Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

I live in the South, but this Yankee is riled when I see "Glory" again. How can any Southerner defend slavery

I know that the Civil War began over economic rather than social issues. But whenever I see films such as "Glory," I am reminded that ultimately slavery was the issue. There are still some fools who think "the South was right," when in fact in all cases that is false. But still - how do we get to the bozos who say so?

Update:

Oh, it's fun to find someone with whom to talk!

I find little with which to disagree, too. The Southern "cause" began with "nullification" in South Carolina, more than 12 years before the war actually started. The issue then was the Northern tariff system on imported goods. It was foolish and incontinent of the South to see this as a bitter imposition of cost - the tariff was, in fact, the main form of financing the government. And the view that without the war the nation today would be an agricultural aristocarcy is not exactly correct but is entirely trenchant. What

FUN!

2 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    While the South certainly was far from being perfect, I think it is only fair to say neither was the Union. I also believe part of the catalyst to war was the feeling of encroaching Federalism by the South. The Southern states felt as though their sovereignty was being eroded.

    We living in the present "remember" the war as being fought over slavery, which was simply not the case (of course slavery had it's hand). Consider, "In War, the first casualty is Truth."

    The truth is we have several different rationales in existence today; we only seem to favor one though: slavery, a few other issues of course; but, slavery was the real reason. The one favored is the North's. I believe it to be far too simple of an explanation, the same sort of rationales used to appease to the masses throughout history.

    I advise we not forget that. After the wars are done, the victor usually molds the legacy of the War. The "facts" will usually be remembered in the words of the victor, with a little appeasement given to the defeated party; so as not to cause a situation in which another war will break out.

    Having said that, it seems as though we willingly accept the propaganda spun to this day by the North. I do not buy into such an explanation. I do not buy into it because of Common Sense. Such a one sided fault is unlikely, we seem to think of it in terms of black and white.

    Do not forget the North had more slaves than the South. Do not forget the Northerners allowed Slavery to be legal for some time after they declared it to be illegal in the South. Why did they not free their slaves before the War broke out; or, at very worse, as the war raged on?

    I believe Slavery was used as a pretext for war, not much of anything more. It is quite clear Abraham Lincoln would be considered a ranting raving "racist" should he be alive today. He favored sending all the blacks back to Africa; and simply did not like them.

    I am not saying the "South was right." I will not say they were outright wrong though. Where in the Constitution does it say it is illegal to secede from the Union? It was not against the law. The Confederates attacked Fort Sumter, after telling the Union soldiers to leave what was then a newly sovereign country. Abraham Lincoln, much like FDR, used the inevitable attack as another pretext for all out War. I find it foolish to overlook that fact.

    People can make all the films they desire, much as they make Holocaust films to justify Israel's existence. It is ultimately too one sided to be completely true (so I think).

    Of course Slavery was a part of the War, ultimately the War was to maintain the Union. It was a fight of State versus Federalism. It was a signal to the States their master is the Federal Gov't. It being fought over such a lovely cause of freeing the slaves is simply how we prefer to remember it, rather than analyze such complexity, with guilt on both sides.

    In many ways I am glad the South lost. We would be more of an aristocracy, with Agriculture as our main "Industry." I am not pleased to see how we continue to be humiliated by the North. Films always cast the North as the overall good guy; the South the noble, yet flawed little brother.

    We are not to blame for the war in my opinion. Had the Constitution said we may not secede; and we did so anyway, alright. That was not the case. We were technically asserting control over part of our territory, which was used as a pretext to begin the big war.

    Sorry, the North was just as guilty, if not guiltier than the South. I don't defend the South's stance on slavery; but, I also outright condemn the North's HYPOCRISY in regards to their stance on slavery. At least the South stuck to it's guns. The North condemned actions they employed themselves. They kept slavery legal longer, they had more slaves; I repeat that because it is always cast aside. Slavery is used to justify the war because it helps tuck away issues that exist to this day. Cheers!

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    i believe the south was right. they were bullied by the north much like the colonies were bullied by england...hypocritical huh??

    Source(s): long live dixie!
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.