Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

American History

Showing Original Post only (View all)

SnohoDem

(1,036 posts)
Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:33 AM Nov 2012

Why didn't the North let the South secede? [View all]

Well, the title asks the question. Here's why I thought of it. Recently we're seeing the secession petitions, and 'Lincoln' is on at the movies. I won't see 'Lincoln' until it's out on DVD, but tonight I watched the miniseries based on Gore Vidal's book.

There's a heck of a lot of smart, well educated people here, so I can't think of a better place to ask this question.

Why didn't the North just let the South go? Although slavery was the central issue in the Civil War, my limited understanding is that the war was fought to prevent the slave states from leaving the Union. Why? Wasn't the North's position that slavery would not be allowed in border states or new states, but that it would still exist in the deep South? Even the Gettysburg Address says nothing about slavery except, "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Was the political pressure from the abolitionists so great that Lincoln felt he had to prosecute the war?

Thanks for any answers.

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I think Lincoln realized it would eventually unravel the whole country. dawg Nov 2012 #1
The New England pols tried to force a confrontation with Leontius Nov 2012 #4
Actually, no Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2012 #7
You fail to mention any of the previous attempts by New England pols Leontius Dec 2012 #8
I didn't mention them because there weren't any Fortinbras Armstrong Dec 2012 #9
Rufus King, Timothy Pickering, Theodore Sedgwick, New Orleans and Mississippi navigation, Leontius Dec 2012 #11
I just looked those up Fortinbras Armstrong Dec 2012 #12
I think you're right there... 47of74 Mar 2013 #13
some answers: Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #2
Both sides were wrong on the timing. SnohoDem Nov 2012 #3
Historians have quite recently upped that figure to well over 700,000 Adsos Letter Mar 2013 #15
Last Great Hope joseph abbott Nov 2012 #5
Yup. Secession was widely viewed as treason in the North. Adsos Letter Mar 2013 #16
Cotton was 60-80% of US export products in the Antebellum. You wanna let that go? Bucky Nov 2012 #6
Go reread the Gettysburg Address: that stuff mattered to people struggle4progress Dec 2012 #10
Fort Sumter? Democracyinkind Mar 2013 #14
kicking this thread-- the South was deeply divided and the North was well aware of it carolinayellowdog Jun 2013 #17
The South vs. The South... Adsos Letter Jun 2013 #18
Freehling... Democracyinkind Jun 2013 #19
I agree. Adsos Letter Jun 2013 #20
Ahh.. I love Martigny! Just thinking about it makes me want to leave work and go there... Democracyinkind Jun 2013 #21
Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»American History»Why didn't the North let ...»Reply #0