Union Or Confederacy?

[vanKliff]

I liked that the generals of the confederation fought like real men just for their homeland (like Lee and Johnson for Virgina). That´s what soldiering is bloody about.

[Millander]

yah know the union boys fought just as hard for their country as well.

[Noodlenrice]

yah know the union boys fought just as hard for their country as well.

  Dude they YOLO charge 360 no ramrod

[NordLord1]

Confederacy, always was interested in the idealism of a federal free south. I also love southern food.

[Czolo]

I would join Union,

But personally I like Confederates, because its was quite unfair, when Union before war led policy which were leading to developing industrialized South, and inner market, preventing South from selling their agro tradeship.

Whole war was made because of money: Industrialized Union were trying to make high taxes to prevent European- better and cheaper stuff- to develop they own industialization system. As response Europa started same taxes, what made tradeship very hard- South hadn't enough demand on its agriculture trades in USA itself, and made farming unprofitable.
Dixie tried to leave Union to save they states from bancrupt, but Union needed their "food". Both sides found in constitution against articles, one saying that secesion is posible (sth like each state can decide), and Union- impossible (to make global decision majority of states have to agree). Union started the war, but conflict raged on, when they revealed slavery (after waar begun!!!) as one of reasons, apart from moral side of this, confederate were concentrated about big plantations with huge amount of slaves, who had quite good life, they had food and "job". So it wasn't slavery so much as you can see on films, probably they had better life   
there than they would have in Africa in that time. So without slaves whole structure of Dixie's would collapse. This are true reasons of war.

[Diplex]

Confederacy, always was interested in the idealism of a federal free south. I also love southern food.

Only reason id go with the south, as a non-American.

[AeroNinja]

Im half brazilian soooooo confederacy south NA if im right

[munky-wunky]

lol like your thinking

[DeoVindice61]

Confederacy, always was interested in the idealism of a federal free south. I also love southern food.

Only reason id go with the south, as a non-American.

To win a man heart is through his belly. Southern Rock and Southern Food mean heaven for me.

[Karth]

Yes I like KFC, oh and I went to Nashville for a whole where part my family live and some of the best food ever is there

[Rallix]

If you want the related material, skip to 8:00.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPiDqUB9k1I&list=WLrPX8vh9qyfPK0_P2ZGSyTQe0ehnm3RUc[/youtube]

Personally, I think the cause of the Confederacy was the just one, even if history has been written by the victors.
The Confederates knew what the US was about. A Union of States. Not provinces of a state, which is what it has largely become.

[Marceaux]

The entire war was started because of slavery. The Union fought to abolish slavery and the Confederates fought to keep their slaves and to take other states to expand their 'slave empire'. Yes they fought for independence but only because the government would not allow them to keep slaves. So if you really support the Confederate ideology in real life then you support the idea of slavery.

The pure complete lack of knowledge in this post never fails to cause many lels.

I would enlist today if the CSA rose again.

[Millander]

Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.

[Allasaphore]

Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Historical_revisionism_(negationism).html

Not all historical revisionism is bad, Millander. I earnestly believe that we do need to look over the events and underlying causes of the American Civil War in light of new knowledge of the period and to do so in an unbiased manner.

It's incredibly important to note that the Civil War was not blatantly about slavery at the onset. I'm sure you realize that the Civil War essentially began with the Battle of Fort Sumter (1861), when the Confederate troops under Beauregard began to shell the fort. This leads one to suspect that the war was not begun for slavery, but as an independence movement.

It is a shame that so many deny the large estrangement that resulted over the slavery question, so large that it ruptured the nation into two separate states (or one, depending on your viewpoint). The North and South had different opinions on slavery, but this did not result in war independently of any other factors. Even Lincoln is quoted to have said "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that" in a letter to Horace Greeley in 1862.

It is also important to note that the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 did not end slavery in the Union, and would only apply to states "still in revolt". This meant that slavery in the border states was preserved in the border states until slavery was officially abolished (13th Amendment, 1865-Post Civil War).

The greatest factor in the American Civil War would be the preservation of the Union as a single nation as opposed to different nations. When the Confederacy formed, Fort Sumter (in SC) was not evacuated by the Union troops, essentially indicating that the Confederate government was not recognized as a legitimate body (France nor Britain recognized them either). Following the shelling of Ft. Sumter, the southern states were considered to be "in revolt" and responded to accordingly.

The American Civil War was more the result of estrangement caused by sectionalism than motivated by slavery alone. Slavery was a factor, but to call it the cause of the American Civil War is a logical fallacy.

Sources:
http://www.civilwar.org/battlefields/fort-sumter.html?tab=facts
http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation/

PS: I've always liked the Union.

[Marceaux]

Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.

Sorry Millander. But you are wrong. The north won. Therefore anything you read in a history book or were taught in school is incorrect.