U.S civil war

the Confederate flag simply was a symbol of Independence from the north, had nothing to do with slavery

The only reason why the north cared about the slaves at all is because the Southern economy and production capabilities was largely based on slave labor. If they take the south's slaves away, then it would severely limit their ability to wage war. They spin the history books as if they were moral crusaders fighting a war for human rights and DA POOR SLAVES. That's all bullshit, they never gave a fuck about the slaves. It was all strategy for the war. Abraham Lincoln wanted to ship the slaves back to Africa.

it was about money.

the feds collected tariffs on the south when they exported cotton and tobacco, and imported raw finished goods from europe.

the feds exempted the tariffs on the north when they imported raw materials and exported finished goods.

the south was tired of paying all the taxes and wanted out. fort sumter in charleston, sc was where the feds collected the money for the tariffs when cotton and tobacco was exported, which is why the confederates fired on it.

lincoln didn't give a shit about niggers or slavery; he only wanted to preserve the union. he knew that if the south seceded then it would only be a matter of time before the u.s. turned into europe with a dozen smaller nations constantly fighting each other and taking out loans from a rothschild controlled central bank. because of this the emancipation proclamation only affected the rebelling states; the 5 border states (kentucky, missouri, west virginia, delaware, and maryland) and washington d.c. kept their slaves all through the civil war. my only gripe with lincoln is that he was an asshole and could have compromised with the south instead of acting like a tyrant and taking such a hard line regarding the tariffs.

Attached: 1548221877088.jpg (500x521, 54K)

No
The South wanted to get out from the tax burden the North was imposing on them. As well as establish a government in line with the founders and constitution. Look it up

>taboo
Not for native southern blacks.

Attached: 9222E600-9819-4396-89E4-81950EECD0CA.jpg (480x640, 249K)

Excellent replies burger anons.
Literally every link Google gives on page 1 is "hurry the war was purely about slaves". Didn't make any sense.

literally read each state's articles of secession. they list slavery as the primary reason

I just met this guy.

AMA.

Attached: IMG_2947.jpg (3648x2736, 2.18M)

>So what's the reason for Americans or others to carry or show the flag?
I hate the Federal government

Attached: 40381259523_dfda731dd1_o.jpg (3648x2736, 3.14M)

as you know the media lies it's getting worse I'm glad we have friends down there

It's basically true

Because the vast, vast majority of southerners didn't own slaves. And they were the ones who died by the hundreds of thousands (which was quite large proportionally in the 1860s), and they bought into the propaganda, which oddly enough happened mostly after the war, that it had nothing to do with slavery - but was instead over this nebulous "states' rights." And so, they feel patriotic about something that sounds more swallowable and for whom many people from their families and hometowns died.

Southern states seceded because of slavery. The misconception is that the civil war started over slavery.

The civil war started because after the south peacefully seceded, the federal government of the north would not let them leave to manage their own affairs. The north started the civil war. It was not to end slavery, it was to hold on to southern economic and military positions of power.

>lincoln didn't give a shit about niggers or slavery; he only wanted to preserve the union.
"Let the south go? Let the south go? Where then shall we get our revenue?"
t. A. Lincoln

Well the NZ shooter frequented a gun club there which has a confederate flag hanging up. NZ media is kvetching about it, prob to create support for gun restrictions.
If debating sheep fuckers about it on FB news articles, if I'm wrong about it not being a symbol of white supremacy or oppression I'm gonna have to SHUT IT DOWN

it's actually because the north wanted to reduce state's rights, which was against the constitution. slave ownership was a triviality

Attached: 5532895255652.jpg (896x567, 96K)

They seceded because of slavery, but the war started because the north wanted to preserve the union and centralize the government

>BASTE black confederate

I don't actually have a problem with blacks that do this, but you realize there's only like 10 of these guys right

It wasn't just slavery, but the future of slavery and what that institution meant for the southern states' role within the federal government. It wasn't just about slavery down south, but about the spread of slavery into the west. Prior to secession there had been decades of malcontent over the South's diminishing role in the nation due to slavery and its demographic and geographical limitations. And yes, there we're other issues that divided the North and the South but slavery was the only issue that could not be resolved to the normal political process. Slavery was an existential institution for the South.

After the election of Lincoln, the first avowedly anti-slavery president in American history, it was a "now-or-never" moment.

The Jewish slave owners and the Jewish factory owners simply played both sides of the fence thru familial ties

Exactly this. Secession and the war itself are two very separate acts. It's lost on so many people that to belligerents in war can fight for very different reasons. For the South the war was about secession which was about slavery and the future of slavery and what it meant for those States and people. On the other hand, the north fought because southern secession, whatever its root cause, was politically intolerable.

This is what happens when you go to the kikes for your information cunt

There was no "civil war", the south seceded and northern imperialists illegally invaded and conquered the south, a separate entity, against any constitutional mandate thereby converting the American experiment into an nonconsensual totalitarian hellscape.

It's also worth noting that they didn't even put Jefferson Davis on trial out of fear that he could prove that the south had every right to secede.

My state seceded because the fed tried drafting us to go to war against the deep south. We weren't willing to die to keep niggers, but we didn't think it was right to slaughter Americans that had voted to secede.
We (the upper south, with the most whites) ended up contributing MOST of the troops to the war effort, and we never fucking seceded until Fort Sumter and Lincoln's demand that we kill our own countrymen and fellow southerners.

If feds hadn't withheld elections, more states (like Kentucky) would have seceded too. And yankees hated getting drafted and rioted over it.

The civil war fought over state's rights .

This is accurate. Shocking to hear a southerner admit the war was about slavery

I mean, the federal government bought the land/states that wanted to secede so yeah lincoln probably wanted to keep those states

Slavery was involved, but just one aspect. You have to understand just how different the societies of the north and south were at the time. I'm not too knowledgeable on britbong history, but if I had to use an analogy it'd be like the conflict that existed between Scotland and England during the middle ages.

Think about it this way. The north was urbanized and the south was rural and agrarian. The main industries were things farming tobacco and cotton. The entire structure of the economy and the society is based on slavery. If slavery were abolished, the south would be completely fucked and thrown into a tailspin. It'd be like if you lived in a coal town in West Virginia and then the President passes a law that bans coal mining. You're fucked.

Adding to this, keep in mind that not long before this time period was the Haitian slave revolt, just across the gulf of mexico. The fear of slaves rebelling and slaughtering the whites was very real and palpable.

It was but it wasnt.

It can be boiled down to slavery to make it black and white but it was far more complex then just wanting to keep slaves.

It was more that the south wanted to have state governments decide for themselves whether to have slaves or not. They feared with Lincolns election that the federal government would move to limit the capacity of the states to hold slaves as was keep the newer states in the union from deciding for themselves whether to hold slaves The south saw this is as the federal government taking power for itself from the states.

Like the above poser stated it It was about states rights but the issue of slavery was what brought that into contrast.

Federalism vs Anti-federalism

They succeeded from the Union because the North wanted control over the means of production in the South. In fact, Ulysses S. Grant who is idolized by liberals as a hero was actually a slave master who refused to relinquish his own slaves up after the CivilWar. It took an act from Congress to force him to give up his slaves.

Robert E. Lee, on the other hand, acquired slaves from his wife's father when he died and freed them immediately. He's the guy who had his statue taken down by leftists because he fought for the Confederates.

So no, it was never about slavery. That was just something Lincoln threw in to get support and virtue-signal like a faggot. Lincoln's plan was to ship all the black people back to Africa. What a hero!

The states literally made articles of succession and most directly cited slavery as their motivation.
Not the hill to die on, any leftist who knows how to google will shut your talking point right down.

And another important point about the whole slavery issue is that abolitionism is HEAVILY whitewashed. In school we're just taught that abolitionists were all just freedom-loving egalitarians who hated racism or whatever the fuck.

In reality, the main reason people were against slavery was that THEY DIDN'T WANT TONS OF NIGGERS INFESTING THEIR STATES OR THE WESTERN TERRITORIES. There was an insane amount of blacks in the south due to slavery. Still are, but it was even worse back then. And many people didn't want to live in a society like that with these apes running around. Certainly didn't want them spoiling the virgin west.

Another fun fact: reason why the "underground railroad" final destination was canada was because nobody in the northern states wanted to keep blacks around. So they all just passed the buck and kicked the bucket down to canada. "Your problem now, leafs."

Most of them list slavery as a primary issue that which they claim the federal government has no right to dictate to them on.

It was about States rights to decide for themselves about slavery.

and don't forget: 1 Lincoln didn't have any authority to free slaves in the south. The south already had Jefferson Davis for it s president . 2 The emancipation declaration only applied to slaves in the states that were in contention with the United States.... Northern states kept slaves for up to 10 years after the war.

To sum up: Not accurate.
It was over states rights vs federalism,
lo and behold the south was right.

I carry it because the south has a right to exist culturally and to honor all the old stock Americans who died fighting the war. One thing they don't tell you in school is that the Union army was over ~40% first and second generation immigrant. The government was literally importing people from Europe to kill southerners. Pic related.

Attached: 1318177883477.png (1280x720, 211K)

Yes but you can divorce the issue of states rights from the issue of slavery for the sake of evaluating the political legitimacy or lack thereof. Once you do that most people have a hard time agreeing with legal argument which Lincoln used as the basis for his invasion of the South. The country exists today under a constitution which has language that is fundamentally opposed to over a century's worth of precedence and jurisprudence reinforcing the establishment of Federal supremacy, and we need to resolve that conflict if the country is ever going to be whole again.

The bottom line is that an entity which entered into a pact as a sovereign actor has the power to leave that pact of its own free agency. If we are going to subordinate the right of the states to revoke their consent to belonging in the Union we must also remove the presumption of a sovereignty parallel to federal authority and reform the institutions which function on the basis of that assumption, i.e. the senate and congress.

Yep, they were pretty much importing irish and germans and immediately giving them rifles and uniforms and sending them off. Hell, there were even draft riots in NYC because of this bullshit.

That is an extremely, extremely oversimplified explanation- though somewhat accurate, certainly good enough granted no one (yourself included) actually reads

Don't quite understand this map. Is it the percentage of 'natively born' americans who were also white?

if I still had slaves I'd return them to africa. not worth the rape and hassle

The typical "Confederate Flag" is not the proper flag of the Confederacy, it's the flag of the military, or at least has become accepted as the flag of the military. So for some people, the show the flag to honor their own ancestors and their sacrifice who fought and/or died in the war, whether or not said ancestors cared at all about slavery.

Same as you might show whatever flag your ancestor fought for, anywhere in the world you might be, from whenever in history.

It's the percentage of the White population that was native born to parents who were also native born. It totally ignores non-Whites, except for on the border. This was back before the census had reclassified spics as a different group to non-hispanics.

Overall yes it was about slavery but it was more than that. The Feds were ruling with an iron fist and fucking the south.

Of course it isn’t that black and white, everyone knows lincoln didnt give a shit about niggers

It is kind of whitewashed. The north were pretty damn racist too, most of the men fighting were not doing it to free slaves. This point seems to be glossed over at times

Damn that's interesting, I had no idea how blanda'd up the whole of New England was. I guess the industrialization of the north was more diffuse at that time than it became in the 20th century?

Its accurate, all the rebel states were polled during the war and all but one cited slavery.
Those inbred pigfuckers didn’t give a damn about states rights they were just afraid of getting cucked by their own niggers. Also they got steamrolled by the north as soon as the champion chad Ulysses came in and fucked their southern asses like the bitches they were

I'll give all of you a hint. 3/5ths compromise.

Beyond that, literally, read any book or lengthy analysis that isn't clearly intended for grade school children...

Its one of many reasons but the slaves thing was more of a tipping point rather than the only reason there was also the divide between the north and south and the southern states not feeling like they are getting representation

I mean like most wars it was about the wealth and power of the elite and both the southern and the northern elite had their own motives.

The southern elite wanted states rights because they felt their power in the legislature waning and wanted to keep control over their home states and thereby protect their slavery profits.

The northern elite wanted to grow the federal government and give themselves more power over the south and over the new states out west. That's why they were willing to throw so many lives away in order to maintain federal authority over the south.

The North didn't really gave a fuck about the blacks but they maintain the narrative so that the war is remembered as a valiant crusade against slavery and not the brutal suppression of a rebellion by the state.

Attached: General Lee Powerslide.webm (700x524, 966K)

The slaves werent even freed until half way through the civil war

France supported the south. England supported the north

Looked it up to see why they would support it and found this quote by a elderly black woman who waved a flag in support at a rally:
>We don’t believe the flag represents racism. Stone Mountain is history. The person who wants to blast the carvings off the mountain is someone who wants to eradicate history.

>want to eradicate history

Based old black lady knew what ((they are up to))

>yes goy, we need these concentration camps to prove it happened but the historic value of the most massive civil war of its time doesn't need to be preserved.

ikr

Attached: 1489743887000.jpg (687x1117, 654K)

The "Rebel Flag" (it's not really the actual flag of the Confederacy) become a symbol of White identity. Happened when Woodrow Wilson was president and around the events of WWI. They were building lots of southern civil war monuments to get southerns to support the Federal government and to fight in WWI. It was a charm offensive by the federal government to get the south to think it was part of the Union so that they would support the Federal government's will.

it's not really accurate IMO but the accurate accounting is very complicated it is easier to go with "muh free slaves." It also fits the current political agenda of "muh evil white men." The truth of the mater is that the North and the South had become two completely different Nations -as separate as France and Germany or Russia and one of it's satellite states. They had completely different cultures, financial systems, goals, philosophy of government etc. The South wanted to be left alone and the North wanted to impose it's will, as well as use the wealth of the South to fund public works projects in the North only. The will of the South was in the way of the North's ambitions.

Attached: 1552614822607.jpg (791x636, 175K)

SCV has a couple hundred black members (out of 98,000).

Attached: 46431446045_b51fea494b_o.jpg (3648x2736, 2.53M)

I can't stand google anymore. I'm a oldfag and shit I learned from a history book is buried or not found Creepy as fuck. Google is even helping China eradicate Tibetan culture by stripping away all search results that don't pretend their culture and land belong to China. For a short while the only results for Tianamen square were vacation and tourist sites.

>The "Rebel Flag" (it's not really the actual flag of the Confederacy)

It's the Naval Jack/Army of Tennessee flag

Attached: tenn_battle-flags_7.jpg (600x333, 40K)

The freed slaves also never got their "Forty acres and a mule" either.

There is rarely a time when only one thing can be pointed at as a cause for such great sweeping changes that the Civil War went through.
Part of it was slavery, slave owners didn't want to lose out on the profitability of slave labor; however what is rarely talked about is the influence of Communism and international banksters. The south was more concerned with being financially enslaved to international interests that were intent on destroying or eroding the Constitution in order to better exploit and control the US. Maintaining slave labor was a big part of the economy, and a big way for the powers of the time within southern states to resist outside influence.
Some of my information is from the John Birch Society (a.k.a. neo-con Central) so take it with a grain of salt.

President Jefferson Davis sent an offer for abolition of slavery in exchange for British support in securing Southern independence from the United States.

google has definitely gotten worse about actually returning useful results in the last 6 months or so, it is total dog shit

>it's true
>says the guy from Mexico

So, says one of Lincoln's slaves.

H-hey um user, can I ask you for a favour? C-come join this Jow Forums Discord server please, it's a really good server I promise! We can maybe even laugh at the Christchurch shooting livestream together if you did... so join using this link right now:
discord
.gg/668D4MY

r

Attached: join degeneracy akarin 18.png (320x360, 219K)

Roll, Alabama, Roll
m.youtube.com/watch?v=k0abJhZdk8E
10,929

Damn why are the civil war songs from dixie so much catchier than the union tunes?

It's true.

The one thing that shocked me when I first met a group of modern Confederates was how mixed they were.
I grew up believing what school taught me: That they were all racist caricatures of evil white men.
The ones I met were fairly diverse.
White, Black, and Latinos.
Much to my surprise at the time, they were extremely friendly to me and very amicable amongst each other despite the battle flag being flown amongst them and by some of them.
They taught me about how the flag represents home, family, and tradition to them... It really shattered my world view at the time.

It's kind of cliché to say, but it was beautiful learning all of that while sharing the 4h July evening together with them.

Attached: confederate-states-of-america-flag-painting.jpg (1411x1009, 714K)

You have to be 18 to post here, kid.

Showing support for States Rights. Most CSA soldiers never owned slaves.

But user, if you wave that flag some white, liberal pussies might be offended!

You don't want that do you? Think of the white liberal pussies!

They're nuts.

The real reason for creating the flag was to prevent friendly fire occurring.

Go teach your Prime a Minster to fear the People. She's needs a spanking.

>The government was literally importing people from Europe to kill southerners.

Thanks for the red pill, never heard of this one

Here's an even bigger mindfuck, at the time of the draft riots the majority of people in New York did NOT speak English as their first language.

Slavery was a pivotal issue of the civil war but perhaps not in the way that most think. The South and the North as well as much of Europe depended on slavery economically. The plantations of the South provided raw materials for the textile industry in the North and abroad and brought both prosperity. The south was concerned with losing its freedom economically and politically, which is why they couldn’t give up slave labor. That being said slavery was only on the surface of the division, it was a war of independence. It’s both true and not true.

Attached: giweshfgionviowernbiof.png (572x330, 47K)

If Confederates wanted better luck gaining foreign support and winning the war you should have listened to Patrick Cleburne.

Really good answers ITT. Was it about slaves? sure. But slaves were going away with the coming industrial revolution. I would say it was over state sovereignty and economics. The south had no industry, no manufacturing. It was almost exclusively agriculturally based. Food crops, cotton & tobacco....fuuck, the south was too poor to produce animals on a large enough scale for meat consumption..... people forget what true poverty looked like in 1855.

Which is why slavery really is a phenomena of the literal 1%.

Attached: (Third, national variant).png (2000x1333, 50K)

The South is America.

Attached: America First.jpg (225x225, 15K)

H-hey um user, can I ask you for a favour? C-come join this Jow Forums Discord server please, it's a really good server I promise! We can maybe even laugh at the Christchurch shooting livestream together if you did... so join using this link right now:
discord
.gg/668D4MY

ck

Attached: join degeneracy akarin 11.png (320x360, 219K)

States rights, mechanization was going to make slaves obsolete overnight, its a complicated issue and modern history books shill the dirty white assholes didnt wanna give up their slaves bs

Attached: 667928A0-403E-496C-AC1A-A5CE2166E32D.jpg (736x496, 198K)

Extremely accurate. Don't listen to the memefaggots

No, fuck off.

Lincoln offered to let them keep slavery. They seceded anyway.