So I was listening to video related and I was wondering, what do non-Americans get taught about the American Civil War...

Read the 10th amendment again

I had to learn all about Chinese history since the beginning in history class in school, also about the American civil war in English class but i think it was topical because a different class had Ireland instead of the US.

I hope none of them say 'because of slavery'. The war was fought due to similar reasons of the revolutionary war. The south didn't want to pay duties/taxes and wanted to make their own currency/split from the Union. Nothing new under the sun.

Don't see where it says you can secede, traitor scum

Nah the state's rights thing was mostly things like the Federal government putting tariffs in place
>Disputes arose at times. During the War of 1812 New England states met to discuss seceding from the Union because the war was interfering with their trade with Britain. In 1832 national tariffs that benefited Northern manufacturers while hurting the economy of Southern states led to the Nullification Crisis, in which South Carolina declared the tariffs null and void. The state threatened to leave the Union, but a compromise was reached that temporarily defused the crisis.

No one learns about this in high school, stop lying. We learn about the opium war in passing, that's it.

it's called world history numb nuts

I'm not even a Dixiefag you utter retard. I'm just pointing out that State rights was a serious issue back then (and even now despite how much the Federal government has encroached on State rights) and saying that it was "just slavery" isn't just idiotically reductionist, it's also just repeating a sanitized version of a very complicated historical event.

exactly. POINT PROVEN thanks retard

I kinda wished that the confederacy won, the federal government holds way too much power in it's current state
youtube.com/watch?v=LruaD7XhQ50

>unironically being a lost causer

Attached: sherman.png (1024x638, 553K)

no. stuff i remember-
roman britain
1066
tudors (henry viii)
English civil war
ww1
ww2

Not him but I also learned about that shit in history class. Don't go to a shit school in your next life mate.

>thread not even about Union vs Dixie
>tries to start shit
I'm asking the foreigners, not you

We do learn about the Chinese Civil War, you retard.

>muh stayts raghts
'no'

Sorry to break it to you, but history is more complicated than "good vs evil".

wasn't even trying to derail this thread into a confederate/union spergout, but apparently i succeeded

Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the CSA, begs to differ

Attached: cornerstonespeech.png (1100x630, 580K)

I don't recall talking about "good v.s. evil"

I didn't say that state's rights was the only reason you utter buffoon. I just said that there were multiple reasons and state's rights was one of the big ones. Most of the white people fighting for the CSA were too poor to have one slave, let alone an entire plantation. The big plantation owners were 1 percent of the entire Southern population. Most of the soldiers were poor dirt farmers who were little better than slaves.

Based Abraham Lincoln kills the fascist and free the slaves. That's pretty much what I remember

>muh pure righteous and equal Union paradise vs evil Southern slave owners
>State's rights? Haha that's just an excuse to be racist.
You weren't saying it but you were implying it.

Not even mentioned in classes here. We are thaught how your independence war influenced our own independence movements and the french revolution, though

They refuse to acknowledge that the war was started by wealthy slave holding planters to keep their property.

A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union
"In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."

You're clearly projecting because you realize that the Lost Cause autism is bullshit.

Based and intelligentpilled.

>I didn't say that state's rights was the only reason
Tell me which state's the south was fighting for.
>The big plantation owners were 1 percent of the entire Southern population
Never disputed this. It is fact though that they dominated civil life, and were the class who had the power to decide if their state would secede or not.

It was about states rights, but slavery was the main state right being fought for. the south feared the government would take away their right to slave ownership primarily and prematurely seceded

I don't understand these kinds of posts, why would other countries learn about our shit. Do any non burgers agree with me ? I think it's very selfish to assume other countries learn niche things about yours, sorry for the soy reply

South Carolina Secession Declaration

"On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.

The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy."

>implying the confederacy wouldn't have been just as bad

No one was denying that rich slave owners were the ones who really pushed for secession but the actual southerners who fought didn't care for the slavery issue because for most of them, the only advantage they had over slaves was that they had some Constitutional rights. If you asked a Southern soldier why he was fighting, he would say he was fighting to preserve state rights against Federal tyranny. If you asked a Northern soldier why he was fighting, he would say he was preserving the Union. Slavery didn't figure into the motivations of the soldiers until the Emancipation Proclamation and even then, it was mostly a Northern motivation. Most Southerners fought for state rights and southern pride. In addition, the abolition of slavery in the South that was dominated by farming cash crops would have economically destroyed them and many of the rich farm owners would rather secede and have the hope of winning rather than giving in and definitely losing everything. And as the conclusion of the Civil War showed, it took decades for the South to economically recover from the effects of abolition, not even counting the damage that Union troops did to infrastructure and such.

Again, trying to say that the Civil War was about slaves and nothing else is reductive and only weakens your argument.

>trying to claim I'm a Dixiefag when I've state multiple times I'm not

Nice and comfy music.

Btw I'm talking strictly about the common Southern soldier. Of course the rich plantation owners and politicians were gung ho about slavery, but I'm talking about the thousands of men who fought and died.

It doesn't matter what the uneducated common solider thought he was fighting for. I'm saying that the the first and foremost reason the southern states seceded was to preserve the institution of slavery. What ever justifications and excuses that were made during and after the war to no obscure this fact.

It does matter because the common soldier was doing the majority of the fighting and dying but you want to paint them all with the same brush stroke.

How does that change what caused the war? I'm not talking about what individual soldiers may have thought they were fighting for. I'm speaking to what prompted the south's elite to decide to secede from the Union

Slavery only explains it in part. Slavery explains why the south decided to secede. Preserving the union is what motivated the north to get them to "reconsider"

probably the most boring topic that regularly comes up on Jow Forums

No you were talking about the South as a whole and that means that the common people must be included. If thousands of men didn't join the Confederate Army by the thousands for a cause they believed in fighting in, there wouldn't have been a war, let alone a four year one. You want to ignore what the majority of the people who lived in the South fought for because it's not convenient for the "Union did no wrong" argument. As a Northerner who thinks that Abraham Lincoln did nothing wrong and the Union winning was a good thing, trying to disregard the common people is disingenuous on your part. You were the one who tried to say that the South as a whole seceded over slavery but as soon as it was pointed out that hardcore slavery supporters were in the minority and the people who actually fought in the CSA army mostly did it out of southern pride and fighting against federal tyranny, suddenly the main enemy fighting force is "no longer important".

Do you believe that a second civil war will happen?

hopefully

No. The USA is a very different place from back then. States are too weak legally and military, and state identity is all but dead.

I could see all of those right-wing militias rising up and going full-Freikorps if we try and elect a social democratic government. Business and the military/police would most likely back them up.

But the USA is very politically divided right now. What do you think will happen instead of the civil war as CA vs TX?

Nothing

We are far too rich to have that happen. The only chance that a civil war would happen is if our institutions eroded down and a dictator installed himself as our head of state.

Well in the unlikely chance things did culminate into an armed conflict, rather than seceding states, there would be hotspots where fighting occurs that would be split by political lines and these would mostly be counties/towns/districts. Cities would be split along racial lines. But in all honesty, nothing will happen and Civil War 2 is just a fantasy.

inb4 Drumpf post

>As a Northerner who thinks that Abraham Lincoln did nothing wrong and the Union winning was a good thing
This is referring to me btw

Do you think that the common people had any real say over whether the south seceded? If not, than their opinion is irrelevant.

The common people were the ones who populated the army. Without them, there wouldn't have been a war in the first place. The Union army would have just marched in and arrested all the ring leaders. Saying that the common people don't matter is just a cheap cop out. Get it through your thick skull.

I love Lincoln speech he was such a good speaker

Hey stupid.
Shut up

it isn't
Theres a pretty big gap. In complusary history they don't bother with that stuff. In the last 2 years where you choose subject modern history covered basically ww1 an before in one term and 20th century for the rest. While ancient was Egypt and the latest was Charlemagne. I did both but a pretty big gap.
And school isn't great for broad history anyway because they really focus on one topic because the content itself isn't what matters its the skills in researching and putting forward a coherent argument justified with evidence.

It doesn't matter what the random people who served in the army thought, they would have done anything the southern gentry told them to do.

You have shown that southerners who did not own slaves, fought when called upon (or drafted) in the war.

You have claimed, though without any evidence, that they believed they were fighting for states' rights against federal tyranny. What did they believe these rights were? In which ways did they believe that the federal government were infringing upon them? Did the common solider have the education necessary to actual know anything about these issues, rather than just believe what the slave lords told them?

Provide evidence of another factor influencing the decision to secede to the extent the slavery did.

Thus far I've shown Mississippi and South Carolina, here's Texas:

"Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated Union to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery - the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits - a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slaveholding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?"

The narrative on it is pretty much the following:
north man good
south man bad

who gives a shit about some ching chong bing bong dynasty lmao

Attached: 7D066800-E078-497A-8B28-1356D7E28529.png (225x225, 6K)