7
edits
Changes
Debate:Was the North right to prevent Southern secession in the US Civil War? (view source)
Revision as of 15:58, March 23, 2007
, 15:58, March 23, 2007no edit summary
This is a tough issue; any other time i'd say no without a second thought, but it seems hard to justify turning the other way and allowing slavery to continue in the south. --[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 01:16, 18 February 2007 (EST)
This is a tough issue; any other time i'd say no without a second thought, but it seems hard to justify turning the other way and allowing slavery to continue in the south. --[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 01:16, 18 February 2007 (EST)
I don’t believe Lincoln or others had a right to prevent secession. The only reason some States finally decided to sign the agreement to form a Union was because of their right to secede.
From what I understand, the initial problem was the treatment of Southern states by Northern businessmen who used laws and government to cheat the South of fair trade and apply unfair taxation. If those issues were resolved, I doubt the South would have pursued secession.
This debate is thoroughly addressed in Thomas DiLorenzo’s book, “The Real Lincoln”. The author also contends that slavery would most likely have been resolved in time by other means.
--[[User:Maxygolf|Maxygolf]] 11:58, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
== Positive Opinions ==
== Positive Opinions ==