| > These aren't people thinking they can wait until the next election to see what happens, and perhaps they can decide to succeed then. These are people convinced that if they stay with the Union any longer then their entire way of life will be destroyed. That's why seven states succeed before Lincoln was inaugurated. Yes, thank you, that's exactly what I sad. Southern politicians believed that they'll never be in a stronger position than they were at that point and if they were going to do something they have to do it now. > The fact is, many of the states which succeeded did do because they want to keep slavery, as they very clearly justified at the time. Absolutely. Never claimed the opposite. My only point that they rebelled because they believed that the Republicans will weaken and restrict the institution of slavery over time which would result in eventual abolition. > If you conjecture it was merely "politically advantageous" and they didn't actually believe it, then you aren't taking this seriously and presenting solid evidence to support your conjecture. I'm sorry but you arguments seem to lack nuance to an almost extreme degree. There is a lot space between "maintaining the status quo" and "imminent (over the next 4 years) abolition". Of course they believed that the new Republican administration and shifting popular opinions in the north (from maintaining the status quo to limiting the expansion of slavery into new territories) were a huge threat to slavery. > How do you get from those statements to "none of these seem to imply that their authors believed that abolition was imminent (in the next 4 years or so)"? I'm seriously puzzled how do we get the complete opposite by reading the same words? None of those quotes imply that they believed that abolition was imminent or might happen in the near future. My entire point was and still is this: while their desire to maintain slavery was obviously the main reason of the rebellion nobody viewed abolition as an imminent threat or that it might occur over the next 4 years (that was politically inconceivable both in the south and the north). The southern states seceded because their politicians assumed that the new administration will do everything it can to weaken the institution of slavery and limit its expansion which would've led to its eventual demise (at and indeterminate point in the future). Could you clarify which part exactly do you disagree with? |