• themeatbridge
    link
    1481 year ago

    It’s worth pointing out, the Confederate states actually opposed state’s rights. Part of the articles of secession were based on the federal government’s failure to enforce federal law in states that did not return escaped slaves. The southern states controlled the legislature, and states like Wisconsin and New Hampshire wanted to exercise their states’ rights to free black people from slavery. Lincoln didn’t even make emancipation a priority until two years into the war, and even then it was only in the states that tried to secede.

    “State’s rights” became a conservative cause celebre during the civil rights movement when federal law was used to force southern states to integrate. There is nothing inherently conservative or progressive about states vs federal power, and it changes depending on who holds power where.

    People who want to make the Civil War about state’s rights vs the federal government overreach are confusing two different eras of racism.

    • jerome
      link
      fedilink
      341 year ago

      You just hit me with that fat education. My brain thanks you.

      • @irkli
        link
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

    • @rockSlayer
      link
      22
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I want to start by saying you’re about 90% correct, and I’m glad that people have found your post to be very educational (bad experiences in the past with being misunderstood).

      In both pre-civil war era and the civil rights era, the south wanted to have their cake and fuck it too. They were crying ‘states rights’ when we established the Missouri Compromise, but whined about the weak federal government with regards to the fugitive slave act. One of the primary drivers for the Emancipation Proclamation was actually escaped slaves after the outbreak of the civil war. The North didn’t know what to do with slaves that escaped, were liberated, or surrendered (slaves were sometimes conscripted instead of the slaveholder fighting). It was a situation that was starting to get unmanageable because of political pressure and the number of slaves, so essentially the Emancipation Proclamation was a last ditch effort to divert Southern forces into defending their slaves while solving a real problem in the North (it actually was fairly successful in this sense).

      In the civil rights era, it was states rights when it came to integration, but a failure of federal to allow MLK’s nonviolent direct action to occur (yea, I know about COINTELPRO; perception vs reality etc etc).

      The connection between the 2 and the modern day? They were all conservatives. The “Democrats” during the civil war were the same as the Republican party from the 1920s to now. The hypocritical rhetorical methods being used by conservatives to argue against the right to abortion has existed since Locke published Two Treatises of Government.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      My mother, who was educated in the 90s in the south, was taught the “war of northern aggression” was fought because the north was paying less for cotton than Europe and tarriffing exports to Europe.

      Not that I believe or ever googled any of this.

    • SeaJ
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Don’t forget that Confederate states could not make laws against slavery via their constitution.

      • @EhList
        link
        5
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator