[lit-ideas] Re: Marx's influence in America
- From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 22:34:44 -0500
Absolutely. If there were no slavery, there would have been no need for
civil war. Slaves were fundamental to the economy, the politics, the whole
way of life of the South. They were fighting for their economy and their
way of life, which is to say, slavery. The North didn't have plantations,
so it didn't need slaves.
> [Original Message]
> From: Robert Paul <robert.paul@xxxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 2/7/2006 10:24:22 PM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Marx's influence in America
>
> Neither the issue of States' Rights alone nor the issue of slavery alone
> led to the Civil War. Slavery was both a moral and an economic issue.
> And the South's concern with States Rights was not a purely legal one:
> it was a way of supporting the slave states' claim to a right to keep
> slaves. There's no evidence that a pure belief in States' Rights
> would have led them to secede.
>
> "Historians have long debated the causes of the Civil War. Many of them
> maintain that slavery was the root cause. In his second inaugural
> address in 1865, Lincoln said of slavery: "All knew that this interest
> was, somehow, the cause of the war." But most historians agree that the
> war had a number of causes. They note especially the sectional division
> between North and South-that is, the differences in economies, ideals,
> and ways of life. They also point to the disputes between the federal
> government and the states over what rights and powers the states
> possessed. Historians further mention the blunderings of politicians and
> the disorder in the American political party system during the 1850's.
> Yet all explanations for the causes of the war have always involved or
> revolved around the issue of slavery."
>
> [World Book Encyclopedia]
>
> Lawrence:
>
> > ?I think you'll find out from any reputable historian that
> > States Rights were the reason the Civil War began. Think about it.
South
> > Carolina wanted to secede. The North said no cessation. Seceding is a
> > Right of a State, SC said, and went ahead with it. The North said no,
lots
> > of fighting, blood, dying, etc.
>
> [snip]
>
> Robert Paul
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
