Childhood is when you think it was about slavery Adulthood is

>>2286358
It was about money, for both sides.

>>2286394
Money from slaves

>>2286470
Yeah but they wouldn't give a fuck about keeping slaves if it didn't bring them money. So tge root cause is money.

>>2286478
>Yeah but they wouldn't give a fuck about keeping slaves if it didn't bring them money.

That's not true though. The average poor southerner was actually hurt economically by slavery, but still wanted to "keep the niggers down."

>>2286478
Most of the southern populace didn't really benefit from slaves, at least not directly. A lot of people joined the army because they legitimately thought the North was going to free the niggers who were all going to rape their wives and daughters, and do to whitey what happened in Haiti.

Money is behind most wars, but few wars are fought for one sole reason.

>>2286394
>It was about money

Nope. Poor whites didn't fight for money but to keep 'darkies' as underclass below them.

>>2286487
Nobody gave a single fuck about what poor southerners wanted, plus you're making shit up.

>>2286487
Look up why West Virginia seceded, faggot

>>2286478
Many did harbor feelings blacks were subhuman, such as Davis. Not Jackson, though.

>>2286358
Actual tier is when you realize people are stupid as fuck and they should all be gassed.

>>2286496
>Nobody gave a single fuck about what poor southerners wanted,

Believe it or not, you can't fight a war with just rich people.

>plus you're making shit up.

Yeah I'm making up 200 years of history.

>>2286500

Seems like you're confused.

>>2286492
>>2286495
>>2286487
ITT cuckolds who onky read 20th century cuck authors and never primary sources

>>2286509
Not an argument.

>>2286510

The primary sources all say it's about slavery you retard.

>>2286516
So you've never read them huh. Start with Louisiana newspaper archives, good shit.

>>2286510
Primary sources is the biggest meme when it comes to the Civil War.
Please, tell me how I'm cucked by trusting books written by qualified historians who study the period with a passion your autistic fervor for "muh lost cause" can never equal.

>>2286510
>Regarding the declaration of secession from Texas
>“...We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.”

>>2286524
>Qualified historians could not possibly have an agenda

>>2286550
>pointing out that the Southern plantation owner's inhumanity to their fellow men and their desire to destroy the American democracy to maintain their social and economic status caused the Civil War isn't a noble agenda

>>2286557
If your agenda is noble than you'd have no problem with people studying how you came to that conclusion

>>2286550
Ok rhen, how else might you interpret >>2286533
?

>>2286566
I'm not saying the narrative is necessarily wrong, I'm saying the idea expressed here >>2286524
is dumb.

>>2286358
>Is there a fourth tier?
When you know it's about race. Everything is.

>>2286690
This is literally nigger-tier
It's all about class in society and power in war and you know it

>>2286758
The base of class is race.

>>2286766
Racism is founded on class, i.e. "they're poorer and less advanced than us, thus they're inferior" and the other way around

>>2286779
>being poor will magically turn your skin black and drop your IQ by 60 points

>>2286782
if african civilizations had been as advanced as european ones, they wouldn't have been viewed as an inferior race

this is a hypotetical scenario though, and obviously it would never have been possible

>>2286788
They would need to stop being mentally retarded in order to be successful first.

>>2286794
Well obviously, but that's beside the point

>>2286806
So we're in agreement that race is largely the basis for social status. I mean there's a reason why even rug selling Arabs and barely literate Bosniak refugees become rich in America while blacks still live in their own shit.

4th tier is realizing the south had every right to leave the union and the north became tyrants they fought to leave.

>>2287189
The south started the war though.

Adulthood is when you stop forcing this meme and just read a book.

>>2286478
You are grossly underestimating the rationalization they had to convince themselves that slavery was morally right.

>>2287405

Feds wouldn't leave their installations in the south

>>2287426
Why would the Feds leave federal property?

File: Robert lee.jpg (6KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 225x225px

>>2287632
Because its not yours REEEEEEEE

>>2286495
>never taken an economics class

as soon as the darkies became free they could compete with whites for better jobs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis_riots_of_1866


This whole bullshit about poor white being "victims" of slavery is leftist class conflict mumbo jumbo. In reality, poor white had pretty logical reasons for keeping slavery intact. The only poor whites who didn't were those who didn't live anywhere near the institution such as appalachia, and they mostly supported the union.

>>2286524
As soon as I read Foner's book about how mean that racist Andrew Johnson was and how Lincoln would totally done a 180 and give all blacks the right to vote if he didn't die I realized that "qualified historians" were a fucking meme. Even Vann Woodward said the AHA was a propaganda arm of the New Left by the time he retired.

>>2287405
funny I don't remember the south invading the north and causing the first casualty.

Why would the South wage a war over a way of doing plantations that was rapidly becoming obsolete? Surely even with the South's dependence on slavery due to a lack of industrialization they realized it wasn't going to work in the long run?

>>2286533
are you implying that was at all controversial in 1860? White supremacy was held as completely normal by everyone except the most radical abolitionists. Here's what Lincoln said during the Douglas Debates.

>“While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]---that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and
political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. .”

>>2287753
>This whole bullshit about poor white being "victims" of slavery is leftist class conflict mumbo jumbo
You left the part about whites opposing slavery because they did not want to compete against slave labor or that to many yeoman the slavers presented a much larger threat to their livelihood than free blacks could ever be.

>>2287978
slavery had been present in the colonies since the 1600's. The percentage of the population that were slaves in the south stayed consistent since at least the revolution, probably higher before that. Slavery was a matter of fact reality in the south, there wasn't a choice between slaves vs no blacks but slaves vs freedman. The only yeoman who were scared of slavery were those who believed the conspiracy of "slave power" attempting to spread slavery to the north which was never true.

File: 1479615007505.png (428KB, 558x744px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 558x744px

>>2286500

>>2287992
>The only yeoman who were scared of slavery
They were scared of the slavers because they directly competed against them. Given the latter's size and power they ended up winning most of the time with yeomen later becoming their dependents. The same thing happened in Rome though I'm not sure if anybody even considered abolishing slavery in that period.

>>2287805
What do you not understand about "political debatr"? The point of a debate is to persuade the voters to elect you, and this requires pandering to their innate prejudices. Neither Lincoln nor Douglas were not as prejudiced as their debate made them to be. They said those things to win over prejudiced white farmers.

>>2286358
The South should secede from the Union tbqh. We are tired of Yanks and west coast liberal elites telling us what to do.

File: 1453009331825.jpg (128KB, 500x678px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 500x678px

>>2288013
>west coast liberal elites telling us what to do

the fuck you talking about? they're too busy telling us what to do, nobody over here gives a fuck about the south or midwest, or hell even the east coast.

>>2286358
That slavery was a component of states rights

>>2288009
>you shouldn't take everything Lincoln said literally
>you should take everything Texas said literally

Lincoln was a white supremacist and it wasn't controversial at the time. This isn't even disputed.

>>2288052

he was also a huge fag

>>2288008
you're just repeating what you initially said. Slavery already existed, yeoman immigrants knew that when they came to the colonies. Most yeoman in slaves states were related to slave owners and/or benefited from the system. Are you really implying that whites were dying to pick cotton all day? Most southern states already imposed bans on slaves working trade jobs or in manufacturing.

>>2288066
>Slavery already existed
Yes and it grew stronger as time went on because they were able to produce more at lower cost especially with tech improvements.

>or benefited from the system
You never explained how they benefited from the system.

>>2288022
>nobody gives a fuck about the east coast
Cuckafornian delusion reached new levels

>>2288132

dude, I've been living here for over 16 years and I've never cared about going to the east coast, much more interested in the Pacific NW and the SW

File: civilwar labor.png (71KB, 627x544px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 627x544px

>>2288082
>Yes and it grew stronger as time went on

no it didn't, the percentage of enslaved in proportion to total population of the south didn't change since the Revolution. The whole slavery exploded eli whitney meme is just a way for historians to exonerate the founding fathers from slavery.

>You never explained how they benefited from the system.

they worked as overseers, patrollers, and craftsmen for Plantations that wouldn't have existed without slavery. Like I said, slavery forced blacks to do jobs that whites didn't want to do. Next are you going to tell me that horses are the enemy of the white yeoman because they cut into their rickshaw profits? For the 1000th time, Slavery was a inherited system that the south couldn't delete over night and if they did it would cause massive economic/social upheaval.

>>2288132
no it's true, I told a Californian that I was from Delaware and he asked me if we had beaches. They are truly the most clueless people in existence. The Civil War butthurt is mostly a north/south thing.

>>2288174
>percentage of enslaved in proportion to total population
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I meant those who owned slaves grew stronger in economic and political power not that more people were enslaved.

>Next are you going to tell me that horses are the enemy of the white yeoman because they cut into their rickshaw profits?
A horse is a lot limited than a slave and people have rioted over advances that they felt threaten their livelihood (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite).

>they worked as overseers, patrollers, and craftsmen
Only a small amount did. How mahy overseers do you think they needed? The rest worked as tenant farmers after being forced to sell their land to survive.

>>2288182
I forget Delaware exists, kek. What is that state like?

>>2288211
>I meant those who owned slaves grew stronger in economic and political power not that more people were enslaved.

I don't understand where you're getting this from. Slave owners were always the elite of the south. If you're talking about national politics then that's also wrong as they continuously lost support after the war of 1812. Honestly the white yeoman gained power during the Jacksonian revolution.

>A horse is a lot limited than a slave
and a slave is a lot more limited than a freedman

>The rest worked as tenant farmers after being forced to sell their land to survive.

come on dude, tenant farming didn't become widespread until after the civil war. The situation of the white farmer in the slave states wasn't any worse than the white farmer in the midwest.

>>2288233
like maryland but shittier.

If the North wanted to free the slaves, why not just offer their masters compensation? That way, the South would have sufficient funds to support the transition from an agrarian society to an industrial one. Plus, hundreds of thousands of lives could have been spared. I mean, didn't both sides spend millions on the war anyways?

>>2288246
>Slave owners were always the elite of the south
And their power increased over the years.

>If you're talking about national politics
I wasn't.

>and a slave is a lot more limited than a freedman
Yes. However unlike horses they could compete with free labor in a larger variety of ways.

>the white farmer in the midwest.
The white farmer in the midwest had a chance of getting a sweet land grab from the indians.

File: Cleburne'sProphecyComeToPass.jpg (79KB, 624x352px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 624x352px

Cleburne deserved better.

>>2286794
but how would this happen?

>>2287805
There is a difference between holding racist views towards blacks, and believing the only purpose for black people is to be held in bondage and be made to work the white man's whims. Lincoln didn't run on an abolition platform because the political climate was too hot at the time, but he let it be known in his letters that he personally detested slavery. Furthermore, regardless of whatever racist views he may have had at the time, towards the end of his life, he let it be known he wanted to give blacks the right to vote, one of the primary reasons Booth shot him.

Really though, many of the declarations of secession are riddled with lines about how the reason is for the upholding of slavery, whether because the South is economically and culturally reliant on it, or, as shown in the case of Texas, because niggers are stupid and can only exist in the country as slaves.

>>2287790
The south started the war by firing on federal property bub.

>>2288258
Lincoln actually had this idea, and tried to pass legislature on compensated emancipation regarding Delaware, but it was narrowly defeated. Unfortunately, the South had chimped out and were in open rebellion at the time, so ignored his proposals of national legislation.

>>2288619
>Lincoln actually had this idea.
Shit, really? That man really did try to appease everyone. Thanks for the knowledge.

>>2288182
>Delaware
Yeah because east coast = Delaware. NYC, Philly, Boston, DC, those don't exist.

>>2288147
West coast has exactly two places that matter - LA and San Francisco. The rest are literal whos, you have to hold in your piss from laughing when some hipster numale tells you some shit like Portland is important.

>>2288998

>San Diego
>Not the port from which the U.S. projects its naval prowess in the pacific

I'm fucking sure if we ever get in a nuke fight it along with Edwards AFB are like main tgts.

>>2289309
Third rate shithole.

>>2286557
>destroying American democracy (America isn't a democracy, but whatever) would be a bad thing
wew

>>2286358
>People unironically believe slavery was the only cause of the Civil War.

>>2289649
>destroying America's democracy in favor of what the South would have wanted would be a good thing

wew

File: 6-civil-war-draft-riots-granger.jpg (231KB, 900x643px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 900x643px

>>2286509

>Believe it or not, you can't fight a war with just rich people.

Believe it or not, but poor people can be dragged into a war that isn't in their interest.

>>2289694
>Some man in New York is taken from his wife and child, put in a uniform, given a gun and is sent down to Virginia to shoot some poor man who probably has been given the same task while neither man has anything personal against the other.

Feels bad man, real bad.

>>2289707
War is hell