Comments by "starventure" (@starventure) on "VIRAL MOMENT: Nikki Haley Asked Point Blank By Voter: 'What Was The Cause Of The U.S. Civil War?'" video.

It wasn't simply slavery in of itself. It was the election(by northern states as a solid bloc) of a president who was part of a virulent anti-slavery platform that the states in question saw as an existential threat. The south at the time wanted a more measured approach to ending slavery as to not cause economic harm, while radicals(like Lincoln) supported an immediate end. The electoral college, which had saved the south for decades, finally failed in 1860 which the losing states did not like one bit.
12
@aef34234dfx Explain the need for the Emancipation proclamation, and without any references to the Trent affair please.
1
@Ric0806 It just means I am wiser than you. You either had a bad teacher or were the guy at the back of the room who couldn't concentrate due to all the bowls you smoked the weekend prior.
1
@usmansiddiqui1384 It is not sympathy, it is just historical fact. Lincoln had zero affection for the slaves and their plight, as is evidenced by his post war plans had he lived - https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/2010/12/01/lincoln-to-slaves-go-somewhere-else/#:~:text=My%20first%20impulse%20would%20be,that%20he%20tried%20it%20anyway. If slavery had been the big issue, it would have been blared long beforehand in the north as the cause celebre arguement for war. It wasn't. It was not until Lincoln gave the emancipation speech that it finally took its place the reason for war, though for some reason it held no weight in northern cities, draft riots et al.
1
@mybrotherkeeper1484 The wealth gap in the old south is an issue I don't want to get involved with because the causes for it are way more complex then can be discussed here. I will say that slavery, old institution or not, was an economic cheat by southern states that actually inflicted more harm on them than good and stunted the growth of the south economically. Getting rid of slavery was a noble cause, but the manner in which it was done was horrific.
1
@punchykarma6685 Of course they defended it. It was the addiction they had, a false economy built on lies. My gripe with the notion that slavery was the primary motivation for the war is that while it is correct to say that hyper-religious locals like Ohio or Pennsylvania at the time were more than prepared to fight the south to end slavery at the time, cities on the east coast were not so hot to the idea. NYC was making a fast buck off of the south to the point that the mayor at the time, Fernando Wood, suggested joining the south in secession against the union. Not to mention the draft riots which cements the view that not all of the north was damning of the slavery institution. Secession was the initial cause of the war, followed by slavery. Not the other way around.
1
@Geewasright Slavery afterwards, not first. Reread please.
1
@Ric0806 Two college degrees? In what? Gender studies and Business communications? And the mention of the rich being able to buy their way out of the draft is a notoriously inaccurate old trope because the same rule was in effect throughout the union states, but yet only NY had the riots over it. No civil insurrections in Boston or Baltimore...were they all able to buy their way out or something?
1
@jeromedavid7944 The problem with that statement is John Brown was fairly exceptional to the time. The vast majority of the public in the north did not care as much as he did, and abolitionism was seen as the provence of the hyperreligious elements(excluding Mormons) at the time.
1