• Nate Cox@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    It was about states rights.

    States rights to do a slavery.

    It’s important to remember that, because fascists are currently pulling the “states rights” card again and the context of what it actually meant last time is horrifying/helpful.

    We should stop trying to separate the two arguments because they’re the same argument and its dangerous to pretend they aren’t.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 hours ago

      tbf, the Confederacy abolished states’ rights to abolish slavery. So even ‘states’ rights’ isn’t a correct answer - and just like in the modern day, it’s only cover for “We do what I want when I’m in power, and what I want when the opposition is in power too”

    • Kaboom@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 hours ago

      It’s kinda dishonest because the weed issue is also states rights, and it’s no where near what slavery was.

      Imo, the civil war topic should remain somewhat simplistic in non-academic settings. The reason was slavery, period.

      You could go into the stuff surrounding it some, like racism, the economy, states rights, but the focus should slavery.

      You might mention that the North had slaves longer than the south did, just because Maryland was a shithole back then. Slavery should still remain the focus.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 hours ago

        You might mention that the North had slaves longer than the south did, just because Maryland was a shithole back then.

        Beg pardon? Maryland’s 1864 constitution banned slavery.

        • Kaboom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Sorry, it was Delaware. They got rid of it with the 13th. The south were forced when they lost the civil war. It’s only a separation of a few months, but it’s there.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    It was state rights until they get a federal majority in all three branches then it’s all about the central government.

  • xia@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Why must we dumb it down to a single cause? Maybe it was asymmetric… that is, about slavery for the north, and about states rights for the south.

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

        Yeah it’s to bad we don’t have well written missives from each of the states that seceded, I guess we’ll never know.

      • xia@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Yes. Or even more accurately, to leave and be left alone while doing that.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Except no, it was 100% a lie in the South, too. The first fucking thing they did after secession was to write themselves a constitution that was mostly copy-pasted from the US Constitution except for where they explicitly removed states’ rights to abolish slavery.

    • Kaboom@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Nah, it was slavery for the south. For the north, it was about keeping the union together and slavery second.