4 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Sharon R. Fiore's avatar

Yep, the War of Northern Aggression was only to force a one government rule, just like they are trying to do now to the world.

Expand full comment
JohnAZ's avatar

One thing often overlooked re: the civil war was the demographics at the time. The antebellum, agrarian south did not have a lot of folks, whereas the North full of cities, had many more people and thus votes. In our country, the South never stood a chance politically and it was the end of the compromise era that drove the South to try to exit. The real battle here was between the manufacturing North, and ENGLAND. The South was a “colony” of both, providing resources to both on-coming manufacturing giants. The South was backed by England throughout the war, Surprise!!!! The demographic advantage, ie, the number of available soldiers, was what did in the South. Grant just threw troops at Lee until Lee had no one left.

The victory of the North is what spurred on the Gilded Age which drove the USA way past England in economic power.

BTW, look at today. The power of the cities politically (Blue) contesting the power of the agrarian sector (Red). Politically, the cities will win, just like 1865, but today a strike by teamsters could undo any power the cities have. Cities today are much more dependent than in the 1860s.

Expand full comment
beantownbill's avatar

Being from Massholechusetts I was never taught that there may have been other valid viewpoints about the Civil War 1 (given our probable future and the real possibility of future uncivil wars, I'm numbering them).

Expand full comment
Cheryl's avatar

And take away states rights

Expand full comment