• m_f@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    96
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days 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
      29
      ·
      2 days 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.

    • HexadecimalSky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days 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
      ·
      2 days 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
        5
        ·
        2 days 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

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

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

    • bigFab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      As a non american I’m curious about these events. I see it as a fact the war ended slavery, but isn’t anyone bothered about the winning heroes having used slaves themselves their whole life up until then? More than heroes I see them as ‘‘I’m not bad anymore’’ and demonizing their foes as a very hipocrite act.

      If I was dealing drugs my whole life I wouldn’t raise my voice too high to condemn other dealers just because I recently quit myself, although seems like for some works pretty well.

      • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Many states has abolished slavery decades prior. It was highly debated at the formation of the country. It gets weirder that Thomas Jefferson was anti slavery while owning 600 slaves and as president, he abolitioned the international slave trade and advocated to end slavery all togather, but was against voluntary manumission. People are… complicated, often self serving but can recognize how the system is horrible…

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        If you do something bad, and then you stop doing something bad, it’s not hypocritical to tell others to stop doing the bad thing. It’s hypocritical to not stop, and then tell others to stop.

        • bigFab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          We agree on that ethically it is right to ask others to stop doing wrong like you did. For me it’s different though asking while pointing with a gun. That is hypocrite.

          • m_f@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            If someone is doing something really bad to you, and someone else came over with a gun to stop them, would you stop the person saving you and purity-check them first?

            Slavery was also much less prevalent in the North, and abolished completely ~55 years before the civil war. It’s not really equivalent. To borrow your drug dealing analogy (though it’s a loose one at best), it’s kind of like your local weed dealer helping to remove an unabashed fentanyl dealer from the community

            • bigFab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Ofc I would let him save me first. It’s what happens after being liberated that concerned me. Before calling him a slave liberator I would definitely make that backgroud check. If i was to find he once dismissed his own slaves without proper compensation based in human rights and equality, then my next moral task would be to prosecute him.

              I mean, please correct my lack of american history knowledge if necessary, but the way I see it is really easy to dismiss slave labour only once you get the industrial machinery.