"The Civil War was an avoidable tragedy" was standard U.S. history - not just in the South - for many years. Not surprising many older Americans still see it that way. Discussed the issue in more depth here: https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/11/john-kelly-civil-war-debate-tim-kaine-america-slavery/ … https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/1121779042850693125 …
Especially if you lived through the end of Jim Crow, which did not require half a million deaths, there is a natural instinct to wonder if war was the only option.
-
-
Slavery would have died out on it's own. The question is how long would it have taken? It may have lasted decades longer than it did.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This all ignores the actual events which sparked the war - the secession of the Southern states. The Union wasn't fighting for the purpose of abolishing slavery (although the Confederacy was definitely fighting to preserve it). Many in the North just wanted the status quo ante.
-
Lincoln used the fact that the Union crushed the rebellion to abolish slavery, but it's just as inaccurate as the Lost Cause myth to say that was the main goal of the North.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think once the South tried to overthrow the election of 1860 war was the only option. Slavery could have been ended without war but that would have required the South to respect Lincoln's election.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.