Me doing this for homework because I'm stuck in quarantine the whole video: 👁👄👁

@mynameisearl1777

Жыл бұрын

Fool. quarantine only exists in your head

@user-ob4uy4uf6w

Жыл бұрын

lol fr

I'm studying English and your voice is very soft , calm and easy for understanding

@gabrielgomes7024

Жыл бұрын

Também

@vitoriamello9929

5 ай бұрын

Me too

in my school book-club, we watched this video because we are going to read a book about slavery and the Civil war. This video really helped my book-club understand the Civil war. Thank you for posting this video ~ Me and my small book-club

"I feel impelled, Mr. President [of the convention], to vote for this Ordinance [of secession] by an overruling necessity. Years ago I was convinced that the Southern States would be compelled either to separate from the North, by dissolving the Federal Government, or they would be compelled to abolish the institution of African Slavery" - Speech of E.S. Dargan, in the Convention of Alabama, Jan. 11, 1861

I’m forced to do this for my homework..

@cianacarroll6424

3 жыл бұрын

Bro same XD

@Ari-tm6so

3 жыл бұрын

same for me but it's a test :/

@obama_man9933

3 жыл бұрын

I’m watching it for a Twitter argument

@peacheatsfruit

3 жыл бұрын

Same 😔

@DSeibert_2026

3 жыл бұрын

Same

What caused the civil war???? The reason is written in The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States. They said the reason and wrote it down before it started. We have no reason, 150 years down the road, to manufacture reasons when the people that started the war put it in writing.

@libertycoffeehouse3944

Жыл бұрын

The South was Pro-Slavery and the North was Anti Slavery. Pro Slavery meant slaves from Kentucky could immigrate with their owners to the western territories. Pro-Slavery meant the western territory was reserved for free white labor to the exclusion of the slaves or free black men. It was not a moral position but based on white supremacy. Slavery was legal in the United States. The union was a compact between the states. The states all should have equal access to the common territory not yet part of the United States. By limiting immigrants from the South, but allowing immigrants from the north, new states would side with the industrial north in Congress on issues such as a tariff and a national bank. The south left the union over principle. When the south left the Union, all that territory belonged to the United States so why not let the south go. The reason was because a free trade Federal Republic (CSA) would have devastated northern industry. Southerners would have purchased their goods from Europe instead of the USA. There would have been massive economic devastation. The south was the number one purchaser of northern manufactured goods. Today, the central bank (Fed) is destroying the dollar. This will devastate and impoverish the United States. Thus, the north had to conquer the south had to control it. What is going on today leads right back to that tyrant Lincoln who by the way disdained black people.

@georgebalko2593

9 ай бұрын

Exactly right. And it is also recorded in the minutes of every succession convention in each southern state.

That is a good video. Thank you for sharing.

"The people of the northern States have organized a political party, purely sectional in its character; the central and controlling idea of which is hostility to the institution of AFRICAN SLAVERY, as it exists in the southern States, and that party has elected a President and Vice President of the United States, pledged to administer the government upon principles inconsistent with the rights, and subversive of the interests of the people of the southern States." Arkansas Secession Convention

@jonknappmcaliser9187

Жыл бұрын

More simply put, slavery caused the Civil War (or, more precisely, greed and white supremacy).

@doithimaceabhard7457

5 ай бұрын

Yes Arkansas was one of the "smoking gun" states that wrote it down so we know today it was about slavery

@libertycoffeehouse3944

2 ай бұрын

Yes, you need to read all of the document though. Slavery was legal in 1860. The USA was a Federal Republic with slavery fighting a war with the CSA which was a Federal Republic with slavery. There were 500,000 slaves in the north and about 3.5 million in the south. Slavery was still legal in New Jersey and Delaware as well as the border states which remained in the union. The north was complicit in slavery. It was the New England states that controlled the shipping industry and were involved in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. Northern factories used slave cotton in their factories. Northern banks provided loans to southerners to purchase slaves. It is important to remember that 75 percent of southerners did not own any slaves. The north only wanted to eliminate slavery in the western territories. See Corwin Amendment. The Anti-Slavery position was the western territory was for free white labor only. This was not a moral position but a racist position. They wanted to keep free blacks out of the territory but why? For reasons of political power in Congress. If new states joined the union and were pro-northern, they would be able to get enough votes to pass unconstitutional legislation such as the American System. This was high tariffs, handouts to corporations, a railroad, and subsidies for internal improvements which were not constitutional.

@Rundstedt1

2 ай бұрын

@@libertycoffeehouse3944 Nope. Every Northern state had acted to end slavery before the war, and even as early as 1820 there will only be about 3000 slaves left in the North, well before it was industrialized, and that number is falling. (Macmillan Encyclopedia, "Slavery In The Civil War Era"). Or as Professor Paul Finkelman put it, _"By 1804, all of the states north of Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware had either ended slavery outright or had passed legislation to gradually abolish the institution. Thus, after 1804, Slavery was peculiar to the South."_ But meanwhile the Southern states not only refused to try to give it up, they grew it and embraced it even more so that even at the time of the Revolution: _"The Southern Colonies of Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, by contrast, were not merely societies with slaves but "slave societies" organized economically, socially, and politically around the principle and practice of human bondage. In 1760, 88 percent of the 325,806 slaves in the British mainland colonies lived in the South."_ Elizabeth R. Varon "Disunion, the coming of the American Civil War" p17 And all the border states were Southern slave states that were retained in the Union one way or another. Many were divided internally themselves like Missouri that fought its own Civil War within the larger one. Kentucky had governments that claimed to represent it on both sides. Maryland had divided loyalties although the weakness of slavery there, economic ties and existing loyalty to the Union and the Federal Military presence itself saw it side with the Union. Only in Delaware with less than 1800 slaves was there no secession movement. In the other three states it had to be suppressed.

@Rundstedt1

2 ай бұрын

@@libertycoffeehouse3944 The Antebellum South itself questions your intellectual integrity. _"Can there be a doubt in any intelligent mind, that the object which the Black Republican party has in view is the ultimate extinction of slavery in the United States? To doubt it, is to cast the imputation of hypocracy and imbecility upon the majority of the people of every Northern State, who have stood by this party through all its trials and struggles, to its ultimate triumph in the election Lincoln._ _In these declarations Mr. Lincoln has covered the entire abolition platform - hatred of slavery, disregard of judicial decisions, negro equality, and, as a matter of course, the ultimate extinction of slavery. None of these doctrines, however, are left to inference, so far as Mr. Lincoln is concerned, as we see he has avowed them in the plainest and clearest language. They are not exceeded by the boldness of Seward, the malignity of Giddings, or the infamy of Garrison. It was the knowledge of these facts which induced his nomination by the Republican party; and by the free circulation which has been given to them in the canvass, it would seem that Mr. Lincoln is indebted to their popularity for his election._ _There is one dogma of this party which has been so solemnly enunciated, both by their national conventions and Mr. Lincoln that it is worth of serious consideration. I allude to the doctrine of negro equality. The stereotyped expression of the Declaration of Independence that "All men are born equal," has been perverted from its plain and truthful meaning, and made the basis of a political dogma which strikes at the very foundations of the institution of slavery. Mr. Lincoln and his party assert that this doctrine of equality applies to the negro, and necessarily there can exist no such thing as property in our equals. Upon this point both Mr. Lincoln and his party have spoken with a distinctiveness that admits of no question or equivocation. If they are right, the institution of slavery as it exists in the Southern States is in direct violation of the fundamental principles of our Government; and to say that they would not use all the powers in their hands to eradicate the evil and restore the Government to its "ancient faith," would be to write themselves down self-convicted traitors both to principle and duty._ _In the election which just transpired, the Black Republicans did not hesitate to announce, defend and justify the doctrines and principles which I have attributed to them. During the progress of the canvass I obtained copies of the documents which they were circulating at the North, with a view of ascertaining the grounds upon which they were appealing to the people for their support and confidence. With the exception of a few dull speeches in favor of a protective tariff, intended for circulation in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and still fewer number of pitiful appeals for squandering the public lands, the whole canvass was conducted by the most bitter and malignant appeals to the anti-slavery sentiment of the North._ _Fellow-citizens of Georgia, I have endeavored to place before you the facts of the case, in plain and unimpassioned language; and I should feel that I had done injustice to my own convictions, and been unfaithful to you, if I did not in conclusion warn you against the danger of delay and impress upon you the hopelessness of any remedy for these evils short of secession. You have to deal with a shrewd, heartless and unscrupulous enemy, who in their extremity may promise anything, but in the end will do nothing. On the 4th day of March, 1861, the Federal Government will pass into the hands of the Abolitionists. It will then cease to have the slightest claim upon either your confidence or your loyalty; and, in my honest judgment, each hour that Georgia remains thereafter a member of the Union will be an hour of degradation, to be followed by certain and speedy ruin...'"_ - Howell Cobb (future President of the Provisional Confederate Congress), December 6, 1860 _”If Mr. Lincoln places among us his Judges, District Attorneys, Marshals, Post Masters, Custom House officers, etc., etc., by the end of his adminstration, with the control of these men, and the distribution of public patronage, he will have succeeded in dividing us to an extent that will destroy all our moral powers, and prepare us to tolerate the running of a Republican ticket, in most of the States of the South, in 1864. If this ticket only secured five or ten thousand votes in each of the Southern States, it would be as large as the abolition party was in the North a few years since. It would hold a ballance [*sic*] of power between any two political parties into which the people of the South may hereafter be divided. This would soon give it the control of our elections. We would then be powerless, and the abolitionists would press forward, with a steady step, to the accomplishment of their object. They would refuse to admit any other slave States to the Union. They would abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and at the Forts, Arsenals and Dock Yards, within the Southern States, which belong to the United States. They would then abolish the internal slave trade between the States, and prohibit a slave owner in Georgia from carrying his slaves into Alabama or South Carolina, and there selling them. These steps would be taken one at a time, cautiously, and our people would submit. Finally, when we were sufficiently humiliated, and sufficiently in their power, they would abolish slavery in the States. It will not be many years before enough of free States may be formed out of the present territories of the United States, and admitted into the Union, to give them sufficient strength to change the Constitution, and remove all Constitutional barriers which now deny to Congress this power. I do not doubt, therefore, that submission to the administration of Mr. Lincoln will result in the final abolition of slavery. If we fail to resist now, we will never again have the strength to resist.”_ Open letter of Gov. Joseph E. Brown to the Georgia legislature. Dec. 7, 1860 .

Thanks Morgan Freeman!

@allisonbudlong7362

3 жыл бұрын

You may know this, the narrator's name is James "Al" Johnson :)

@fezzik7619

3 жыл бұрын

Morgan Freeman?! 🤦‍♂️

@kake9340

2 жыл бұрын

Nah thats normal-talking yoda

@Chattahoochee_Chief

2 жыл бұрын

IGNORANT LOO

@Clipz153_

2 жыл бұрын

@@fezzik7619 😂

Slavery was why the South left the Union but it wasn't why the North fought.

@Dragonette666

3 жыл бұрын

@VIII Maus then why didn't they free the slaves held in the 3 Union states?

@Mmvarto

3 жыл бұрын

@@Dragonette666 as OP said, the USA DIDNT fight for the abolition of slavery, they fought to stop southern succession

@cintysanchez7163

3 жыл бұрын

Interesting point

@austinjohnson4890

3 жыл бұрын

it was a large part of it, what was the reason you think?

@Dragonette666

3 жыл бұрын

@@austinjohnson4890 preserving their tax base and federal property. That's the funny part now when these states say they want to leave the union. The federal government isn't going to give up it's bases or any ports regardless of how you vote. It's also how the US goes to war. We put people in harms way and provoke the potential enemy. Then act sheepish when they respond with violence.

I love this guy's narration voice

@MilesCobbett

6 ай бұрын

Yes he does a great job explaining this :)

@torybarnett

4 ай бұрын

"narrative" voice

Finally, a history lesson that doesn’t sound like one big filibuster

@doithimaceabhard7457

5 ай бұрын

And indeed doesn't sound like a history lesson either but is a fine piece of disinformation

This is a great explanation. Thanks.

Good information, keep it up!

This was very helpful for my test! Keep creating more!

@VirginiaHistoryAndCulture

5 жыл бұрын

Very glad to hear it, Katie!

Great voice and thank you for the video explaining the cause of the Civil War.

FYI, for those in the South that are still in denial that the main cause of the Civil War was slavery. The leaders of the south, in the articles of secession, their personal writings, and in the constitution of the confederacy make no mention of tariffs (as the reason for succession). The Morrill Tariff had not passed in the Senate when 7 of the southern states seceded. The vote, which needed a 2/3 majority to pass, was 25-14 without those 7 southern states or 14 potential votes voting. If they had stayed in the Union, and all voted they could have easily prevented the passage of the Morrill Tariff since it needed 32 votes to pass (60% of 53 votes (39 that voted plus the 14 potential votes, a simple 8-6 against would do)). And the Tariffs set in 1857 were the lowest since 1817. Hence, it was not about tariffs. Or, state rights, since the south only cared about state rights so that they could keep and possibly expand slavery into newly acquired territories. The fugitive slave law in 1950 showed how little the south cared about states rights by forcing the North to help enforce slavery against their state's policy about not having slaves. So grow up -- no one is blaming you -- just some of the adults that lived in the South in 1860.

@jessejive117

6 ай бұрын

I read the succession from Georgia and that’s the only one, and it literally mentioned taxes lol so no.

@jessejive117

6 ай бұрын

Either way, as long as you know, the north wasn’t trying to ens slavery to be nice but to hurt the south there were good abolitionist as long as you know, the vast majority of people in the south and not on slaves and as long as you know, the Civil War would’ve 100% happened if slavery wasn’t an issue that I’m fine with you being wrong about Texes

@jessejive117

6 ай бұрын

You’re arguing against arguments nobody’s making. Nobody mentioned that specific Tax, and said that’s the reason. The north was literally taxing the south on commodities that vastly disproportionately affected the south. You’re just lying for some reason. You’re saying it was primarily about slavery, and then essentially saying these are the reasons it was about nothing else. So you’re contradicting yourself. Tell us what else was it about you claim it was about other things while simultaneously saying it was about nothing else but slavery by making bad arguments. You’re just making strawman arguments. No one said taxes were the highest they’ve ever been. But if you’re saying, the south didn’t disproportionately commodities affected them more than the north lying or uninformed

@jessejive117

6 ай бұрын

There is literally not an ounce of logic tied to the fugitive slave law being brought up in the south not caring about states rights. That’s so incomprehensibly stupid

@jessejive117

6 ай бұрын

But I know slavery was an issue, and I’ve never claimed the opposite and people who claim it had nothing to do with slavery or wrong, but you’re equally as wrong as they are, and pretty much everything you said, even if some of us factually true isn’t relevant because that’s not the point anyone’s making. There were separate issues, and removing one of them may have prevented the Civil War, or may not have.

The whole thing was so big it can only be clearly studied in sections! It's amazing it all actually happened!

@edwardclement102

2 жыл бұрын

Yes and the South was able by guerrilla warfare to overthrow radical reconstruction.

@user-ht4gb2fw4e

2 жыл бұрын

@@edwardclement102 Hey. March 1. 2022. .."Radical Reconstruction". ..This is what "Czar Putin" pushes on Ukraine in his twisted desire for a new Russian Empire! ,(Not Soviet Union, Putin hates Commies!), Using brute force & the most astounding cruelty! Dear "Southern" Soul! Rise up & smite down the Devil Putin!! ...General Lee would smile as Gray Army made Putin's Imperial Army cry for mommy!! You see! Just like old King George lll !! & you, dear FREE AMERICA!! Taught little Imperialist ,Georgy!, a damn fine lesson in Manners!! & Putin will learn those manners !! Stand Strong American Soul!!

@CosmoShidan

Жыл бұрын

@@edwardclement102 Thus the south stole black peoples' rights.

@jonknappmcaliser9187

Жыл бұрын

@@edwardclement102 You mean the terrorist activities of the KKK?

@doithimaceabhard7457

5 ай бұрын

​@@edwardclement102is that why they're still so far behind the developed states?

Now I know what to do for my assignment! Thank you! 😁

I'm learning English. Texts with audios are my anchor now. Thank you very much for give me this simple class (sorry for my bad English)

INFORMATIVE!!!

Thank you so much for posting this video! It helps out a ton with our history!

LOVE YOUR VOICE

@t.t.3nag942

2 жыл бұрын

._.

That was the longest 3 minutes of my life!

thank you! this helped me so much.

Nice help me alot :D

this was great

I really needed this for homework so thanks

Thank you Sir, that was wonderful. 😊

Excellent for classroom.

Great video!

Excellent presentation, you have explained the cause very clearly

@nedhill1242

5 ай бұрын

But it’s actually very inaccurate

@doithimaceabhard7457

5 ай бұрын

​@@nedhill1242hugely inaccurate but serves to continue the tradition of southern propaganda that the south needs to have some sense of worth.

you learn something new everyday

Thank you so much for helping me on my report

thanks! that was helpful! your voice is deep and relaxing ^_^

Fleece Johnson really knows his history

Brilliant and simple explanation. Thank you!

@karenday9109

7 ай бұрын

Well said!

@karenday9109

7 ай бұрын

Thanks for the video!

I love your voice!

@Olivia-cw8ig

4 жыл бұрын

i do to but he kept smacking

@doitallbros5123

4 жыл бұрын

same

@NYC.NA1

3 жыл бұрын

@@Olivia-cw8ig forreal it’s bothering me😂

@fischlisthebest606

3 жыл бұрын

@@Olivia-cw8ig he was way too quiet I had to turn up my laptop all the way up.

"Within the profession [historians] there's virtually no discussion or debate left of slavery as central to the antebellum south and the fundamental cause of secession and the war." Dr. Eric Walther of University of Houston

@hellstromcarbunkle8857

2 жыл бұрын

Nor should there be, given that the south placed "Negro Slavery" as a COMPULSORY for all states in the new Confederate States.

@hellstromcarbunkle8857

2 жыл бұрын

@Old Corps Marine it was all about slavery...said the Confederate Constitution, which was almost entirely a ripoff of the Union Constitution, EXCEPT all states and all persons were required, REQUIRED, to support and preserve the institution of NEGRO SLAVERY (their exact word). All about slavery of the Black Race. Grow up

@hellstromcarbunkle8857

2 жыл бұрын

@Old Corps Marine Facts don't care about your lies. Only the South insisted that NO ONE could challenge the "right" of "Negro slavery" and put that in their Constitution.

@williamwilliams2565

2 жыл бұрын

@Old Corps Marine whatever helps you sleep at night. Right👍🤡

@doithimaceabhard7457

5 ай бұрын

WOW, and him from Texas, who da thunk it?

"Many people continue to believe that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery: that the South tried to leave the Union to protect “states’ rights” in general or because it objected to the Republican Party’s stand on tariffs or other unrelated matters. But the record of the North-South conflict during the 40 or so years before the war shows unmistakably that slavery was central to it. And the leaders of the secession movement said as much in 1860-61. They left the Union because they believed that Lincoln’s election imperiled the security of slavery, an institution that they considered essential to their own happiness and prosperity." - Professor Bruce Levine, Apr. 8, 2011

@davidcarr1133

4 жыл бұрын

The Professor would probably fail any student with such vast claims on an assignment and no references with facts that backed it up - unless it was something like this that he so strongly wants to believe, himself.

@Rundstedt1

4 жыл бұрын

@@davidcarr1133 You want references? I could give you a list of hundreds of books. Of course you never picked up one of those in your life. at least not one by an actual historian. _"Within the profession [historians] there's virtually no discussion or debate left of slavery as central to the antebellum south and the fundamental cause of secession and the war."_ - Dr. Eric Walther of University of Houston .

@rb032682

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidcarr1133 - Here are some facts about USA history, the Electoral College, and the civil war. The sources of this information are the USA Constitution and actual events in USA history: The Electoral College was written by terrorists(slavers) to be nothing more than a "welfare benefit" for themselves and other USA terrorists. The E C (+ the 3/5ths clause) awards excessive national governmental and political power to terrorists(slavers). The Electoral College encouraged and rewarded the terrorism of slavery. The Electoral College allowed terrorists to dominate the USA national government until around 1850-1860. The USA's "founding fathers" were the USA's first group of "welfare queens". Ten of the first twelve presidents were terrorists. What happened around 1860 when abolition and the prohibition of slaver terrorism in the new territories greatly reduced the "free stuff" to which the terrorists had become so accustomed? One of the biggest blows to the "terrorist welfare queens" was the prohibition of slaver terrorism in Western territories. That's one of the reasons you hear that old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda phrase, "WE DON'T WANT TO BE RULED BY THE COASTS!". What happened when the terrorist "welfare queens" lost their "free stuff" from the USA government? The csa/kkk was just a MS-13-type gang of butthurt "welfare queens". After causing the civil war, the Electoral College became a "welfare benefit" for states which suppress voting. I wonder which states LOVE to suppress voting .......... might they be the former terrorist states and terrorist sympathizer states?

Greetings from Canada. thank you for this brief answer. I didn't know why the South was not allowed to secede peaceably.

@aaronfleming9426

6 ай бұрын

Because it's illegal to secede.

@mattcrawford9633

5 ай бұрын

Not only was it illegal to secede the south started stealing union property before the war started. Also slavery... allowing the south to secede peacefully would have meant the spread of slavery. The south was planning on invading Cuba, Mexico, and south America to spread slavery.

@dwightyon3833

5 ай бұрын

No it was not illegal to secede. You need to listen to Thomas Sowell if you want the truth.@@aaronfleming9426

@ZairokPhoen

2 ай бұрын

The problem is immediately upon seceding a lot of the states rose militias by their governors to seize federal properties and forts within their states. It all then came to a massive head when one such militia in South Carolina decided to open fire on Fort Sumter, officially sparking the Civil War.

The U.S. coronavirus death toll has hit more than 200,000

@MockingjayYT

3 жыл бұрын

🐑

"Having swept away the counterfactual Myth of the Lost Cause, a historian may briefly state the history of the Civil War as follows. The eleven states that seceded and became the Confederate States of America did so in order to protect the institution of African slavery from a perceived political threat from the majority of the people of the United States who disapproved of the institution." - Gary W. Gallagher, Alan T. Nolan "The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History" p29

@edwardcricchio6106

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you. The Lost Cause Myth given the losing side of the Civil War a chance to re-write history to make it seem that slavery was just this little thing that was going to die out anyway and that it was the big bad North that forced their way upon the poor little South.

Good overview on the causes of the war. A Teenager’s Guide to the Civil War: A History Book for Teens is a good resource for those who want to learn more.

@My2CentsYall

6 ай бұрын

it was spot on. The north never wanted to get rid of slavery they wanted to contain it.

He left out a couple of KEY issues, primarily the 10th Amendment which simply said "any powers that are not specifically given to the federal government, nor withheld from the states, are reserved to those respective states, or to the people at large". Since the Constitution did not give the Federal Government the power to determine whether a state was to be Free or Slave, it was constitutionally a State's Right of Self Determination which the Federal Government was taking away with their actions. The Constitution ALSO did not give the Federal Government the right to hold states to the Union against their will, and therefore, their secession was Constitutional and the War to bring them back into the Union was Unconstitutional. Every seceding State's Secession Document gave a long list of grievances against the Northern States and the Federal Government where they were ignoring Constitutional Mandates to the Detriment of the Slave States as the reason for their Secessions.

Finally!! Something that doesn't make me want to not do my assignment.

Nice voice

This would be great if we could hear it!

In one of the comments the guy says I was forced to do this for my homework, I say that you weren't for this is a part of educating yourself about America

@onewayortheotherinc.6555

5 ай бұрын

Shut up goofy. Y’all keep taking land and implementing rules and still pay the so called illegals a misery…. Yet take all the credit from their skills.. same stuff was happening back then..

Love you

I didn't know that about why theres a virgina and west Virginia 😳.. ✌🏾

I Loved The Narrator

what caused the civil war is the problem that the superheroes were destroying too much property and needed to be put in check, but Captain America said otherwise..... find out what happens on May 6 2016

@tannerchabot5036

8 жыл бұрын

+Hello People bruh this is about the real civil war not a damn comic

@randomgirl833

8 жыл бұрын

+Tanner Chabot ik 😂

@tannerchabot5036

8 жыл бұрын

Hello People whats so god damn funny

@randomgirl833

8 жыл бұрын

+stefanjunior22 😏

Winners write history.

@professionalgoob

Жыл бұрын

Historians with whatever resources they have available do.

The Kansas-Nebraska Act really started the ball of war rolling: Senator Stephan Douglas made Chicago the railroad capital of the country. However, in doing so, he threw away Senator Clay's Missouri Compromise insuring that all the land from the Mexican War would be equally divided between slave & free states maintaining the balance of power. Popular Sovereignty was a disaster stating the people of each state could deside for themselves. "Bleeding Kansas" was the result: a mini civil war 4 years before the big one started.

@georgeparsons7338

6 ай бұрын

Bleeding KS bled over into the rest of the country in 1860

I say look at the letters between Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln. The letter from them state that slavery would be in the south only and not in the new territory. They were trying to contain slavery and the southern leaders didn't want that nor did they like the amount of tariff they had to pay. They also had issues with the growing power of the federal government over the states.

@aaronfleming9426

6 ай бұрын

The south loved the amount of tariffs they had to pay. The tariff law was written by a Virginian and supported throughout the south. And no, they didn't have a problem with the power of the Federal government...as long as that power was used to keep slavery intact. They loved being able to send the U.S. Army to the north to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. They loved being able to use the U.S. Army to take land from Mexico so they could expand slavery.

@My2CentsYall

5 ай бұрын

@@aaronfleming9426 That is no accurate. The Tariff of 1828, called the Tariff of Abominations in the South, was the worst exploitation. It passed Congress 105 to 94 but lost among Southern congressmen 50 to 3. The South argued that favoring some industries over others was unconstitutional. The South Carolina Exposition and Protest written by Vice President John Calhoun warned that if the tariff of 1828 was not repealed, South Carolina would secede. It cited Jefferson and Madison for the precedent that a state had the right to reject or nullify federal law. In an 1832 state legislature campaign speech, Lincoln defined his position, saying, “My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank . . . in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.” He was firmly against free trade and in favor of using the power of the federal government to benefit specific industries like Lincoln’s favorite, Pennsylvania steel. I do not understand the rest of you comment about using the army to capture slaves they had bounty hunters for that and it was never a concern, lastly their is nothing written to support that claim. Its best to stick to what you can see and their is nothing more definite than actual correspondence between people.

Thank you morgen Freeman how the movies going

I like it vey mutch

Anybody who has read anything by an actual Civil War historian knows the war was caused by and about slavery, and the South admitted that itself, over and over. "I have been appointed by the Convention of the State of Georgia, to present to you the ordinance of secession of Georgia, and further, to invite Virginia, through you, to join Georgia and the other seceded States in the formation of a Southern Confederacy.… *What was the reason that induced Georgia to take the step of secession? That reason may be summed up in one single proposition. It was a conviction; a deep conviction on the part of Georgia, that a separation from the North was the only thing that could prevent the abolition of her slavery."* Henry L, Benning, Commissioner from Georgia - "Address Delivered Before the Virginia state Convention. February 18, 1861 They didn't make those kind of statements about anything other than slavery. So: “Any neo-Confederate or plain old American who wants to say, ‘No, no, it’s about states’ rights,’ [or anything else] has the problem that they’re not arguing with me. They’re arguing with the people in South Carolina who seceded; they’re arguing with the convention in Mississippi.” "I don’t mean to be mean, but secession and the Confederacy was all about treason on behalf of slavery, and we have to call it what it was.” Dr. James Loewen .

@Rundstedt1

9 жыл бұрын

***** "To evade the issue thus forced upon us at this time, without the fullest security for our rights, is, in my opinion, fatal to the institution of slavery forever." Speech of Tennessee Governor Isham G. Harris January 7, 1861 "The great question which is now uprooting this Government to its foundation---the great question which underlies all our deliberations here, is the question of African slavery" -Thomas F. Goode, March 28, 1861, VA Secession Convention "African slavery is a vital part of the social system of the states wherein it exists, and as that form of servitude existed when the Union was formed, and the jurisdiction of the several States over it within their respective limits, was recognized by the Constitution, any interference to its prejudice by the federal authority, or by the authorities of other states, or by the people thereof, is in derogation from plain right, contrary to the Constitution, offensive and dangerous." - Virginia Secession Convention Statement Yeah, it was slavery. The Southern states committed treason to protect slavery. .

@Rundstedt1

9 жыл бұрын

So Once again: "Having swept away the counterfactual Myth of the Lost Cause, a historian may briefly state the history of the Civil War as follows. The eleven states that seceded and became the Confederate States of America did so in order to protect the institution of African slavery from a perceived political threat from the majority of the people of the United States who disapproved of the institution." - Gary W. Gallagher, Alan T. Nolan "The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History" p29 .

@Rundstedt1

9 жыл бұрын

***** Bullshit Tenn. like the rest of the confederacy committed treason to protect slavery and gov. Harris admitted it as shown. What speech do you think I just quoted? The very January speech you reference, LOL. There are no factual inaccuracies and I am backed by the entire academic Civil War historical community, my degrees in history and my certificate to teach it.

@Rundstedt1

9 жыл бұрын

***** The 'coercion' argument was invalid then and it is invalid now. The upper Southern states had no problem when it was the Northern states being forcibly coerced because of their opposition to the fugitive laws. The South didn't threaten to secede to when it was Northern states that were being 'coerced' by the South. The upper Southern states didn't threaten to secede when the Confederacy called up 100,000 troops BEFORE Lincoln's call. Troops which were to be used to coerce the legal federal power and Unionist Southern citizens, steal federal property and attack its installations. The upper Southern states, given their position and economic ties to the North were more reluctant and at first looked to compromise, but when it was clear that a choice had to be made to side with or against the slave states and slavery, they chose slavery because of slavery, not 'coercion'. The 'coercion' argument must be seen for what it is; merely a preemptive form of the states' rights/states sovereignty justification; and 'states rights' was all about slavery. "The claim that his call for troops was the cause of the upper South's decision to secede is misleading. As the telegraph chattered repots of the attack on Sumter April 12 and its surrender the next day, huge crowds poured into the streets of Richmond, Raleigh, Nashville, and other upper South cities to celebrate this victory over the Yankees. These crowds waved the Confederate flags and cheered the glorious cause of southern independence. They demanded that their own states join the cause. Scores of such demonstrations took place from April 12 to 14 BEFORE Lincoln issued his call for troops. Many conditional unionists were swept along by this tide of Southern Nationalism; others cowed into silence." McPherson, "The Battle Cry of Freedom" p278 "I feel impelled, Mr. President, to vote for this Ordinance by an overruling necessity. Years ago I was convinced that the Southern States would be compelled either to separate from the North, by dissolving the Federal Government, or they would be compelled to abolish the institution of African Slavery. This, in my judgment, was the only alternative; and I foresaw that the South would be compelled, at some day, to make her selection. The day is now come, and Alabama must make her selection, either to secede from the Union, and assume the position of a sovereign, independent State, or she must submit to a system of policy on the part of the Federal Government that, in a short time, will compel her to abolish African Slavery." Speech of E.S. Dargan, in the Convention of Alabama, Jan. 11, 1861

@Rundstedt1

9 жыл бұрын

***** And you can 'screen shot' anything you wish, the only thing you prove is your own ignorance. "Within the profession [historians] there's virtually no discussion or debate left of slavery as central to the antebellum south and the fundamental cause of secession and the war." Dr. Eric Walther of University of Houston .

"Everything stemmed from the slavery issue," - James McPherson - "The war was ABOUT slavery. [Catton's emphasis] Slavery had caused it: If slavery had vanished before 1861, the war simply would not have taken place." Bruce Catton, "Reflections on the Civil War" p5

@avenaoat

2 жыл бұрын

Missouri the border state: The unionist part was StLouis and the neibourhood, Ozarck region and the Iowa border region. The Confederat sentiment area was the little Dixie the Missouri river area. Where lived in dense mass of slaves in Missouri???? Yes in the little Dixie! Where was low % slave population in Tennessee? In East Tennessee! Where did Union sentiment people lived in Tennessee, in East Tennessee! The first and second (East) Tennessee regiments fought in the Battle of Mill springs in January 1862 under the (East) Virginian general George Thomas. Farragut admiral was born in East Tennessee. Where did few slaves live in North Caroline? In West part of North Carolina and New Bern port city were less slavery system dependent areas and both region was pro Unionist! North Carolina gave about 15 000 soldiers to the Union! Arkansas. Where did few slaves lived in Arkansas? Ozarck region and Ozark region gave soldiers to the Union! I think the Union sentiment regions in Texas (north and central counties) and in North Alabama and North Georgia could connect to the relativly fewer slave population. But here these areas could not send soldiers to North becaus to be too far.

Mr history guy I was told IKe clanton was killed by a detective but I thought it was a bank robbery can you clarify this.

Helped me with my work

@Sebastian-hf6jv

10 жыл бұрын

This

@Sebastian-hf6jv

10 жыл бұрын

is

@Sebastian-hf6jv

10 жыл бұрын

stupid

I predict another civil war.

That's pretty much how I see it as well.

Narrator... I thought you were telling a bedtime story......can you please speak closer to the microphone...? Thanks from Canada.

@randomgirl833

8 жыл бұрын

BRUUUUHHHH 😂😂😂😂

This video was very helpful!

@Braylon18

4 жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/qJuJmLuKh92eZso.html

@Braylon18

4 жыл бұрын

Wake up

Which one?

Pilgrims escaping the Kings Religion at Plymouth vs Jamestown Colonizing for The King

All I'm responding to is the claim that "When Lincoln was elected he passed the tariff act..." No, the Southern States had seceded before he took office. You can revise and massage and try to avoid slavery as the cause for war all you like, but my only comment is against the clear misinformation by Leo Smith above.

I can’t with his voice lol😂. Does anybody hear that lip smacking???😂😂😂

so now i have to right a very long paper about this 😬

@autybell248

3 жыл бұрын

@Madison Lecraft hope you do well 😔🙏

Your emitting significant parts of this story

Your map is wrong. Deleware, the little yellow dot east of Maryland should be green. Deleware was a slave state that remained in the union. The slaves in Deleware were not freed until the 13th amendment was legally radified (incidently by it's adoption by the readmitted state of Georgia) in December of 1865. If fact, Deleware did not ratify the 13th amendment until the early 1900s.

Someone told me it was the letter Karl Marx (the father of communism) wrote to Abraham Lincoln.

It all boils down to slavery

dayum son u got nise vocal kords

@randomgirl833

8 жыл бұрын

😂

@tamathachudgar1743

3 жыл бұрын

@@randomgirl833 stop

Kayle Bertges has a 'Refugees Welcome!' sign.

1 - What caused the American Civil War? That’s a complicated question, and one that many people still argue and disagree about to date. After the American Revolution, the regions of the new country grew, but in different ways. 2 - Although there were still lots of farms in the North, it became an increasingly industrial society where many people lived in cities with factories. Although there was some industry in the South, it remained mostly agricultural with few people, over a third of whom, were enslaved. 3 - Northern states had gradually abolished, or gotten rid of slavery, while it remained legal in the South. In the 1850s the big question was what to do about all the land in the West when it was settled and carved up into new states. Northerners wanted territories in the west admitted as free states, while Southerners wanted them to become slave states. 4 - In 1854, a new political party, called the Republicans didn’t want slavery in the Western territories. In 1860 their candidate, Abraham Lincoln was elected President of the United States. Many white Southerners were upset by Lincoln’s election because they believed they had the right to take their slaves to the West if they moved there. 5 - They also feared that as the number of free states grew, congress would vote to abolish slavery all together. Some Southerners began to claim their states had the right to secede or break away from the United States which was also called the Union. They wanted to become a new country. 6 - That’s exactly what happened in December 1860 when South Carolina became the first state to secede. Six other Southern states followed and in February 1861, they formed the Confederate States of America. 7 - At first, Virginia voted to remain in the Union. It wasn’t until South Carolina attacked a Union fort off its East coast called Fort Sumpter that war actually began. Now Virginia was forced to decide which side it would fight with and after voting a second time, it chose to join the Confederacy. 8 - Even after secession, 50 counties in Western Virginia refused to leave the Union and in 1863 became the state of West Virginia. How do you think a war in Virginia would affect your community?

@edgarmaldonado6470

4 жыл бұрын

This is helpful for my hw thanks :D

@rb032682

3 жыл бұрын

@ Victor - You left out some important facts. Here are some facts about USA history, the Electoral College, and the civil war. The sources of this information are the USA Constitution and actual events in USA history: The Electoral College was written by terrorists(slavers) to be nothing more than a "welfare benefit" for themselves and other USA terrorists. The E C (+ the 3/5ths clause) awards excessive national governmental and political power to terrorists(slavers). The Electoral College encouraged and rewarded the terrorism of slavery. The Electoral College allowed terrorists to dominate the USA national government until around 1850-1860. The USA's "founding fathers" were the USA's first group of "welfare queens". Ten of the first twelve presidents were terrorists. What happened around 1860 when abolition and the prohibition of slaver terrorism in the new territories greatly reduced the "free stuff" to which the terrorists had become so accustomed? One of the biggest blows to the "terrorist welfare queens" was the prohibition of slaver terrorism in Western territories. That's one of the reasons you hear that old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda phrase, "WE DON'T WANT TO BE RULED BY THE COASTS!". What happened when the terrorist "welfare queens" lost their "free stuff" from the USA government? The csa/kkk was just a MS-13-type gang of butthurt "welfare queens". After causing the civil war, the Electoral College became a "welfare benefit" for states which suppress voting. I wonder which states LOVE to suppress voting .......... might they be the former terrorist states and terrorist sympathizer states?

Nikki Hailey should have watched this video and quote what this narrator said to the person who asked her about what cause the civil war.

Lincoln was building up forces in Fort Sumter. SC had no choice but to stop it. Each State would have been considered a country inside the Union and had the right to remove itself from the Union.

@Ben00000

3 ай бұрын

Really? They had no choice but to fire on federal territory that they suddenly disassociated with because they were afraid they'd lose the ability to stop owning people? What a convoluted perspective.

🍷Except after they seceded, The south side decided they wanted in on that sweet new found chunk of land on the West. And for that west side land they were sure ready to give it all up!

"Slavery was the principal cause of the U.S. Civil War, period," said Bob Sutton, chief historian for the National Park Service. "Yes, politics was important. Yes, economics were important. Yes, social issues and states’ rights were important. But when you get to the core of why all these things were important, it was slavery!" - "Atlanta Examiner," December 11, 2010 as reprinted in "George Mason University's History News Network"

@ryanhuisman5381

2 жыл бұрын

@Old Corps Marine Try actually reading the Articles of Secession of the individual southern states. In their own voices, in their own writing, they make clear that slavery, and more specifically their belief that the northern states would try to keep adding more and more new states out west as free states, thus eventually getting enough votes in congress to abolish slavery. Every argument from the revisionist historians in the succeeding years is merely window dressing to the core fact that protecting slavery was the one and only main driver of the southern state's decision to secede.

@davidcaple6521

5 ай бұрын

WRONG!

@Rundstedt1

5 ай бұрын

@@davidcaple6521 Anybody who has read anything by an actual Civil War historian, or what the South itself was saying at the time, knows the war was caused by and was about slavery, and the South admitted that itself, over and over. _"I have been appointed by the Convention of the State of Georgia, to present to you the ordinance of secession of Georgia, and further, to invite Virginia, through you, to join Georgia and the other seceded States in the formation of a Southern Confederacy.… _*_What was the reason that induced Georgia to take the step of secession? That reason may be summed up in one single proposition. It was a conviction; a deep conviction on the part of Georgia, that a separation from the North was the only thing that could prevent the abolition of her slavery."_* - Henry L, Benning, Commissioner from Georgia - "Address Delivered Before the Virginia state Convention. February 18, 1861 *They didn't make those kind of statements about anything other than slavery.* So: _”Any neo-Confederate or plain old American who wants to say, ‘No, no, it’s about states’ rights,’ [or anything else] has the problem that they’re not arguing with me. They’re arguing with the people in South Carolina who seceded; they’re arguing with the convention in Mississippi.”_ _”I don’t mean to be mean, but secession and the Confederacy was all about treason on behalf of slavery, and we have to call it what it was.”_ - Dr. James Loewen .

@mattcrawford9633

5 ай бұрын

@@davidcaple6521 No you're wrong. See there. I think I won this here debate.

@davidellis5240

5 ай бұрын

You apparently haven’t done much of a deep dive on this. In 1860, a letter from Lincoln to his close friend (who later became VP of the Confederacy) said that he didn’t like slavery, but did not see it as his place to unilaterally impose his will on the entire country, He did see his job as keeping the Union intact, and stated that if he had to keep slavery legal, or abolish slavery, or free some and not others, he would do whatever it took to keep 100,000 men from dying. In 1858 there was a tax bill passed in Congress that put a disproportionate burden on the south to pay for the spending projects in the north (sound familiar?). There are senate minutes of speeches by southern senators of the unfairness of this and how similar it was to the tea tax that lead to the Revolution. He also promised that it would not be tolerated. (This is all available in the Library of Congress if anyone is interested in facts rather than emotion and hyperbole). After taking office Lincoln began to worry about all of this and where it would lead. He offered the south to let all slave states stay slave (not all were in the south), as long as no states switched to becoming slave and no new states, like CA, were allowed to be slave even if they wanted to. That really doesn’t sound like a reason to succeed and guarantee that the northern army would come after you and completely do away with slavery, if that was one’s agenda. So they succeed to avoid unfair taxes, just like the colonies. Not all slave states did, just the ones in the south that were being taxed. The slave states in the north that weren’t being taxed stayed with the Union, and with the continued blessing of Congress for them to continue slavery in their state. During the first several months of the was Lee kicked McClellan’s a** all over the east and voters began to lose enthusiasm for the war as the south lost one battle after another. Lincoln was also concerned that England and France would enter on the side of the Confederacy as they depended heavily on the cotton from there (like fight for oil). And that was when he made a shrewd political move. He decided he had no choice, that it would be a good idea to declare this war as a cause for human rights and claim the moral high ground. This gained favor with voters and scared the Europeans away as they had banned slavery many years before and wanted nothing to do with the perception of fighting for it. The Emancipation Proclamation was not a law, or even a proposal for one. The president doesn’t have the authority to make those decisions on his own. The text was an order to the military, something he could do as commander in chief. It said any slaves in places they were able to find victory and occupy would be freed. There was not mention of any other slaves, no statement that all slaves are now free from this minute. All of the slaves in the north were still enslaved, until the end of the war when the 14th Amendment was passed and all slaves were freed. For Lincoln, as much as he detested slavery, he wasn’t going to force it until he had no choice if he wanted to reunite the Union. The worst thing that could have happened to the south was JW Booth. Lincoln was above all a man who wanted to put all of this behind America and getting things reconciled asap. Instead there was ‘Reconstruction’, which was another word for retaliation, exploitation, with cruel and unusual punishment. Justified or not, this produced the opposite of what Lincoln wanted. Like MLK, he wanted to put the racial differences that divided the country behind us. Without Lincoln, that didn’t happen until MLK came along and picked up that flag with his commitment to non-violent protest. MLK’s death was one of the worst things to happen to the entire country, including the south, because he would have taken effective action for a smooth landing. Jesse Jackson was poorly equiped to take over and do anything but play the race card early and often. He ended up ruining most of what Martin accomplished. Your teachers and organizers won’t tell you that, just critical race theory,a divisive tactic that only produces outrage on both sides, not successful conclusion. MLK was too smart for that; I watched all of it from his death in ‘68 to the present. In 1964 Dallas’s SMU was the first school in the Southwest Conference to give an athletic scholarship to a black student. I mention that last part because I am an Alum and very proud of that.

(1/2) "As evidenced by the prewar political discord, the nature of the compromise efforts on the eve of Fort Sumter - all if which concerned the legal status of slavery - and the prewar statements of Southern political leaders, slavery was THE (his emphasis) sectional issue. Southern political leaders led their states out of the Union to protect slavery from a disapproving national majority.

@davidcarr1133

4 жыл бұрын

Who needs to use references and sources of fact when they can just make up a story from partial records, avoid masses of additional details, and most "educators" agree to it because it fits the narrative?

@Rundstedt1

4 жыл бұрын

@@davidcarr1133 And that's exactly what you Neo-confederate liars do.

@mattcrawford9633

5 ай бұрын

@@davidcarr1133 i know. Its a real problem, especially in the south. The lost cause arguments made without considering the facts really exposes how morally bankrupt these people really are.

BRUH THIS VIDEO NEVER SAID WHAT THEY BELIEVED I WATCHED THIS OVER 5 TIMES

I am an Indian was interested to know about history

Being taught about the civil war by yoda rn

I usually withhold comments not to do with music - but you're completely wrong, Leo. Lincoln's inauguration was not until March 1861. The core seven deep southern states had seceded by February, the month before Lincoln took office. The rest followed suit because of economic pressure, cultural unity, anxiety, and long-building differences with non-slave states. They were out by June 1861. I think your claim needs a little research.

Helloooo! Duh, the Mississippi River in the hands of the Confederates would have a disaster for the Union.

@rb032682

3 жыл бұрын

@Jeffrey - Anything the "confederates" touch turns bad. The csa was nothing more than a low-life terrorist gang.

Hi

Man, this video should be one second long. One word: racism

not me having to watch this for classss

school made me do it 🧍🏽‍♀️

🤯🤯🤯

The war was over slavery the traders even said that’s why they went to war against America

The colonies were home to a lot of English prisoners. Most going to Georgia (hence the name)

" My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery". - A.Lincoln

@mjfleming319

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, Lincoln said that. He was also on record his whole political career as being opposed to slavery, which was why the south feared and hated him, seceded, and started the war.

@mjfleming319

2 жыл бұрын

@Old Corps Marine “government education truly is a tragedy” as it happens, I’m a product of home and private school, which must explain why I know so much more than you. Remember how I called you out three hours ago for your ridiculously ignorant comment about the Morrill Tariff? Now let me call you out again. You’re technically right about Lincoln, but you’re only partly right, which leads you to a wrong interpretation of events. As I noted in my comment above, Lincoln was well known as a life-long anti-slavery politician. Now, today the uneducated are unaware that there is a difference between “anti-slavery” and “abolitionist”, but in 1860 it was a well known and significant distinction. Part of being anti-slavery was simply a willingness to talk about slavery as the evil, anti-American institution we all know it to be today. But then, suggesting to southerners that slavery was anything less than God’s gift to civilization was heretical and cause for fear, hatred, slander, censure, and censorship. Further, being anti-slavery also typically - and certainly in the case of Lincoln - meant being “free soil”, or being opposed to the spread of slavery to new territories and states. If Lincoln and the Republicans had their way, the political balance would quickly shift far enough that free states would be able to change the constitution...and then Lincoln WOULD have legal power to touch slavery. This reality was well understood in 1860, and it is precisely why the south freaked out when Lincoln was elected, first seceding and then making war on the United States. Anyone who has read the writings and speeches of secessionists knows this. People who argue that secession and war were not about slavery aren’t arguing with me, they’re arguing with the secessionists themselves.

@TheLAGopher

2 жыл бұрын

@Old Corps Marine Slavery was an issue for the southern states from the beginning. It was only an official issue for the Union until half way through the war because the north didn't see itself having the Constitutional authority to eliminate slavery where it lawfully existed. Slaves were contraband to the north going back to the start of the war and were often returned to their masters by Union commanders under the terms of the fugitive slave law until Lincoln ended that practice as a war measure.

Argument over a remote

1863

nyeh.

Fort something?