I don’t think you understood what I was saying as much you think.
You’re looking at the situation in the 19th century through a 21st century lens. A lot that seems obvious to us, was not obvious to them.
The southerners were not stripped of their right to vote in as much as they were ready to leave anyway and could careless. The Lincoln election merely catalyzed the inevitable.
You can’t look at it through the lens of the present. Try to see it from their perspective, on both sides, withholding judgement. Things happened in one place and another place didn’t hear about it for weeks sometimes. It’s not like they had the internet.
Take a look at the breakdown. The only southern state that had any votes for Lincoln was Virginia, which was the last state to secede.
Factoid:
Robert E Lee was asked by Lincoln to be a general for the Union. Lee said he could not betray his home state of Virginia.
I am a Civil War buff. My favorite ‘war’.
If you want to know more about the war than you ever thought you can know, try that series I recommended on PBS. It’s free. In 5 hours you will know more about the war than most people. It’s really well done.
I thought I knew a lot about the war and I found out a lot of new stuff from it.
Then watch the ‘Vietnam War’ series. Holy shit that was a cluster-fuck of major proportions, by everybody.
You did. You categorized my thoughts pretty well. I don’t think people know a lot about pre-civil war history and the increasing abolitionist movement pushing the south to the brink. The roots of this war started during the Revolution.
Here is a excerpt from the Mississippi Declaration, it’s a fascinating look into the mindset of the times:
"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. "
No apologist can make a reasonable argument that can make secession about anything other than slavery, it’s written in black and white.
The war itself is a different matter. The south was fighting for slavery and their independence. Slavery being the catalyst for their independence. But slavery was federally legal through out the nation. So, those who were tentative about leaving the union were so because they had the Constitution and the reassurance of the Supreme Court that they could legally engage in slavery. But boiled down, the South starting the war, was about slavery.
The North, originally, was fighting for preservation of the Union. Lincoln himself stated that if he could preserve the Union without freeing any slaves he would do it. So initially you had the two going at each other for different reasons. Make no mistake that the North for the most part was very pro-abolition, but they were not fighting for that reason. As Lincoln’s views on abolition evolved so did the Union cause. By 1862 the paths of Union and abolition were converging. And as the initial preliminary Emancipation Proclamation came out, it actually caused desertions in the Union army.
There were some soldiers who were not willing to trade their lives for that of slaves. It also brought some soldiers to the Union who were strong abolitionists, but the numbers didn’t cancel each other out. There were more deserters.
By 1863, the war was mainly about slavery for both sides. Before that, the issue is a little more murky for the North. For the South, it was always about slavery.
Southern culture is pretty cool. I enjoy it. BBQ’s, grits, fried chicken, sweet tea, biscuits and gravy, mmmm, good shit… College football, funny church signs, great accents… I like the south.
If a vote wasn’t held re: secession, they were stripped of their right to vote. Whether or not it phased them at the time doesn’t impact what actually happened.
You realize the statistical probability of ZERO votes amongst thousands and thousands of votes is essentially zero right? As in, it’s more likely that the results were fudged than actual 0 votes.
I guess there’s a chance that not a SINGLE southerner cared about equality more than their wallet, but it doesn’t seem likely.
Still not sure how we got onto the Lincoln topic, as (gun to my head) I probably couldn’t find a worse example to defend the electoral college system
Lol, we diverged to a quite interesting discussion of Civil War America. And like you I can only go by what I see. If a credible source shows no voted for Lincoln and another credible source shows the same results, then that’s what I have to go by.
The vote for secession was overwelming. Whether or not the right to vote was doled out fairly to the sweaty masses is something we will never know. Again, you cannot look at history through the lens of 21st century post-modernist society.
We can know what was recorded. We cannot know who did the voting or if it was equitable. We’re talking about an age where illiteracy was high and information was slow. I would wager they followed the ‘rules’ in as much as they could.
There were very few abolitionists in the south that we know of and because it was an unpopular opinion, may not have been spoken much outside the home. Or some poor homesteader, who only knows he’s in the summer because it’s hot and winter because it’s cold, may be duly unaware of what is going on beyond his rural existence. It would not surprise me if there were pockets in the south that didn’t know they seceded or that there was a war for possibly a year or more after the shit hit the fan. I would say the same potential ignorance existed in the north as well as it was largely untouched by the war, save for the men being called up to serve.
You’re missing the point. It’s not a matter of conducting a fair election, it’s a matter of conducting it in a way that is as fair as possible. I am pretty certain that the law was followed in these voting situations. There is no information to indicate that the will of the people were trampled (outside the slaves). No information that federal or state laws regarding voting were violated.
So were these votes equitable? In as much as we are able to tell without a time machine, yes. Can we know for certain? No.