War is hell. Was this the righteous war it was claimed to be? I feel many of the South and their agrarian culture saw the problems with taxation they were experiencing that little effected states of the North. It was a serious problem. Yet, the issue that precipitated for the southern states to begin to secede was the election of Lincoln who basically ran on an anti-slavery/abolishment platform. Although the North tried to decorate the issue with this clever resolution, the issue at heart was slavery and the South wanted to handle it on their own terms without being forced. But, they pushed the issue and started a war. I still am inclined to think that the Civil War was more of what Peter Marshall described in The Light and the Glory," which is that the Civil War was God's judgment on this American nation for not dealing with slavery when there had been plenty of opportunity. It make one think...
Thanks for sharing this, Tara Ross. This contains very legitimate questions about our history.
State's rights are extremely important, but the union of those states is what keeps us a power to be considered on the world stage. We are coming dangerously close to seeing another struggle in this mean. Pray for God's guidance!
It's complicated because if it really was just about state's rights then the southern states had the better argument. The United States was formed by the concept that the numerous independent states were voluntarily joined together. The entire design of the constitution was to ensure that the states remained equal to one another in power and didn't lose their complete autonomy. How then could they be required by force to remain in a union that no longer served their interests? It's a terrible argument.
On the other hand, slavery, I think we can all NOW agree, is a supreme moral wrong. It would be easy today to argue that it is worth fighting a war to end it. However, at the time, slavery was legal (enshrined, in part, in the constitution) and the north had no legal right to interfere in the practice.
So, they chose the argument that offended the least number of people. But it's obvious that the practice of slavery was the impetus for the war and it was mostly an economic disagreement more than a moral one for many of the major players.
I disagree. Slavery was not enshrined in the Constitution. If the Constitution had been taken verbatim, we would not have needed an amendment to make it illegal. Unfortunately, it was never dealt with although many were questioning it at the time of the American Revolution. To have made it part of the mandate presented by the Declaration of Independence would torn the weak alliance apart. Instead, the intolerable was tolerated rather than addressed.
I don't disagree with you except to point out that the 3/5 compromise did effectively place slavery in the constitution as an accepted practice. Your points about it being necessary are valid and correct.
However, a counterpoint argument could be made that by kicking the can down the road they forced an even larger fight (Civil War) the results of which kept the states in a union yet all but destroyed their original concept.
I know the war was over States Rights. It is not an easy conversation as to all the factors that make it more than just complicated. This nation is better now and we are the best place to live on the earth.
History, like everyday life is indeed, complicated. People and nations act or don’t act based on multiple and sometimes conflicting interests.
Slavery is a perfect illustration. Yes, Lincoln was definitely anti-slavery. But he was above all a practical politician. Many in the South also were anti-slavery but lacked the vision or political power to act on it.
How sad the nation had to shed so much blood in a conflict between literally brothers.
Too many today try to put historical figures into a box that fits their narrative._
Sometimes history is not so cut and dried. It’s often said that the war was about slavery, but you have clearly demonstrated, Tara, that there was so much involved that the question of slavery was not the focus or even a consideration as the purpose of the war. The main goal was to save the union. They had their eyes set on a “united states”. Not an easy birth of a nation. Excellent post again, Tara.
Thank you Tara. More than 150 years later and the raw feelings do not subside. Of course, the Civil War was about preserving the Union and about abolishing slavery.
If it weren't such a valuable political issue, I believe that racism as it is currently shoved in our faces would go away. We are equal in the eyes of the lord and the law and it is time to act like it.
Human nature has not changed…people standing up for human justice do not typically have the majority voice. But God blessed the “minority” stance to prevail in the typical political environment, and the reality of all “being created equal” was, in my opinion, the most significant victory of maintaining the Union and Constitution.
People, regardless of race are always pawns for politicians and elites to achieve a political end. The last few years of our history should have taught us that if nothing else. So, no surprise to learn this.
War is hell. Was this the righteous war it was claimed to be? I feel many of the South and their agrarian culture saw the problems with taxation they were experiencing that little effected states of the North. It was a serious problem. Yet, the issue that precipitated for the southern states to begin to secede was the election of Lincoln who basically ran on an anti-slavery/abolishment platform. Although the North tried to decorate the issue with this clever resolution, the issue at heart was slavery and the South wanted to handle it on their own terms without being forced. But, they pushed the issue and started a war. I still am inclined to think that the Civil War was more of what Peter Marshall described in The Light and the Glory," which is that the Civil War was God's judgment on this American nation for not dealing with slavery when there had been plenty of opportunity. It make one think...
Thanks for sharing this, Tara Ross. This contains very legitimate questions about our history.
I tend to agree 👍
State's rights are extremely important, but the union of those states is what keeps us a power to be considered on the world stage. We are coming dangerously close to seeing another struggle in this mean. Pray for God's guidance!
It's definitely a complicated issue!
It's complicated because if it really was just about state's rights then the southern states had the better argument. The United States was formed by the concept that the numerous independent states were voluntarily joined together. The entire design of the constitution was to ensure that the states remained equal to one another in power and didn't lose their complete autonomy. How then could they be required by force to remain in a union that no longer served their interests? It's a terrible argument.
On the other hand, slavery, I think we can all NOW agree, is a supreme moral wrong. It would be easy today to argue that it is worth fighting a war to end it. However, at the time, slavery was legal (enshrined, in part, in the constitution) and the north had no legal right to interfere in the practice.
So, they chose the argument that offended the least number of people. But it's obvious that the practice of slavery was the impetus for the war and it was mostly an economic disagreement more than a moral one for many of the major players.
I disagree. Slavery was not enshrined in the Constitution. If the Constitution had been taken verbatim, we would not have needed an amendment to make it illegal. Unfortunately, it was never dealt with although many were questioning it at the time of the American Revolution. To have made it part of the mandate presented by the Declaration of Independence would torn the weak alliance apart. Instead, the intolerable was tolerated rather than addressed.
I don't disagree with you except to point out that the 3/5 compromise did effectively place slavery in the constitution as an accepted practice. Your points about it being necessary are valid and correct.
However, a counterpoint argument could be made that by kicking the can down the road they forced an even larger fight (Civil War) the results of which kept the states in a union yet all but destroyed their original concept.
I know the war was over States Rights. It is not an easy conversation as to all the factors that make it more than just complicated. This nation is better now and we are the best place to live on the earth.
Complicated to say the least! Thank you for today's lesson Tara!! 🇺🇸👍🇺🇸
Thank you, Tara, for this little known story!
My belief is that the Civil War was all about slavery and this action taken in 1861 was to try to bring peace before further bloodshed!
May I suggest reading "Grant" by Ron Chernow? I have learned a ton reading this book
Reading Grant's autobiography is also very informative.
An interesting lesson, mainly about how politicians try make a point without offending the majority.....
History, like everyday life is indeed, complicated. People and nations act or don’t act based on multiple and sometimes conflicting interests.
Slavery is a perfect illustration. Yes, Lincoln was definitely anti-slavery. But he was above all a practical politician. Many in the South also were anti-slavery but lacked the vision or political power to act on it.
How sad the nation had to shed so much blood in a conflict between literally brothers.
Too many today try to put historical figures into a box that fits their narrative._
That is a dangerous and narrow minded approach.
Sometimes history is not so cut and dried. It’s often said that the war was about slavery, but you have clearly demonstrated, Tara, that there was so much involved that the question of slavery was not the focus or even a consideration as the purpose of the war. The main goal was to save the union. They had their eyes set on a “united states”. Not an easy birth of a nation. Excellent post again, Tara.
Thank you Tara. More than 150 years later and the raw feelings do not subside. Of course, the Civil War was about preserving the Union and about abolishing slavery.
If it weren't such a valuable political issue, I believe that racism as it is currently shoved in our faces would go away. We are equal in the eyes of the lord and the law and it is time to act like it.
When the first cannon fired on Fort Sumner, It was about State's Rights to preserve slavery!
👍👍👍
Human nature has not changed…people standing up for human justice do not typically have the majority voice. But God blessed the “minority” stance to prevail in the typical political environment, and the reality of all “being created equal” was, in my opinion, the most significant victory of maintaining the Union and Constitution.
People, regardless of race are always pawns for politicians and elites to achieve a political end. The last few years of our history should have taught us that if nothing else. So, no surprise to learn this.