The Crown didn't see the colonists as being in the wrong nearly as much as the North, and the World, saw the South. The really odd thing about the ARW is that almost all the grievances that the colonists listed in the Declaration had been addressed by Parliament and many were resolved even before the Revolution started. Large factions in Parliament were seeking reconciliation throughout the conflict and attempts to reestablish friendly relations were nearly immediate once it was over. The ACW started nasty and got considerably worse very quickly. Britain, which could have easily gained a client state in North America while eliminating what was becoming a major rival on the world stage with very little effort on her part was still unable to buck home and world opinion which had been condemning the Southern States as the last civilized slaveholding entity in the world for several years; and this was in an era when naked imperialism was the accepted norm in International relations
If Lincoln had lived he most likely would have pushed for deporting all blacks from America. Because he was killed the liberals were able to include blacks as a legal part of America. If the South had won there might be a lot more blacks in the Southern States today, unless they had later deported them. In any case the country would be completely different if Lincoln had lived or if the South hadn't been defeated.
Well people don't have to be racists (or even pro-slavery in that era) to be anti-tyrant... Lincoln was an idiot.... The whole civil war could have been avoided if he just compensated the south for slaves.... However I doubt that was Booth's reasoning for offing Lincoln..
Teachers/professors shouldn't be doing stuff like that... Indoctrinating students with extremist politics isn't their job.
You would think neo-Confederates would hate Booth to be honest. He single handedly turned Abraham Lincoln into a legend and killed most of the contemporary sympathy for the south in the north, as well as shamed the south. There was a dirtiness to his act that outclasses almost any other villain in American history. Not even Benedict Arnold deserves the level of scorn owed to Booth.
Did Lincoln have that much money in his bank account? He was a really wealthy guy if he could have bought all of the slaves but what would he have then done with them to get his money back? Maybe he could have sold them to the Brazilians.
The nation was already dividing when he assumed office and the constitution allows for most of what he did; not to mention even the most unconstitutional stuff he did was equaled by the CSA's government (they threw out Habeus Corpus too) and it's outmatched by many things done by recent administrations.
I wasn't even suggesting he should have personally bought slaves, however the government should have. Slavery was a property issue and a lot of people had money invested in slaves and slaves weren't cheap. I can understand slave owners logic.... For example would you like the government just taking your car and claiming "well it's not environmental" or a horse or any asset you own? I doubt you would like that.
And over three million freed from permanent bondage. You can go one about how he wouldn't have freed the southern slaves if he didn't have too, but the fact is he did, and slavery in the north died in the years after as a direct consequence of it. My god the CSA would have been a nightmare. A third of the population in chains, another third poor share croppers living like serfs, and a literal aristocracy dominating and benefiting from the whole thing. Half of America regressing to the state that Europe at the same times was abandoning. I almost guarantee It would have collapsed by 1900. Feudalism is incompatible with the modern world.
It's apparent you don't understand what the problem was and can only see through your "I'm better than you" lens. Do you actually think southerners were racists? They only became racists when southern democrats turned into massive tyrants and that was over bitterness over slavery..
If our government just compensated slave owners we would have never had a civil war..... As a matter of fact the compensation would have been way cheaper than having a war... Of course the dude who was elected president and had his brain rocked by a donkey couldn't understand this...
You can whine all you like, that doesn't make it any less true. Also do you really want m to cry you a river over the fact that the government was trying to rein in the spread of slavery to new states? Because that's what it sounds like. And yeah, southerners were racist. Northerners were racist too. Pretty much everyone was a racist back then to some degree.
You realize Lincoln made efforts to dothat right? http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...n-stewart-lincoln-tried-buy-slaves-free-them/ Every time it was shot down. Even in the border states slave owners did not want to part with their human chattel for money, or anything else.
Why would I care now? it's kind of a dead issue is it not? What I want is for people to understand instead of try to out-lib one another.. Of course none of this changes the fact that Lincoln was a massive dummy...
I don't even know why you believe that - it's not true... It sounds like someone has taken what I have said since the birth of the internet and manufactured something.
Surely there are supporting documents and sources to back up that claim of you saying it's false, rather than just trusting some anonymous person on a political forum, right?
Do you have evidence to prove this isn't real lol? http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/tex...text;idno=lincoln5;rgn=div1;node=lincoln5:312
I could've sworn it was previous presidents who divided the nation in the first place and laid the groundwork for the Civil War to happen. Namely James Buchanan and Franklin Pierce.
to think it was any one or two specific presidents that caused the civil war is as dishonest as saying "the Civil War was about slavery" There were a LOT of issues, all complimenting and complicating the issues we had as a young country. and ultimately, it was not the morality of slavery that decided the fate of the confederacy (eg - they lost because slavery is evil), but rather, it was a very weak central govt that is a confederacy. When you can't get Alabama men to go to Virginia to fight the union armies.... because they would only defend alabama.... and the jefferson davis couldn't make them go... you can't win a war.
Yea, the North was about preserving the Union, the South was about keeping the institution known as slavery intact. Don't take my words for it, just read the letters of secession the Confederate states drafted before the war. South Carolina: Mississippi: They got straight to the point, it only took them two paragraphs before slavery was brought up Georgia: I think wins, because it was the first paragraph, second sentence.... Texas: So, I find it so amusing how people claim the civil war wasn't about slavery, when documented proof has shown otherwise. Keep digging cons.
