You have an interesting take. The source of the problem is many writers try claiming slavery as the cause of the Civil War (protective tariffs were the cause as they were in the Republican platform in 1860). President Lincoln actively worked against abolitionists again, and again. He invaded the South and nearly lost the war. His Emancipation Declaration was supposed to cause an insurrection among the slaves and it did not happen, but it did change how the rest of the world viewed the conflict.
No one ever bothers to cover the conflict between Lincoln and the Abolitionists. What was accomplished with the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendment is the result of the persistence of Abolitionists to confront adversary after adversary to obtain results for freedom which last to this very day.
In addition to protective tariffs, the Republican Party platform of 1860 also opposed expanding slavery to the territories, condemned of the Dred Scott decision in which the Supreme Court said Congress did not have to power to prohibit slavery in the territories, and opposed the re-introduction of the slave trade. It did not oppose slavery in states that already had slavery. Perhaps a one step at a time approach.
Also, the states that succeeded from the Union made it abundantly clear what the cause of the civil war was. Their Articles of Succession specifically stated it was the North’s opposition to slavery.
Abraham Lincoln was a life-long abolitionist. You provide no evidence he was not. His family moved to the north in part because of their disapproval of slavery. When he made it to Congress he introduced legislation to abolish slavery. His extensive documented history support his credentials as an abolitionist.
This is typical debate points. Reality check. Only 7 of the 15 slave states seceded, and their justification was complex. The vast majority of slave owners did not care if slavery was expanded. In fact, Sam Houston and Alexander Stephens OPPOSED secession originally. General John C Fremont made effort to free slaves during the war, but President Lincoln reversed Fremont's decision. Lincoln rebuked abolitionists numerous times as he want to primarily preserve the Union. He makes this abundantly clear in the First Inaugural Address.
Slavery was the cause of the Civil War. Because chattel slavery was so despicably wrong--and most everyone knew it was wrong. You only have to read Huckleberry Finn to know this. When every portion of our economy starts to melt seriously because of tariffs somebody will say this next Civil War will have been caused by Tariffs--when in fact our deficit is born by wage earners. The $46 Trillion owned by the uber rich and is largely untaxed, is actually an implementation of slavery (working folks cannot own their own homes anymore). And this my friend is despicably wrong.
If you take that stand, where in the 1860 Republican platform does it say slaves would be free? There is none. The secessionists made a leap in logic because the platform called for protective tariffs, which would destroy the South, and consequently slavery.
You have an interesting take. The source of the problem is many writers try claiming slavery as the cause of the Civil War (protective tariffs were the cause as they were in the Republican platform in 1860). President Lincoln actively worked against abolitionists again, and again. He invaded the South and nearly lost the war. His Emancipation Declaration was supposed to cause an insurrection among the slaves and it did not happen, but it did change how the rest of the world viewed the conflict.
No one ever bothers to cover the conflict between Lincoln and the Abolitionists. What was accomplished with the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendment is the result of the persistence of Abolitionists to confront adversary after adversary to obtain results for freedom which last to this very day.
In addition to protective tariffs, the Republican Party platform of 1860 also opposed expanding slavery to the territories, condemned of the Dred Scott decision in which the Supreme Court said Congress did not have to power to prohibit slavery in the territories, and opposed the re-introduction of the slave trade. It did not oppose slavery in states that already had slavery. Perhaps a one step at a time approach.
Also, the states that succeeded from the Union made it abundantly clear what the cause of the civil war was. Their Articles of Succession specifically stated it was the North’s opposition to slavery.
Abraham Lincoln was a life-long abolitionist. You provide no evidence he was not. His family moved to the north in part because of their disapproval of slavery. When he made it to Congress he introduced legislation to abolish slavery. His extensive documented history support his credentials as an abolitionist.
This is typical debate points. Reality check. Only 7 of the 15 slave states seceded, and their justification was complex. The vast majority of slave owners did not care if slavery was expanded. In fact, Sam Houston and Alexander Stephens OPPOSED secession originally. General John C Fremont made effort to free slaves during the war, but President Lincoln reversed Fremont's decision. Lincoln rebuked abolitionists numerous times as he want to primarily preserve the Union. He makes this abundantly clear in the First Inaugural Address.
Slavery was the cause of the Civil War. Because chattel slavery was so despicably wrong--and most everyone knew it was wrong. You only have to read Huckleberry Finn to know this. When every portion of our economy starts to melt seriously because of tariffs somebody will say this next Civil War will have been caused by Tariffs--when in fact our deficit is born by wage earners. The $46 Trillion owned by the uber rich and is largely untaxed, is actually an implementation of slavery (working folks cannot own their own homes anymore). And this my friend is despicably wrong.
If you take that stand, where in the 1860 Republican platform does it say slaves would be free? There is none. The secessionists made a leap in logic because the platform called for protective tariffs, which would destroy the South, and consequently slavery.