What Started The Civil War?

[ickysdad]

You guys think this is just a tad over the top? I mean leaving it at tariffs,the western territories or whatever but going on into secular humanism is just a bit much IMHO....

 

http://www.confederateamericanpride.com/10causes.html

[DesertFox]

I am pretty sure the whole thing is made up from his gluteus maximus. . . .

Of note however, you will find most historian pretty approachable.

For example, you could write Gary W. Gallagher

He presented the teaching company course on the ACW

Edited July 6, 2015 by DesertFox

[swerve]

What started the Civil War? I was going to describe Charles 1st's attempt to introduce royal absolutism, but I see another civil war is meant.

Edited July 6, 2015 by swerve

[BillB]

What started the Civil War? I was going to describe Charles 1st's attempt to introduce royal absolutism, but I see another civil war in meant.

Nice one!

 

The Cousin's wasn't really a Civil War, more a vulgar brawl over matters that remain unclear and consequently unresolved. We did ought to take a leaf out of their book with regard to our home-grown porridge-flavoured secessionists tho IMNSHO...

 

BillB

[BP]

 

What started the Civil War? I was going to describe Charles 1st's attempt to introduce royal absolutism, but I see another civil war in meant.

Nice one!

 

The Cousin's wasn't really a Civil War, more a vulgar brawl over matters that remain unclear and consequently unresolved. We did ought to take a leaf out of their book with regard to our home-grown porridge-flavoured secessionists tho IMNSHO...

 

BillB

 

 

It was largely a continuation of the American Revolution, which greatly stemmed from feuds brought over from England (and Scotland/Ireland).

[Ken Estes]

War of the Northern Aggression

War of the Southern Rebellion

War Between the States

War for the Preservation of the Union

 

...take your pick!

 

...and more. There must also be a textbook list approved by the Texas State Board of Education with a completely different take on it, intended for the 35% of schools in the US still teaching Genesis version of human origins and other fun stuff.

 

Just crazy. And I was just guessing....

Students in Texas public schools could soon be learning that democracy and our nation’s government are based on the ideas of biblical figures like Moses and King Solomon. That’s because the State Board of Education is set to adopt new textbooks that teach this peculiar distortion of American history.

Such an outcome would surely gladden the hearts of culture warriors who insist that America is a distinctly Christian nation that should be guided by biblical law. But it should distress parents, scholars and others who recognize the profound influence religion has had in our history — as in the struggles against slavery and for racial equality — but object to exaggerating it and misleading students about it.

Barring late changes by publishers, the new Texas textbooks will distort the facts on a variety of other topics as well. That’s largely because the textbooks are based on controversial curriculum standards SBOE politicians put in place four years ago. Even the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute has called the state’s new history standards a “politicized distortion.” Sharing these concerns, we reviewed the proposed new textbooks for the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund.

....

 

 

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20141116-textbooks-proposed-for-texas-schools-open-can-of-worms.ece

Edited July 6, 2015 by Ken Estes

[JWB]

War of the Northern Aggression

War of the Southern Rebellion

War Between the States

War for the Preservation of the Union

 

...take your pick!

 

...and more. There must also be a textbook list approved by the Texas State Board of Education with a completely different take on it, intended for the 35% of schools in the US still teaching Genesis version of human origins and other fun stuff.

 

Just crazy. And I was just guessing....

Students in Texas public schools could soon be learning that democracy and our nation’s government are based on the ideas of biblical figures like Moses and King Solomon. That’s because the State Board of Education is set to adopt new textbooks that teach this peculiar distortion of American history.

Such an outcome would surely gladden the hearts of culture warriors who insist that America is a distinctly Christian nation that should be guided by biblical law. But it should distress parents, scholars and others who recognize the profound influence religion has had in our history — as in the struggles against slavery and for racial equality — but object to exaggerating it and misleading students about it.

Barring late changes by publishers, the new Texas textbooks will distort the facts on a variety of other topics as well. That’s largely because the textbooks are based on controversial curriculum standards SBOE politicians put in place four years ago. Even the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute has called the state’s new history standards a “politicized distortion.” Sharing these concerns, we reviewed the proposed new textbooks for the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund.

....

 

 

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20141116-textbooks-proposed-for-texas-schools-open-can-of-worms.ece

How about the War Between Illiterate Factory Workers vs Illiterate Farmers? Northerners believed slavery was a threat to wages. Southerners believed abolition would force poor farmers to pay more taxes. Basic economics.

[RETAC21]

 

What started the Civil War? I was going to describe Charles 1st's attempt to introduce royal absolutism, but I see another civil war in meant.

Nice one!

 

The Cousin's wasn't really a Civil War, more a vulgar brawl over matters that remain unclear and consequently unresolved. We did ought to take a leaf out of their book with regard to our home-grown porridge-flavoured secessionists tho IMNSHO...

 

BillB

 

 

Something to do with tea, taxes and Boston harbor...

[FlyingCanOpener]

It was largely a continuation of the American Revolution, which greatly stemmed from feuds brought over from England (and Scotland/Ireland).

Like our friend Old Tanker (RIP) would say so many times, the Civil War was merely the last phase of the English Civil War.

[DesertFox]

 

War of the Northern Aggression

War of the Southern Rebellion

War Between the States

War for the Preservation of the Union

 

...take your pick!

 

...and more. There must also be a textbook list approved by the Texas State Board of Education with a completely different take on it, intended for the 35% of schools in the US still teaching Genesis version of human origins and other fun stuff.

 

Just crazy. And I was just guessing....

Students in Texas public schools could soon be learning that democracy and our nation’s government are based on the ideas of biblical figures like Moses and King Solomon. That’s because the State Board of Education is set to adopt new textbooks that teach this peculiar distortion of American history.

Such an outcome would surely gladden the hearts of culture warriors who insist that America is a distinctly Christian nation that should be guided by biblical law. But it should distress parents, scholars and others who recognize the profound influence religion has had in our history — as in the struggles against slavery and for racial equality — but object to exaggerating it and misleading students about it.

Barring late changes by publishers, the new Texas textbooks will distort the facts on a variety of other topics as well. That’s largely because the textbooks are based on controversial curriculum standards SBOE politicians put in place four years ago. Even the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute has called the state’s new history standards a “politicized distortion.” Sharing these concerns, we reviewed the proposed new textbooks for the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund.

....

 

 

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20141116-textbooks-proposed-for-texas-schools-open-can-of-worms.ece

How about the War Between Illiterate Factory Workers vs Illiterate Farmers? Northerners believed slavery was a threat to wages. Southerners believed abolition would force poor farmers to pay more taxes. Basic economics.

 

 

From everything I have read, literacy actually was really high . . . .Seen numbers for the north of 85 to 90% and 80% in the South.

One of the reasons why we know so much is due to the writing of soldiers and not just officers. They seemed to love to write home.

[BillB]

 

 

What started the Civil War? I was going to describe Charles 1st's attempt to introduce royal absolutism, but I see another civil war in meant.

Nice one!

 

The Cousin's wasn't really a Civil War, more a vulgar brawl over matters that remain unclear and consequently unresolved. We did ought to take a leaf out of their book with regard to our home-grown porridge-flavoured secessionists tho IMNSHO...

 

BillB

 

 

Something to do with tea, taxes and Boston harbor...

 

No mate, that was ninety years earlier.

 

BillB

[BillB]

 

 

War of the Northern Aggression

War of the Southern Rebellion

War Between the States

War for the Preservation of the Union

 

...take your pick!

 

...and more. There must also be a textbook list approved by the Texas State Board of Education with a completely different take on it, intended for the 35% of schools in the US still teaching Genesis version of human origins and other fun stuff.

 

Just crazy. And I was just guessing....

Students in Texas public schools could soon be learning that democracy and our nation’s government are based on the ideas of biblical figures like Moses and King Solomon. That’s because the State Board of Education is set to adopt new textbooks that teach this peculiar distortion of American history.

Such an outcome would surely gladden the hearts of culture warriors who insist that America is a distinctly Christian nation that should be guided by biblical law. But it should distress parents, scholars and others who recognize the profound influence religion has had in our history — as in the struggles against slavery and for racial equality — but object to exaggerating it and misleading students about it.

Barring late changes by publishers, the new Texas textbooks will distort the facts on a variety of other topics as well. That’s largely because the textbooks are based on controversial curriculum standards SBOE politicians put in place four years ago. Even the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute has called the state’s new history standards a “politicized distortion.” Sharing these concerns, we reviewed the proposed new textbooks for the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund.

....

 

 

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20141116-textbooks-proposed-for-texas-schools-open-can-of-worms.ece

How about the War Between Illiterate Factory Workers vs Illiterate Farmers? Northerners believed slavery was a threat to wages. Southerners believed abolition would force poor farmers to pay more taxes. Basic economics.

 

 

From everything I have read, literacy actually was really high . . . .Seen numbers for the north of 85 to 90% and 80% in the South.

One of the reasons why we know so much is due to the writing of soldiers and not just officers. They seemed to love to write home.

 

And keeping journals and diaries of their experiences while serving. IIRC that's where Ken Burns got a lot of the material for his documentary series on the Civil War.

 

BillB

[RETAC21]

What started the Civil War? I was going to describe Charles 1st's attempt to introduce royal absolutism, but I see another civil war in meant.

Nice one!

 

The Cousin's wasn't really a Civil War, more a vulgar brawl over matters that remain unclear and consequently unresolved. We did ought to take a leaf out of their book with regard to our home-grown porridge-flavoured secessionists tho IMNSHO...

 

BillB

 

Something to do with tea, taxes and Boston harbor...

No mate, that was ninety years earlier.

 

BillB[/quote

 

Which was another civil war but one in which the rebels won...

[swerve]

 

 

From everything I have read, literacy actually was really high . . . .Seen numbers for the north of 85 to 90% and 80% in the South.

One of the reasons why we know so much is due to the writing of soldiers and not just officers. They seemed to love to write home.

 

Hang on . . . almost 40% of the people in the Confederacy were slaves. & IIRC rather few of them were literate. 80% of black American adults were illiterate in 1870, which puts a ceiling of 70% on southern literacy, even assuming 100% literacy among the free population.

[DesertFox]

 

 

 

From everything I have read, literacy actually was really high . . . .Seen numbers for the north of 85 to 90% and 80% in the South.

One of the reasons why we know so much is due to the writing of soldiers and not just officers. They seemed to love to write home.

 

Hang on . . . almost 40% of the people in the Confederacy were slaves. & IIRC rather few of them were literate. 80% of black American adults were illiterate in 1870, which puts a ceiling of 70% on southern literacy, even assuming 100% literacy among the free population.

 

 

I suspect the sources I read indicate that it is 80% among white southerners

[Wobbly Head]

 

 

 

 

From everything I have read, literacy actually was really high . . . .Seen numbers for the north of 85 to 90% and 80% in the South.

One of the reasons why we know so much is due to the writing of soldiers and not just officers. They seemed to love to write home.

Hang on . . . almost 40% of the people in the Confederacy were slaves. & IIRC rather few of them were literate. 80% of black American adults were illiterate in 1870, which puts a ceiling of 70% on southern literacy, even assuming 100% literacy among the free population.

I suspect the sources I read indicate that it is 80% among white southerners

Writing home has always been a soldiers tradition. Like most wars its 1% action 99% boredom so you have to have something to pass the time a lot of soldiers would have improved their literacy in their writing and waiting for something from the postman gives you something to look forward too. The journals of soldiers would be a good historical source but most of the commen soldiers letters would not have survived They would be more Hustler than PBS.

[DesertFox]

Many of the guys were pretty young too and were writing to mom. Many men did not marry until 26 and many women did not marry until around 21 or 22. Our image of the teenager marriages, while it did happen, were not the norm.

As such, there may have been less Hustler than one might think although there was certainly some (there was also porn available). I suspect a lot of complaints about officers, the other men, and food.

[JWB]

Replace literacy with poor and nothing changes. The war was about competing economic systems. Dirt farmers in the South dodged taxes because of slavery and the plantation system. Factory laborers in the North were terrified about the expansion of slavery into industry.

Edited July 7, 2015 by JWB

[Ivanhoe]

Not just economics;

 

http://coursesite.uhcl.edu/HSH/Whitec/terms/G/GreatAwake.htm

 

google "Second Great Awakening".

[ickysdad]

Replace literacy with poor and nothing changes. The war was about competing economic systems. Dirt farmers in the South dodged taxes because of slavery and the plantation system. Factory laborers in the North were terrified about the expansion of slavery into industry.

IMHO it is all abut State's rights,politics,culture,economics, and territories but each of these was driven by slavery in the South.

1.State rights? Slavery drove that issue because the South felt the need to regulate that istitution itself and only itself.

 

2. Politics? Well in the South one's political career depended on how much you supported slavery.

 

3 Culture? How high one was held in esteem inthe South was dependant on how many slaves one owned and even after the CSA instituted a draft peopel who owned so many slaves were exempted from the draft.

 

4.territories? Well as land wore out Plantation owners could simply take their mobile asset,their slaves, and move to new land as long as the latter was availiable. So slavery drove the territorial argument.

 

5.economis? The plantation owners were convinced that slavery was the only way cotton was profitable and they just didn't want to give up their investment. When it comes to money it will surprise you how people can rationalize something as wicked as slavery is justifiable.

[JWB]

 

Replace literacy with poor and nothing changes. The war was about competing economic systems. Dirt farmers in the South dodged taxes because of slavery and the plantation system. Factory laborers in the North were terrified about the expansion of slavery into industry.

IMHO it is all abut State's rights,politics,culture,economics, and territories but each of these was driven by slavery in the South.

1.State rights? Slavery drove that issue because the South felt the need to regulate that istitution itself and only itself.

 

2. Politics? Well in the South one's political career depended on how much you supported slavery.

 

3 Culture? How high one was held in esteem inthe South was dependant on how many slaves one owned and even after the CSA instituted a draft peopel who owned so many slaves were exempted from the draft.

 

4.territories? Well as land wore out Plantation owners could simply take their mobile asset,their slaves, and move to new land as long as the latter was availiable. So slavery drove the territorial argument.

 

5.economis? The plantation owners were convinced that slavery was the only way cotton was profitable and they just didn't want to give up their investment. When it comes to money it will surprise you how people can rationalize something as wicked as slavery is justifiable.

 

This entire post gives just the Southern half of the picture. The Northern motive was almost entirely economic. The info in the link provided by Ivanhoe is instructive but not convincing. If slavery provided a net economic benefit to factory labor in the North then the war would never had started. The North would have embraced slavery. The South would have had no reason to leave.

[ickysdad]

Yes but all Northern states had outlawed slavery by 1800 right? Wasn't this before the NorthEast/North had really become industrialized?

 

 

Now of course this is interesting...

 

http://slavenorth.com/slavenorth.htm

Edited July 8, 2015 by ickysdad

[Adam_S]

So why did the North get involved? Why not just let the South leave the Union?

Edited July 8, 2015 by Adam_S

[JWB]

So why did the North get involved? Why not just let the South leave the Union?

Legal doctrine and precedent. If the Southern states could leave so could the Northern states. The Union would then become the Division. Or the Dissolution. Or some other failed state. Good bye USA and liberty and all conceptions of a nation state under the rule of law instead of the law of rule. Royalism, empire, divine right, lawful coercion, arbitrary tyranny and a whole lot of things I don't even want to contemplate.

[ickysdad]

Well the Constitution starts off with "In Order to form a more Perfect Union" which begs the question more perfect then what? The Artilces of Confederation? I think it was section X or XIII of that article which stated the Union was perpetual. Just MHO though !!!

 

another interesting site...

 

http://civilwartalk.com/

Edited July 8, 2015 by ickysdad