![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Confederate History Month
Apr. 20th, 2010 10:48 amFor the last decade or so (starting with Texas, in 1999), several of our southern states have been celebrating what they refer to as "Confederate History Month" every April. (Originally it was supposed to be February, but that would have been way too obviously motivated by racism.)
One of the myths that many in the South like to promote is that the Secession had nothing to do with slavery as such, but everything to do with States Rights. In reality, it had to do with exactly one states' right: to own slaves.
The central argument going on at the time was about the Territories (such as Oregon) that were not yet states. The South wanted to make sure that these territories would become slave-holding states. The North, on the other hand, wanted them to be free states. Slavery had gotten a bad reputation by that time, and there were large abolitionist movements going on, in both North and South. It was a fierce, ongoing debate - entire newspapers were being created dedicated to one side or the other of this issue. The South was legitimately afraid: If these new states were free, they could not be counted upon to vote pro-slavery, and the very institution might be voted out of existence. The abolitionists in the North recognized this fact as well, and were hoping for it.
This one issue, albeit a big one, bigger than health care is today, was the sole major reason for Southern Secession: they were afraid they would lose their slaves if they stayed with the union.
One need look no further than their own declarations to see the truth. This was the middle of the nineteenth century that this occurred. Back when literacy was not so common as today, and therefore more highly esteemed. So, they understood at the time that this was a major turning point in history and took pains to document their reason for leaving the union.
( Declarations of Secession )
One of the myths that many in the South like to promote is that the Secession had nothing to do with slavery as such, but everything to do with States Rights. In reality, it had to do with exactly one states' right: to own slaves.
The central argument going on at the time was about the Territories (such as Oregon) that were not yet states. The South wanted to make sure that these territories would become slave-holding states. The North, on the other hand, wanted them to be free states. Slavery had gotten a bad reputation by that time, and there were large abolitionist movements going on, in both North and South. It was a fierce, ongoing debate - entire newspapers were being created dedicated to one side or the other of this issue. The South was legitimately afraid: If these new states were free, they could not be counted upon to vote pro-slavery, and the very institution might be voted out of existence. The abolitionists in the North recognized this fact as well, and were hoping for it.
This one issue, albeit a big one, bigger than health care is today, was the sole major reason for Southern Secession: they were afraid they would lose their slaves if they stayed with the union.
One need look no further than their own declarations to see the truth. This was the middle of the nineteenth century that this occurred. Back when literacy was not so common as today, and therefore more highly esteemed. So, they understood at the time that this was a major turning point in history and took pains to document their reason for leaving the union.
( Declarations of Secession )
