• m_f@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    There’s a joke I’ve heard, “In middle school, you learn the Civil War was about slavery. In high school, you learn it was about states rights. In college, you learn it was really about slavery”.

    Alternative form:

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      6 hours ago

      To join the Confederacy the state had to enshrine slavery in it’s constitution. It was actually giving up the right to choose.

      It was slavery or union.

      The South went out of it’s way to make the war about slavery.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      I usually read it as “When you know a little bit… When you know more… When you know a lot…”

    • HexadecimalSky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Best short explanation I heard, was in college. The cause of the civil war was slavery, the civil war was not fought over slavery.

      This helps understand why the south started fighting to keep slavery but the union did not start fighting to end slavery. Some halfway through the war abolition started getting steam but racism and bias continued through and after the war.

      Edit: "Sates right’s (To allow slavery) is a common misdirect, the same as calling it the war of northern aggression, to not flat out say slavery. But hey they get to say the quiet part out loud now so maybe they wont try and be coy.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 hours ago

      God, I’m so glad that states’ rights and tariffs only got a passing mention when I was in high school as part of the lead-up to the Civil War. I hope that old canard is dying.

      • minnow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I give it two years, tops, before some states start ban teachers from saying that the civil war was because of slavery. And because the DoE will be dismantled there’s nothing stopping them from doing just that

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Which we still have, but limited to prisons.

      California just voted down getting rid of it at the state level.

    • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 hours ago

      State’s rights to force the northern states to return runaway slaves. Can’t forget that part.

      • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        “How dare you disrespect our sovereignty by exercising your own! And during a Civil War that we started over this very issue, no less!”

        This country has been half dogshit-brained fuckbag since the first European “explorer” landed here. And while I’m sure, like any society, Native Americans had their share of colorful characters, we’ll hardly hear of them due to the whole cultural erasure which followed the landing of the aforementioned European “explorers”.

        “What’s so great about discovery? It’s a violent penetrative act that scars what it explores. What you call discovery, I call the rape of the natural world.”

        — Dr. Ian Malcom, Jurassic Park

  • lath@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I too watched a documentary on the US civil war. I learned it was about power, greed and fear. The southerners had complete control over their slaves and losing them meant becoming completely dependant on northern machinery. They likened this to becoming slaves themselves, which was obviously horrifying considering their own behaviour in this regard. So war was their only option, not only to maintain and then grow their properties, but also to destroy or take over the northern industrial capabilities.

    Sounds evil, which it was, but at the same time it was a matter of survival, as proven after the war when many plantations and businesses using the former slaves collapsed.

    The war happened because the southerners had nothing to lose and everything to gain from it. Or at least, that’s how the documentary portrayed it.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Sounds evil, which it was, but at the same time it was a matter of survival, as proven after the war when many plantations and businesses using the former slaves collapsed.

      Yes, but not because they became enslaved to northern machinery. Because the slaves left, having been treated horribly, and the post-war planter aristocracy was incapable of luring any but the most desperate back since the aristocracy was darkly hilariously (in the sense of “the sheer gall of asking someone to come back and work for peanuts or goodwill after enslaving them”) and gruesomely unwilling to pay their former slaves a fair wage, even as their plantations were overgrown and their properties rotted, unmaintained.

      Turns out that when almost half of your labor force up and leaves because you’ve been a piece of shit, and you’re unwilling to stop being a piece of shit even to lure them back, the economy slumps. Who’d’ve thought?

      The materialist analysis is really lacking on the Civil War. It really was a war of ideas. People, including demographics on a large-scale, do not always act rationally, but according to the values set by their societies.