# The Civil War was not about states' rights **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2019, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085 "2019-09-12T02:14:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/121 "2019-09-16T13:20:37Z")
The Civil War was about “states’ rights” in the same sense that that damn flag it left behind is about celebrating Southern heritage. :rolleyes: Slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, the Klan, segregation, redlining, voter suppression … the war isn’t over _yet_. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/122 "2019-09-16T13:24:07Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Lincoln chose to not negotiate the practicalities of the secession. He also promised bloodshed to collect tariffs in his inaugural. Ah, yes, the “Look what you made us do!” argument … a timeless classic. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/123 "2019-09-16T13:35:52Z")
Lincoln’s first inaugural speech [The Avalon Project : First Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln](https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln1.asp) "In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. " ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/124 "2019-09-16T13:36:41Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Ah, yes, the “Look what you made us do!” argument … a timeless classic. Yes. They fired on a tax-collection fort in their harbor and killed nobody. Of course the trigger happy warmongers of today say that total war and devastation was the only choice after such an isolated event. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/125 "2019-09-16T13:37:44Z")
> [@Andy\_L](#): > > Lincoln’s first inaugural speech [The Avalon Project : First Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln](https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln1.asp) > > "In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. " Thanks. Here we have Lincoln saying there will be bloodshed if he can’t hold the tax collection forts. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/126 "2019-09-16T13:50:21Z")
He’s also saying it will be the rebels who shed it. Did you miss that part? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/127 "2019-09-16T14:56:58Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > He’s also saying it will be the rebels who shed it. Did you miss that part? Oh then he was just wrong. The rebels didn’t inflict casualties at Sumter. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/128 "2019-09-16T15:11:34Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Oh then he was just wrong. The rebels didn’t inflict casualties at Sumter. You really are ignorant about the meaning of Intent to kill, also referred to in many states as malice aforethought. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/129 "2019-09-16T15:20:27Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > The rebels didn’t inflict casualties at Sumter. What \*were \*they trying to do? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/130 "2019-09-16T16:07:54Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Lincoln chose to not negotiate the practicalities of the secession. He also promised bloodshed to collect tariffs in his inaugural. > > Your line of thinking ignores historical facts about the Lincoln administration’s internal discussions on whether to make war. It was not as simple as the comic books, bud. There was a choice made. This is not in dispute. It’s not as simple as your ideology either. But then the real world never is. Lincoln didn’t “chose to not negotiate the practicalities of the secession.” He opposed secession for both moral and practical reasons. And he was the representative of both a government and a general population which opposed secession. Lincoln wanted the seceding states to return back to the United States. He was willing to negotiate for that purpose. In his [inaugural speech](https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln1.asp), he did not promise bloodshed. That is ridiculous. He spoke of his willingness to compromise and to acknowledge the rights of the southern states. I assume this is the portion of his speech you’re referring to: > [@](#): > > I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and I shall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself. > > In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices. I know it’s inconvenient for you that history doesn’t support your beliefs. But that doesn’t mean you get to make up a different history. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/131 "2019-09-16T16:10:54Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Yes. They fired on a tax-collection fort in their harbor and killed nobody. Of course the trigger happy warmongers of today say that total war and devastation was the only choice after such an isolated event. So according to you it wasn’t the people shooting the cannons who were the trigger happy warmongers. It was the people who objected to having cannons shot at them. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/132 "2019-09-16T16:44:31Z")
So the ethical supremacy of the Confederacy is based on bad aim with their artillery? That is one hell of a logical kludge. I’m going out on a limb here, and guess that if “stand your ground” laws in those same states were to be amended to exclude “attackers who missed” you would find a counter argument some where. Tris ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/133 "2019-09-16T16:47:24Z")
When I am trying to not inflict casualties, I always use 32lb cannon fire. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/134 "2019-09-16T17:27:49Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Yes. They fired on a tax-collection fort. You realize those forts were designed for harbor & coastal protection, yes? They were designed in the light of the War of 1812 where it was realized that there were not enough fortifications to protect the coasts and waterways of the USA. (The fact the the British made it all the way to Baltimore before finally coming across a fort that could stop them should speak volumes). Calling Sumter a ‘tax-collection fort’ is disingenuous at best. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/135 "2019-09-16T17:29:23Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > The decision to disallow secession was a decision made by a small group of men. It was very much in the realm of possibility that the Union chose to negotiate the practicalities of the secession instead of suppressing the rebellion. So it is a good idea to question the decision. > > Can you see the difference between questioning a definite decision by a small group of men and questioning why an entire society did not want to change? No, it is a bad idea, because the “entire society” was made up of racist ignorant men who wanted to keep a evil way of life and treat people like property based on the color of the skins. The “small group of men” being those elected by the nation. ---
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/136 "2019-09-16T17:30:20Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Ignoring the true root cause… The root cause of slavery was economic profitability. ---
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/137 "2019-09-16T17:33:14Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Yes. They fired on a tax-collection fort in their harbor and killed nobody. Of course the trigger happy warmongers of today say that total war and devastation was the only choice after such an isolated event. The trigger-happy warmongers of **that** day, **on both sides,** said the same. Once Sumter was fired on, there was no going back. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/138 "2019-09-16T17:34:18Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Oh then he was just wrong. The rebels didn’t inflict casualties at Sumter. They certainly tried , bombarding it for 34 hours. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/139 "2019-09-16T17:52:17Z")
Lets pause a moment and think about this. Many nations today were once a region of smaller city states and regions. The UK for example - England, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, etc… but all under Londons rule. France - held power over the different french states and in ancient times independent nations, by making all roads and later railroads go thru Paris. Germany only became a nation maybe 150 years ago when Prussia united all the German states under rule from Berlin. The Soviet Union was a mix of nations ruled by the Russians in Moscow. Look how they later broke up. So Washington wanted more control over the states. Especially the ones that had been purchased by the federal government via treaty like Texas and Florida. They were afraid of states splitting off and becoming their own countries. Partly why Lincoln said “A house divided cannot stand”. Lincoln and others did want a strong federal government. Different states were not big on the federal government levying taxes and setting up laws which they then had to follow. For example Illinois tried to have a law forbidding blacks from living there (slave or free). Some states wanted the right to deal with indians as they wished and not have to abide by treaties signed by the federal government. Think about how later in Little Rock Arkansas it took federal troops to enforce laws set by the supreme court. Slavery was the cause of the civil war. But at the heart of that was the right of different states to allow slavery or not. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085/140 "2019-09-16T18:01:03Z")
> [@kirkrapine](#): > > The root cause of slavery was economic profitability. Nope, it was racism and the desire of ignorant men to have people to feel superior over. Money was important but secondary. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/840085.md?page=8)