Responding to the text I have highlighted, I would say that it was rhetoric, to a point. These states were getting ready to defy the Federal government. Now, its a fine thing to have the backing of the common folks, yes indeed. But its perhaps more important to have the backing of the monied folks, and to let them know that you are doing what they want you to do. Slavery was certainly a central issue to the Civil War, but it was far from the only issue. I'd look at the whole thing as a powder keg waiting to blow, slavery as the fuse, and the actions of abolitionists as the match that lit the thing off.baldeagle wrote:jmra wrote:
All these reasons I see being articulated are secondary to the primary cause of the whole problem. So how do you explain this? Why did all the seceding states claim they left because of the North's attempts to abolish slavery? Was it all just rhetoric?
I despise communists with a passion and I don't want the hammer-and-sickle banner ever flying over any government building. But, on the other hand, is Amazon going to stop selling it? After all, communism has resulted in more modern deaths than any other single reason, the figures are in the multi-MILLIONS. Think about it.