I guess this counts as progress.https://twitter.com/IbnSiqilli/status/1066603505031495681 …
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @jesswelman
Slavery was THE “states’ rights” issue. The bitter disputes of the day were about abolition, fugitive slaves, and expansion of slavery into western territories. “Sectionalism” was about whether the South could maintain its economic system based on slavery.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Grange95 @jesswelman
Also, the “states’ rights” argument is the centerpiece of “Lost Cause” revisionist history that has long sought to paint the South as the aggrieved side in the Civil War.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @jesswelman
I think one complexity that gets lost is that Lincoln wasn’t initially pursuing abolition as a goal of the war. Rather, it was preserving the Union. So you have the Border States.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
But the cause of the war is pretty straightforward—slavery. We know because the Confederate states told us why they seceded. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states#Texas …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.