most of us don't agree on slavery being fair, however back then it wasn't seen as such a morally wrong thing, or so I believe. If someone suddenly tried to take away everything that makes you, you, wouldn't you want to stop them as well?[/quote] Yep. For the time it was there way of life, they had the right to defend it. Just like today if our way of life was endanger then we have a right to defend it
-
Do you guys think that the Southerners were right about defending their life style? I know most of us don't agree on slavery being fair, however back then it wasn't seen as such a morally wrong thing, or so I believe. If someone suddenly tried to take away everything that makes you, you, wouldn't you want to stop them as well?
-
The south felt that their way of life was being threatened by the federal government.
-
Slavery was used more as recruiting propaganda by the North. Southerners were fighting to protect their culture, and states' rights. Most Southerners at that time were too poor to own slaves. I'm not saying that slavery wasn't prevalent or that it wasn't a problem, but it was exaggerated by a good amount. Many slaves were owned by one family that owned a plantation, and many whites worked alongside the slaves. The difference was that the white men were employees, rather than slaves. There wasn't one slave to each family. My family, even though they were Southern farmers, never owned any slaves. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] iRdACheef619 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SmD x MaYHeM x States' rights and Lincoln being elected without a single electoral vote from any Southern state. Many Southerners felt that their way of life was being threatened. They wanted to secede to allow the North to do as it wanted without it affecting the South, and to protect their culture. Honestly, many of the men that fought for the South never owned any slaves. [/quote]Sure, the men who fought in the war may haven't but many did own slaves in the south, to say that slavery wasn't the main cause for the South to leave the Union is.. political-incorrect. [/quote]
-
They felt the North was being unfair and threatening their way of life.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] iRdACheef619 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SmD x MaYHeM x States' rights and Lincoln being elected without a single electoral vote from any Southern state. Many Southerners felt that their way of was being threatened. They wanted to secede to allow the North to do as it wanted without it affecting the South, and to protect their culture. Honestly, many of the men that fought for the South never owned any slaves. [/quote]Sure, the men who fought in the war may haven't but many did own slaves in the south, to say that slavery wasn't the main cause for the South to leave the Union is.. political-incorrect. [/quote] while that's true it did play an important role later on in the war, thats why it's so popular right now
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SmD x MaYHeM x States' rights and Lincoln being elected without a single electoral vote from any Southern state. Many Southerners felt that their way of life was being threatened. They wanted to secede to allow the North to do as it wanted without it affecting the South, and to protect their culture. Honestly, many of the men that fought for the South never owned any slaves. [/quote]Sure, the men who fought in the war may haven't but many did own slaves in the south, to say that slavery wasn't the main cause for the South to leave the Union is.. political-incorrect.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Fridge Gnome [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] General Ryan Because they where inferior to the smarter, northern states. They [b]where[/b] for slavery.[/quote] Feels like bait, should I bite?[/quote]Sure :)
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] General Ryan Because they where inferior to the smarter, northern states. They [b]where[/b] for slavery.[/quote] Feels like bait, should I bite?
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SmD x MaYHeM x States' rights and Lincoln being elected without a single electoral vote from any Southern state. Many Southerners felt that their way of life was being threatened. They wanted to secede to allow the North to do as it wanted without it affecting the South, and to protect their culture. Honestly, many of the men that fought for the South never owned any slaves. [/quote] Yes, I heard only about 20% did, and most had to work in the field with the slaves because they only had a couple.
-
Because they where inferior to the smarter, northern states. They were for slavery. I would have just let them secede. [Edited on 12.05.2012 5:56 PM PST]
-
States' rights and Lincoln being elected without a single electoral vote from any Southern state. Many Southerners felt that their way of life was being threatened. They wanted to secede to allow the North to do as it wanted without it affecting the South, and to protect their culture. Honestly, many of the men that fought for the South never owned any slaves.
-
The south wanted state government, instead of federal gov
-
It was largely about slavery. They had a 'good' thing going for them, they didn't want to give something up that was so beneficial to them - which was slavery.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] l Wersonian l [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sgt Mag1 States' rights. [/quote] As the OP says, could you please elaborate?[/quote][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States%27_right#Civil_War]Sure[/url]
-
States rights, the south didnt like Lincoln so they planned on to secede.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sgt Mag1 States' rights. [/quote] As the OP says, could you please elaborate?
