Author Topic: American Civial War  (Read 2858 times)

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #30 on: October 11, 2008, 09:22:44 AM »
Just reading this thread, it's very clear to me that the legacy of the civil war and its issues are still with us today!  We act like the war and slavery were millennia ago, when for a historian we are its grownup children. ;)
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #31 on: October 11, 2008, 09:22:52 AM »
laser... I think that you are oversimplifying when you say that slavery was the cause..  pure and simple.   Almost none of the people who fought in that war had slaves or even knew a slave..  Northerners had no problem treating men women and children of any race as slaves in their factories.

When the war was over the your-0-peeeans that came here were treated worse than any slave and died like rented mules..  they were in fact.. very much the same as rented mules.   Slaves were treated better..

You could not have gotten any of the combatants on either side to kill each other over slavery.. soo.. even if the people who ran the war may have done so because they thought the issue was important.. the people who fought it.. who died in droves while killing friends and relatives in the most misserable conditions imaginable..   they did not do so over the issue of slavery.

Just as..  If we have another civil war here it will not be about one issue or even several.. we will not fight for gun control or lack of it or for privacy rights or whatever.. we will fight because we think that either we need to control and socialize or because we don't want to be controlled or socialized.

lazs

Offline Stage1

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 177
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #32 on: October 11, 2008, 09:30:46 AM »
  Most of the weapons where Springfield's, enfield, carbine, Spencer, sharps.  The cal. on these are .54 or less. 

Springfield, Enfield Muskets and some Enfield carbines are .577 cal or known as a .58 cal, some Enfield muskets where .69 cal and some smooth bore musket up to .75 cal. that where used in the civil war.
Most muskets only had a muzzle velocity of 960 feet per second and a bullet wieght of 500 grains or more

Spencer Carbine are .54 cal (Spencer made a musket too)
Sharps Carbine are .52 cal                       

Here are some other carbines from the civil war most where .50cal,
Jenks---Muzzle load
Symmes---Muzzle load
Gibbs---Muzzle load
Schroeder---Muzzle load
Greene--breech-load
Joslyn---Muzzle load
Cosmopolitan--breech-load
Starr   --breech-load
Smith  <~~~ paper or rubber shells, breech-load
Warner--breech-load
Maynard  .50 cal or .36 cal <~~brass shells, breech-load
Palmer--breech-load
Gallager --breech-load
Wesson--breech-load
Burnside  <~~ had a brass shells that look like an ice cream cone, breech-load
Perry Navy--breech-load
Merrill--breech-load
Latrobe--breech-load
Thomas---Muzzle load
If it can't get there on it's own, leave it at home!!

Buick GS, Fast with Class!!  www.V8buick.com

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #33 on: October 11, 2008, 09:50:09 AM »
laser... I think that you are oversimplifying when you say that slavery was the cause..  pure and simple.   Almost none of the people who fought in that war had slaves or even knew a slave..  Northerners had no problem treating men women and children of any race as slaves in their factories.

When the war was over the your-0-peeeans that came here were treated worse than any slave and died like rented mules..  they were in fact.. very much the same as rented mules.   Slaves were treated better..

You could not have gotten any of the combatants on either side to kill each other over slavery.. soo.. even if the people who ran the war may have done so because they thought the issue was important.. the people who fought it.. who died in droves while killing friends and relatives in the most misserable conditions imaginable..   they did not do so over the issue of slavery.

Just as..  If we have another civil war here it will not be about one issue or even several.. we will not fight for gun control or lack of it or for privacy rights or whatever.. we will fight because we think that either we need to control and socialize or because we don't want to be controlled or socialized.

lazs

Sure, at the time the split was shown to the southerners as a need for freedom.  That the overbearing totalitarian north was telling them how to run their government.  That states rights was way more important than federal rights. 

This was all true.

But the southern leadership didn't really give a toejam about states rights.  It was only a ploy to get 95% of the confederate fighters to fight in the war.

The main and BIGGEST reason that the southern politicians believed in states rights was that they believed the States should decide the issue of Slavery.  Every other reason is a distant second place, and only really placed there to muddle the issue.

Had slavery been guaranteed, you wouldn't have seen a conflict between state and central rights.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #34 on: October 11, 2008, 09:59:39 AM »
laser... I think that you are oversimplifying when you say that slavery was the cause..  pure and simple.   Almost none of the people who fought in that war had slaves or even knew a slave..  Northerners had no problem treating men women and children of any race as slaves in their factories.

When the war was over the your-0-peeeans that came here were treated worse than any slave and died like rented mules..  they were in fact.. very much the same as rented mules.   Slaves were treated better..

lazs

Simplification often leads to understanding.  A well written book on the topic would probably be simplified quite a bit, but it’s hard to comprehend that much information at once…  A page on the topic would be even more simplified, but easier to comprehend.  The same could be said by condensing the cause down to a paragraph, a sentence or even a word.  I see value in compressing the cause down to any particular size.  With such a question, the length of the answer almost needs to be stated in the question.

If I were a civil war history professor I’d be tempted to have my students explain the cause of the civil war in one page.  The next week have them do it again in a paragraph.  The week after the limit would be one sentence.  Finally, define the cause of the war in a word.

In a word, I’d say the cause was slavery.  Without slavery, it’s hard to imagine that the war ever would have started.  Then again, you probably could say the same about racism…

Often the reasons why individuals go to war don’t match the reasons why nations (or states) go to war.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #35 on: October 11, 2008, 11:34:54 AM »
well gee wizz guys..  I guess if you want an oversimplification you could just say that the south resented the north and was about fed up with them trying to run their lives.

It is no less accurate to say that it was about states rights than to say it was about slavery..  You can't have a war.. especially a bloody civil war.. without the people fighting it believing that it is about something important to them..   I would say that not more than a handful who actually fought the war.. or had bullets come their way.. were fighting on either side of the slavery issue.

If you want students to say it was slavery then you are doing a disservice for the wrong reasons (expediancy).  It takes no more time nor makes any less sense to say that the north was fighting to preserve the union and that the south was fighting for states rights than to glibly say it was about "slavery" which would have ended on it's own in any case.

It also does a disservice in it's oversimplification by not showing what a historic event it was for the constitution and how it changed the constitution by the illegal activities of the federal government that forever changed how we think of states rights.   The real civil rights war was not fought for another 100 years .

lazs


Offline Donzo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
      • http://www.bops.us
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #36 on: October 11, 2008, 11:50:56 AM »
well gee wizz guys..  I guess if you want an oversimplification you could just say that the south resented the north and was about fed up with them trying to run their lives.

It is no less accurate to say that it was about states rights than to say it was about slavery..  You can't have a war.. especially a bloody civil war.. without the people fighting it believing that it is about something important to them..   I would say that not more than a handful who actually fought the war.. or had bullets come their way.. were fighting on either side of the slavery issue.

If you want students to say it was slavery then you are doing a disservice for the wrong reasons (expediancy).  It takes no more time nor makes any less sense to say that the north was fighting to preserve the union and that the south was fighting for states rights than to glibly say it was about "slavery" which would have ended on it's own in any case.

It also does a disservice in it's oversimplification by not showing what a historic event it was for the constitution and how it changed the constitution by the illegal activities of the federal government that forever changed how we think of states rights.   The real civil rights war was not fought for another 100 years .

lazs



Good post.

Offline AWMac

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9251
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #37 on: October 11, 2008, 11:54:16 AM »
"Skunk Beer"

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #38 on: October 11, 2008, 12:23:12 PM »
So lazs,

Do you think that US soldiers fighting in Iraq are in it for the same reasons as our government?

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6728
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #39 on: October 11, 2008, 12:26:13 PM »
So lazs,

Do you think that US soldiers fighting in Iraq are in it for the same reasons as our government?
:huh (needs more 'splaining')
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #40 on: October 11, 2008, 12:38:01 PM »
It was all abouts State's Rights.... to own slaves.

Offline Curlew

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1280
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #41 on: October 11, 2008, 12:40:28 PM »
Slavery is a common missconception

Short Answer: Economics

Long Answer
(A paper I wrote for my History class)

The civil war took the most American lives out of any war in our country’s history. This war was brought on by many things including slavery, industrialization, politics, and economic factors. The factors all combined to create sectional tensions great that it ripped American apart. The fact is that the civil war was caused by sectional tensions partially created by economic factors such as the effects of the War of 1812, the Panics of 1819, 1837, and 1857 as well as government policies such as protective tariffs, banking and Clay’s American System, in coordination with the growth of the west, the industrialization of the north, and the agricultural development of the south.

The war of 1812 was brought on by American trade policy towards European nations and attempting to protect its rights as a neutral nation. It started in the early 1800s with the impressments of American and attacks on American vessels by the British and French Navy which was a burden to American foreign trade. This lead to a set of embargo and tariffs which prevented and restricted the trade with any foreign nation. The embargo was an instant disaster, especially for southern farmers who depended on foreign markets for trade, but benefitted the industrial north which took the chance to shift their capitol to machine based manufacturing.  Eventual this lead to the invasion of America and the War of 1812 which was a major hit to the American economy heavily. Though the war of 1812 sent American into depression for several years it also helped to spur American industry, having been cut off from British manufactures, the mechanical age started by the war brought heavy industry to the north. The events that lead to as well as the War of 1812 were the start of the sectional tensions between the North and South. In the end trade was restored to Europe and the flow of agricultural goods to the war stricken continent became a valuable market.

The panic of 1819 hit the American economy hard, putting economy in a depression for almost six years. This depression was created by the growing European reliance on American farmers during the Napoleonic wars. This sudden rise in the price agricultural goods created sudden boom in the buying and cultivating of new land, most of this land was bought with little or no money down and often no collateral. As the Napoleonic was came to a close and European agriculture began to recover it started to cause a fall in the price of cotton and other American agricultural goods as there was no longer a large European market, this was also in addition to the British textile industry switching to Indian producers for cheaper cotton. All this in turn lead to a collapse of the American agriculture and also meant that the farmers could not pay off the debt. This hit the Midwest and South particularly hard but most of all it greatly slowed the western movement and started to create sectional tension between the East and the West. Several factors that slowed the recovery of the American economy was the lack of a central currency, the individual banks had put out their own currency which became mostly useless and incredibly unstable after the panic began. This instability in the currency meant that no man who holds it in his possession could be safe for a day.The economic depression though it did cause much damage in the south also affected the north quite significantly and only was a cause of mild sectional tension between the north, south, east, and west. In the end The panic of 1819 and the Missouri Compromise revealed the clashing interests that divided the country and created sectional tensions.

It was about this time that Henry Clay developed The American System which pushed for protective tariffs, internal improvements, and a strong national bank in the end seemed to benefit the north greater. His main argument ran along the lines of constitutional equality which defined would not draw resources from one part of the Union, and expend them in the improvements of another part of the union. Given in the form of a key part of Clay’s American system, internal improvements, the amount of local money collected would be returned to that local area and since the amount received in the more industrialized north would be greater then there would be more internal improvement than in the south, which in the end became the case. Clay also promoted protective tariffs that would protect American industry; this did not favor the south because it benefited from cheap European goods and also incited tariffs from European countries which affected the market of southern goods. A key example of this is the Tariff of 1828 also referred to as the Tariff of abominations by southerners abominations because it incited similar tariffs in foreign markets and hurt the southern agriculture as well as increased the price of manufactured goods, basically the fate of the fertile states was be poverty and desolation. Most of the tariffs that the American system proposed would benefit the north and hurt the south and was an adding factor to the sectional tensions between the North, South, and West. The last key part of Clay’s system was a strong national bank which if it had been instituted in the early years of the Nineteenth Century could have prevented several of the panics and depressions that lead to the civil war, in fact American moved away from the idea of a National bank when president Jackson vetoed the recharter of the Bank of the United States and withdrew all of its fund in favor of smaller individual banks. In the end Clay’s American System never really was put into effect before the civil war, though we have since implemented many of its key points into our modern government since the war.

In 1832 president Jackson vetoed Bank of the United States recharter bill and condemned its monopoly on banking. The creation of pet banks and state issued currency caused an instability that had not been foreseen, in response to the rapidly growing inflation Jackson issued Specie Circular. However it had an opposite effect than intended increasing the rate of inflation greatly as well as slowing movement in the west. Panic of 1837 was brought on by the actions of Jackson was caused by a lack of Specie and a surplus of paper money, as well as over extensions on credit and speculation on land in the west. This caused a spiral into depression for six years. President Van Buren made very few efforts to counteract the actions of the depression instead he only protected the federal government’s holdings. The panic slowed growth in the west and caused a growth in sectional tension between the north, west, and south.

The final economic factor to contribute to the sectional tension in America was the Panic of 1857. The panic of 1857 had a short affect on the North and was averted by the incoming flow of California gold. This newfound reliance on western gold caused a shift away from the southern sources which in turn lead to more sectional tension between the north and south. The difference between the panic of 1857 and previous economic problems was that it only greatly affected the North instead of the south and was quickly settled and solved as well as being a minimal additive to the social tension already at hand, this being the Dred Scott case and the Bloody Kansas incident which were much greater contributors to the sectional tension that brought on the civil war.

This was the last major economic factor to contribute to the civil war. In Late 1860 and early 1861 state began to secede from the union and an attack on Fort Sumter began. The civil war had started, caused by social tension spawned by the economic differences created by tariffs, wars, and politics. Though they were not the only factor that lead to the separation of the Union it was one of the key parts, in the end it was a battle that was going to need to be resolved, be it on the battle field or on the floor of our government.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2008, 12:47:18 PM by Curlew »
It is I, Ens. Pulver! And I have just thrown your palm tree overboard!
Quote from: Helm
The best cure for "wife ack" is to deploy chaff:    $...$$....$....$$$.....$ .....$$$.....$ ....$$

Callsign---Curlew

Offline Fugita

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 406
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #42 on: October 11, 2008, 12:53:28 PM »
I'm just amazed that Curlew went to school :rofl :rofl :rofl

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #43 on: October 11, 2008, 01:50:40 PM »
Slavery is a common missconception

Short Answer: Economics

Short answer, Wrong.  You should have been failed for that paper.  But for the same reason why you think you are right is the same reason we've discussed here.  People can't possibly accept that the answer is as simple as Slavery.  It is not a simplified answer as to why everything happened.

It is that the answer as to why it happened is simple. 



Every single major strife that occured in the US from post Confederacy to the Civil war was because of slavery. 
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: American Civial War
« Reply #44 on: October 11, 2008, 02:46:59 PM »
curlews paper is accurate so far as I recall reading the facts..  it is not oversimplification to say slavery.. it is lazy and stupid.

How much room did curlews paper take?  how long to read it?   that could easily be taught.

It boils down to..  if the north had not acted as they did they could not have engendered the kind of resentment that would cause brother to fight brother.

To say that brother fought brother in order to keep or get rid of slavery is ludicrous in the extreme.   Liincoln himself said that if he could preserve the union by allowing slavery then he would have done it.

lazs