The origin of slavery in North America was contractual, a.k.a. "indentured servitude". The slave consented to it, and it was for a specified amount of time. Kidnapping Africans, making them slaves for life, and forcing their children into lifelong slavery was totally unnecessary and 100% pure evil.
Add to that the British and the French navies defending the Mississippi River and disrupting the Union blockade of southern sea ports.
Europe could see the growing economic power of the USA. They would have jumped at any chance to disunite the states, but they couldn't side with the south because of slavery.
Clearly, the south didn't want independence if it meant the loss of their slaves.
If the south had abolished slavery as soon as they seceded, that would have virtually guaranteed European intervention on the side of the South, which would have guaranteed victory for them. It would have given them the moral high ground. Their cries of "liberty" and "freedom" would actually hold water. The Union would be seen as tyrannical slaveholding imperialists.
Imagine British attacks from Canada, French defense of the south, and possibly even Mexican attempts to reclaim California.
Slavery was necessary for the rich landowners to stay rich, but it was NOT necessary for the southern economy. After the war, slaves became sharecroppers and worked on the same plantations. Hinton Rowan Helper, in his book "The Impending Crisis of the South", argued that slavery was hurting the south both economically and politically. The southern population was growing much slower than the north because most labor was done by slaves, so poor southerners had to move north/west to find jobs
MYTH - The War of 1861 - 1865 was fought over slavery.
FACT - Terribly untrue. The North fought the war over money. Plain and simple. When the South started Secession, Lincoln was asked, "Why not let the South go in peace?" To which he replied, "I can't let them go. Who would pay for the government?" Sensing total financial ruin for the North, Lincoln waged war on the South. The South fought the War to repel Northern aggression and invasion.
@canaydemedian That Lincoln quote is always repeated by southerners, but Lincoln never said it. The North fought to preserve the Union, and one of the advantages of there being a Union was to keep the states economically strong, so you're right, in a way, the North did fight over money.
The south, on the other hand, fought primarily to preserve/expand slavery. All you need to do is read the southern states' declarations of causes of secession, specifically South Carolina, Mississippi, and Texas.
@KayBeeEee1983 How do you know if all of that is true? Those declarations could be fake but you never know. Remember this, Nothing is true, everything is permisable.
@canaydemedian How do I know the Declarations of Causes of Secession are true? I don't, but I've never heard any southerners claim that they're forgeries.
I find it terribly ironic that you doubt the authenticity of the Declarations of Causes of Secession, but you proclaim a fake Lincoln quote to be a fact.
Wrong, slavery was not made an issue in the war until two years after it began. When slavery was made an issue, it was due to the Lincoln administration. Read the emancipation proclamation. It clearly states that only the slaves of the rebelling states were to be set free (leaving the slaves of the Union in tact). The last state to end slavery was New Jersey. Not to be a dick, but you should research before you try to explain American history.
Reason why the Civil War happened? State rights. What are these "state rights"? The state had the right to protect her citizens' private property. The central government had no right, says the South, to deprive private citizens' of their property and their moral right to keep that property.
Of course, the "right to private property" the Southern states were "protecting" was the right to own other human beings. The South equated Emancipation with government sponsored theft of their property.
you know..something struck my mind..if there was good farmland in the north theyd probably have gone along with as well. its not like you were born in the north and became instantly all knowing and aware of the evils of slavery
exactly, for the most part, america was an agrucultural nation. Slavery probably would have been used in the north. Sadly, many people back then were racist against the slaves. Many northerners hated blacks because they could take white peoples jobs. You make a good point!
I totally agree with you about the horrors of slavery. In terms of economics though , slaves strengthened the economy. You can't compare genocide with slavery. slavery was used for economic purposes. Slavery is horrible, and inhummane. But once again, this video is using the term necessary evil for economical purposes ONLY.
Exactly! One of the reasons why people back then were not willing to face the evil nature of slavery was because the evil institution WAS necessary for the survival of the USA back then. Many Southerners didn't like slavery too, but unfortunately money did the talking back then.
Slavery shaped america dramaticly. The slaves strengthened the southern economy, keeping them alive. If you look back in history, colonies in the new world weren't able to survive unless slavery was established there. (like the colony of Santo Domingo)The south survived before the civil war because of slaves. Also, the southerners weren't in any way evil. More than 3 quarters of them didn't even own slaves.
Wow!! that was very interesting I always wonder about slavely. The south did not want to give this up because its a big money making for business for cotton and its fifty % of their business in the south to make a healthy co. for the whole country. That really make scence!
The origin of slavery in North America was contractual, a.k.a. "indentured servitude". The slave consented to it, and it was for a specified amount of time. Kidnapping Africans, making them slaves for life, and forcing their children into lifelong slavery was totally unnecessary and 100% pure evil.
KayBeeEee1983 6 months ago
Add to that the British and the French navies defending the Mississippi River and disrupting the Union blockade of southern sea ports.
Europe could see the growing economic power of the USA. They would have jumped at any chance to disunite the states, but they couldn't side with the south because of slavery.
Clearly, the south didn't want independence if it meant the loss of their slaves.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
If the south had abolished slavery as soon as they seceded, that would have virtually guaranteed European intervention on the side of the South, which would have guaranteed victory for them. It would have given them the moral high ground. Their cries of "liberty" and "freedom" would actually hold water. The Union would be seen as tyrannical slaveholding imperialists.
Imagine British attacks from Canada, French defense of the south, and possibly even Mexican attempts to reclaim California.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
Slavery was necessary for the rich landowners to stay rich, but it was NOT necessary for the southern economy. After the war, slaves became sharecroppers and worked on the same plantations. Hinton Rowan Helper, in his book "The Impending Crisis of the South", argued that slavery was hurting the south both economically and politically. The southern population was growing much slower than the north because most labor was done by slaves, so poor southerners had to move north/west to find jobs
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
MYTH - The War of 1861 - 1865 was fought over slavery.
FACT - Terribly untrue. The North fought the war over money. Plain and simple. When the South started Secession, Lincoln was asked, "Why not let the South go in peace?" To which he replied, "I can't let them go. Who would pay for the government?" Sensing total financial ruin for the North, Lincoln waged war on the South. The South fought the War to repel Northern aggression and invasion.
canaydemedian 1 year ago
@canaydemedian That Lincoln quote is always repeated by southerners, but Lincoln never said it. The North fought to preserve the Union, and one of the advantages of there being a Union was to keep the states economically strong, so you're right, in a way, the North did fight over money.
The south, on the other hand, fought primarily to preserve/expand slavery. All you need to do is read the southern states' declarations of causes of secession, specifically South Carolina, Mississippi, and Texas.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 How do you know if all of that is true? Those declarations could be fake but you never know. Remember this, Nothing is true, everything is permisable.
canaydemedian 7 months ago
@canaydemedian How do I know the Declarations of Causes of Secession are true? I don't, but I've never heard any southerners claim that they're forgeries.
I find it terribly ironic that you doubt the authenticity of the Declarations of Causes of Secession, but you proclaim a fake Lincoln quote to be a fact.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
we only talk about slavery that happen in america but what about the slave trade and slavery in orther parts of the world
please look up these videos on youtube
"No Apologies for Slavery by The Southern Avenger"
"Islam, Blacks and African Slavery.... The truth about the American Slave trade. obamachrist"
"Africans started slavery - how it REALLY happened"
CrazyFavVideos 1 year ago
Wrong, slavery was not made an issue in the war until two years after it began. When slavery was made an issue, it was due to the Lincoln administration. Read the emancipation proclamation. It clearly states that only the slaves of the rebelling states were to be set free (leaving the slaves of the Union in tact). The last state to end slavery was New Jersey. Not to be a dick, but you should research before you try to explain American history.
treenfloyd 2 years ago
Reason why the Civil War happened? State rights. What are these "state rights"? The state had the right to protect her citizens' private property. The central government had no right, says the South, to deprive private citizens' of their property and their moral right to keep that property.
Of course, the "right to private property" the Southern states were "protecting" was the right to own other human beings. The South equated Emancipation with government sponsored theft of their property.
authorion 2 years ago
you know..something struck my mind..if there was good farmland in the north theyd probably have gone along with as well. its not like you were born in the north and became instantly all knowing and aware of the evils of slavery
johnayerger13 2 years ago
exactly, for the most part, america was an agrucultural nation. Slavery probably would have been used in the north. Sadly, many people back then were racist against the slaves. Many northerners hated blacks because they could take white peoples jobs. You make a good point!
83rdNYVolunteers 2 years ago
I totally agree with you about the horrors of slavery. In terms of economics though , slaves strengthened the economy. You can't compare genocide with slavery. slavery was used for economic purposes. Slavery is horrible, and inhummane. But once again, this video is using the term necessary evil for economical purposes ONLY.
83rdNYVolunteers 3 years ago
Exactly! One of the reasons why people back then were not willing to face the evil nature of slavery was because the evil institution WAS necessary for the survival of the USA back then. Many Southerners didn't like slavery too, but unfortunately money did the talking back then.
authorion 2 years ago
Slavery shaped america dramaticly. The slaves strengthened the southern economy, keeping them alive. If you look back in history, colonies in the new world weren't able to survive unless slavery was established there. (like the colony of Santo Domingo)The south survived before the civil war because of slaves. Also, the southerners weren't in any way evil. More than 3 quarters of them didn't even own slaves.
83rdNYVolunteers 3 years ago
Wow!! that was very interesting I always wonder about slavely. The south did not want to give this up because its a big money making for business for cotton and its fifty % of their business in the south to make a healthy co. for the whole country. That really make scence!
wildwestoutlaws 3 years ago 3