HomeОбразованиеRelated VideosMore From: CrashCourse

The Civil War, Part I: Crash Course US History #20

23343 ratings | 3009647 views
In which John Green ACTUALLY teaches about the Civil War. In part one of our two part look at the US Civil War, John looks into the causes of the war, and the motivations of the individuals who went to war. The overarching causes and the individual motivations were not always the same, you see. John also looks into why the North won, and whether that outcome was inevitable. The North's industrial and population advantages are examined, as are the problems of the Confederacy, including its need to build a nation at the same time it was fighting a war. As usual, John doesn't get much into the actual battle by battle breakdown. He does talk a little about the overarching strategy that won the war, and Grant's plan to just overwhelm the South with numbers. Grant took a lot of losses in the latter days of the war, but in the end, it did lead to the surrender of the South. If you want to learn more about the Civil War, we recommend these books: Battle Cry of Freedom by James McPherson The Civil War by Shelby Foote Hey teachers and students - Check out CommonLit's free collection of reading passages and curriculum resources to learn more about the events of this episode. There were many causes of the American Civil War and events that led to disunion: https://www.commonlit.org/texts/causes-of-the-american-civil-war Once the war started, its outcome was determined by the different abilities and resources of the divided North and South: https://www.commonlit.org/texts/a-nation-divided-north-vs-south follow us! @thecrashcourse @realjohngreen @raoulmeyer @crashcoursestan @saysdanica @br8ybrunch Support CrashCourse on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/crashcourse
Html code for embedding videos on your blog
Text Comments (5354)
Mustafa Ali (21 hours ago)
I miss john green in recent videos
Boston Downs (1 day ago)
Thank u u just saved my test tomorrow Eeeeee I got a 98
Sabeeha Mian (3 days ago)
can someone find a transcription of the video?
Daniel Gonzalez (3 days ago)
Are you part of VFD I mean you read a lot
Jacob Webb (5 days ago)
Umm spoilers! Coulda warned me bro
Karen Young (5 days ago)
TO; RonPaulHatesBlacks.. This is Rev. Jeffrey Young. The cursing that you sent to my wife showes how immature you are. Me and my wife were born in the late 40's. My Father was born in 1908. We have always been in Texas. You should Apologizes to her for your lude language. We will be praying for you. My great Grand Father had a large cotton plantation and took very good care of his slaves. He built a School for them and never let them work on Sundays. After the war they stayed with him.
weeyummy bmp (6 days ago)
i disagree with the idea of slavery since the UNION had slave owners - of which even the founding fathers (or at least some of them) had slaves.
Lively Autistic Man (7 days ago)
Who else is studying for their final or AP exam
Mr. Star (8 days ago)
The reason for the war is something no one will agree on but one side is wrong all Im saying
TheWaldojr (9 days ago)
"You sniveling little ghoul" *R o a s t e d*
Clay Marmon (9 days ago)
Anyone watching these vids in 2019?
Ci Jenkid (9 days ago)
Yo on the Lincoln behind him are his eyes closed or does he just not have pupils? Cuz if so dats kinda weird
John Brown (10 days ago)
...so we're counting Confederate troops as Americans then? And everyone's okay with that?
John Brown (6 days ago)
+Darrian Weathington because none of those people have drafted articles of secession saying they are no longer part of this country, for starters.
Darrian Weathington (6 days ago)
John Brown well, when you see the news about a hate crime, someone dropping the N word, or some political official who wants to kick the Mexicans out of their own country, and they call those people "Americans" much less "Human beings" why would the Confederates be called anything else?
Christian Burrell (11 days ago)
The South basically stood no chance. The North was winning big time since Shiloh. The newspapers kept getting distracted by Richmond. Even Lee had almost no decisive victories, yet he is universally praised. Yet, when did he win that the North had to seriously retreat and change their approach? They just kept coming back. In the West, the South has almost no victories. How do people think this was a close fight?
Karen Young (13 days ago)
The war was fought over TAXES. The south had cotton, the north wanted it. Lincoln did not want to give up his slaves. The south had slaves fighting with them in battle.
RonPaulHatesBlacks (10 days ago)
If the Civil War had anything to do with "TAXES," the rebels would have said so in their own declarations of secession, which you have obviously never even read.
Reggie's Homework (15 days ago)
Im only here for History Meme Ideas
Anakin Moonwalker (17 days ago)
What are the two women representing in 5:43 ? The North and the South?
Tobias Konowitz (17 days ago)
but it was about state's rights...
Master Reliever (20 days ago)
Lol when I’m in 10th grade, I won’t have to watch Crash Course cause it’s my goal to know everything.
jeff c (25 days ago)
just another millenial trying to change the history of our country. Please go back to school and learn all the reasons for the Civil War!
Bart Tare (25 days ago)
Ah, yes, women "shaming" men into fighting wars. How many wars, actually, are due to this never-ending pattern?
Darrian Weathington (6 days ago)
Bart Tare how many are almost all of them?
The Flash (27 days ago)
HI EVERYONE
Bart Tare (28 days ago)
The only inevitable outcome(s) of any war is/are that: 1) many people's lives will be irreparably changed, most often for the worse 2) because the stakes are so high (life or death, "morally right" ideology vs. "morally wrong" ideology), most people will find a way to believe some higher power is on "their side." What is most disconcerting is that this repeated pattern appears to be part of the inevitable human condition, with little hope of changing it. Frustratingly, there is a competing counter myth in the West of "moral progress," (ironically, a form of secularized Apocalyptic Christianity) which has blinded some people to the reality of the more likely pattern.
Ethan ward (29 days ago)
Thats exactly what I'm hoping lol
QuadFeedClipz (30 days ago)
The war wasn't initially about slavery, it was actually about preserving the Union, however, the build-up towards the conflict that threatened the unity of the Union, was slavery.
Hetalian Geek (30 days ago)
Better than school.
Clorox Bleach (1 month ago)
When your city gets burned down to the ground...rip Atlanta
Yammy Flappy (1 month ago)
w o h that was intENse
Michael Ibrahim (1 month ago)
2:12 Rare footage of President Elect Barack Obama consoling Senator John McCain after defeating him in the 2008 presidential election
Boozer (1 month ago)
Dang
sophieevee (1 month ago)
Cactuar making a cameo gives me life
Gabriella DeMauro (1 month ago)
is everyone forgetting how deeply racist the north was and the reasons why they were already so rich and well established by this time was because they made their money in the slave trade? When the south wanted to do the same, they decided it was amoral? anyone else bothered by this hypocrisy? just some thoughts.
RonPaulHatesBlacks (1 month ago)
Do you believe slavery is morally wrong?
kody simpson (1 month ago)
So your saying that all those men on the south side , fought and died so that they could have slaves that they couldn't even afford. They fought and died for slaves that actually took their jobs from them. Your an idiot of you really believe that. That is propaganda given to the sheople that are willing to buy it.
Luke Christmas (1 month ago)
When it comes to the American Civil War, I geek out about all the technology, trains, submarines, ironclads, battleships and tugboats. So why was there no reference to the famous train hijack-chase of the American Civil War, "The General" in this? Regardless, Mr. Green never fails to dissapoint me, one way or another.
찬 찬 (1 month ago)
And here's some Asian dude, knowing that the comment section will be controversial without even looking at it.
Ysabel Jacobson (1 month ago)
Anybody else hoping that John Green can save their APUSH grade?
Edward Nesterenko (1 month ago)
Lincoln hated slavery but he thought black people were sub human
cj Hunter (1 month ago)
See I lost a percentage on a test because one of their questions was, “what caused slavery” and it gave options and one was just slavery, and I just circled that. But my history teacher was like That’s wrong, it was more about the states rights and I was like No
Darrian Weathington (6 days ago)
Evan McConnell teacher would've probably got him expelled
Evan McConnell (1 month ago)
cj Hunter you should have responded “A State’s right to what Sir?”
SHRIKEACOLUIS I (1 month ago)
7:36 How I Am When Outsmart A Jerk Who Thinks He Knows More About History Than Me.
Ben Chernjavsky (1 month ago)
The civil war wasnt about slavery
I was inspired to watch this after buying The Red Badge of Courage at a booksale for less than a dollar. It even has a name in front.
xjjxjcn cmnxnf (1 month ago)
So whites died to save blacks... hmmm
Darrian Weathington (6 days ago)
Dynamic Prepper probably the best reply
Dynamic Prepper (1 month ago)
Yes, whether they knew it or not...
Maya (1 month ago)
Green, you brought up the Nullification Crisis as an example of why the war did not surround states' rights, but the crisis did almost start a war. If Clay hadn't passed the Compromise Tariff of 1833 through congress, then armed conflict could easily have erupted. However, you could have used the Nullification Crisis in your argument that the Civil War is about slavery. After all, the underlying issue of the Tariff of 1828 was that it suggested the government's power to interfere with their "peculiar institution." My point being that states' rights and slavery went had in hand, hence why many consider popular sovereignty to be a leading factor in causing the Civil War. But to say states' rights had nothing to do with it would be crudely incorrect.
Maya (1 month ago)
+Evan McConnell "All the Declarations of Secession make clear that when they said rights they were referring to right to own slaves." Well, yes. This is precisely the point I'm arguing in my original comment. And I agree, they did secede in response to Lincoln's election. I feel you have misinterpreted me as defending the South's secession on the basis of "righteous grounds," which is far from what I believe. I'm just interpreting possible reasons for their secession, based on documents and textbooks I've come across. I was lead to the conclusion it was over slavery, states' rights, and popular sovereignty, seeing as those were recurring trends in the events leading up to their secession. In my mind, Lincoln's election was the final push that drove the South to secede, while earlier events set the tone of sectionalism.
Evan McConnell (1 month ago)
Maya Tell me how democracy can exist if the minority can just declare anything they find repugnant unlawful or they just secede? Our founders were bright enough to put minority rights into the US constitution but every one of those rights were ratified by a majority that wisely realized that the first in a nation could become last and vice versa.
Evan McConnell (1 month ago)
Maya I’ve read all the Declarations of Secession. This isn’t new to me. My point is that every war is about rights in some way shape or form. To say it was about State’s Rights begs the question which rights? All the Declarations of Secession make clear that when they said rights they were referring to right to own slaves. The Constitution and the Articles of Confederation that preceded it are clear that there is no right to unilateral secession without the consent of all the States or through military victory. The South failed to try the first and utterly failed at the latter. The South was wrong to even try to secede until they were harmed. They seceded because they thought Lincoln was a boogeyman. Similarly I can not sue someone preemptively because I have a wild imagination and fear the worst. Besides, the South fighting for their independence while owning other human beings is the definition of hypocritical. Let me be clear though that I do not blame the soldiers that fought for the South. They had many honorable and practice reasons, not the least of these being that most were drafted into war, but that doesn’t excuse the politicians who signed their States Declaration of Secession and who to a man owned slaves.
Maya (1 month ago)
+Evan McConnell I get what you're saying, but states' rights was definitely an issue before the confederacy lost. Look up "Declaration of Causes of Seceding States." The seceding states mention their rights 37 times in the proclamation, including the right to own property (slaves, for them), the right to popular sovereignty, the right to remove a destructive gov., etc
Evan McConnell (1 month ago)
Maya State’s Rights is a bogus argument. It was made up by Jeff Davis to safe face after losing the War. What right did Lincoln and the North infringe upon prior to the South’s secession? Answer: None because Lincoln didn’t take office until after a great many Southern states had already seceded.
james emmanuel babaan (1 month ago)
Hey thanks for making your voice slower. Who can relate comment down here ...
Meme Machine (1 month ago)
Many people say the most deaths were in WW2 yet they dont look back at the wars behind them.
Clowy Martin (1 month ago)
I'm somehow still baffled at how important Americans find their own history as opposed to any other historical events ever.
quiflington (1 month ago)
My grandfather fought in the Civil War. He didn't talk about it much. I guess it was pretty bad.
Emiley Mercado (1 month ago)
What would be 3 major reasons that lead up to the Civil War from a professional opinion?????
Tabish Shaik (1 month ago)
"I am never right because Stan makes it too hard..." This sounds like my APUSH teacher and I. 😂
Lynne Stephenson (1 month ago)
This prick is so annoying - you can put up with him for 5 minutes max, but then you simply have to switch it off, because his voice and mannerisms are just getting too obnoxious.
AlessandroLCJ (1 month ago)
I like the fact that you're using a blue shirt with a elephant. So neutral.
1 2 (1 month ago)
Actually Abraham Lincoln made it about slavery, originally it had been to preserve the country, northerners were just as racist as southerners.
The civil war wasn’t fought over slavery tell 1862 where the south almost got Britain’s support Lincoln was smart he made it about slavery because he knew Britain 🇬🇧 would avoid that as it would earn them a bad reputation politically
MuslimahStudios 313 (1 month ago)
How were there 3.5 million slaves in the northern army? You can't have half a person, can you?
MuslimahStudios 313 (1 month ago)
+Micheal Carney Ohhh duh. Brain wasn't working. Thanks!
Micheal Carney (1 month ago)
Half of a million is five hundred thousand.
Bolt (1 month ago)
USA: We lost 8% of our male population in a war France: Hold my beer
Maximus Media (19 days ago)
Paraguay: AMATEURS
Frisk (1 month ago)
Avocado*
Kritikal Skeptik (1 month ago)
*baguette
TheDeepDebunk (1 month ago)
The Civil War was about keeping the union. The southern states wanted to split from the union to form "The Confederate States Of America". Lincon didn't like this so he tried to keep the union. He had to eventually introduce the slave issue to convince people to fight and that is where history books start to tell it.
Evan McConnell (1 month ago)
TheDeepDebunk I respectfully disagree Sir. The civil war started because The CSA fired on Fort Sumter. The CSA fired on Fort Sumter because Lincoln wouldn’t let the South secede. The South seceded because of Lincoln and GOP got elected and they were opposed to the expansion of slavery. Lincoln tried to make the first two years of the War about Union and not slavery, because he feared the border slave states would secede too. When he was convinced that messing with slavery in the South wouldn’t lose him Northern support and actually would get him more European support he issued the emancipation Proclamation. Few things in history are as clear cut as slavery’s role in causing the Civil War. The Southern states even left notes as to why they left, aka their Declarations of Secession written when they thought they could win. Slave or slavery is mentioned 85 times. Taxes only once and it was in relation to...you guessed it...slavery.
impulse1311 (1 month ago)
become a comedian not an historian, fuckoff
Tom Hufnagel (1 month ago)
“The Northern onslaught upon slavery is no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states.” —Charles Dickens, 1862, British author. “The contest is really for empire on the side of the North, and for independence on that of the South, and in this respect we recognize an exact analogy between the North and the Government of George III, and the South and the Thirteen Revolted Provinces. “ —London Times, November 7, 1861.
RonPaulHatesBlacks (1 month ago)
Dickens said that? Really? When? On what date? To whom did Dickens say it? Where were they when he said it? Tom the racist invents ANOTHER fake quote!!! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!! What a LIAR!!!
han solo (1 month ago)
Lincoln was gay
gypsieladie (1 month ago)
As usual, depressing comments. *Puts popcorn down.
Aaron Green (2 months ago)
My most pertinent question is: are you a complete idiot? Or are you just an idiot that knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the Civil War? Because I can call BS on pretty much everything you've said in the first six minutes alone... For example, if the North was THAT superior, why did that war last four years? Also, um... Your "map" of the U.S.A. includes states that weren't even Territories at that point in time... You also seem to jump through hoops to discredit the South with how "Slavery had nothing to do with it!" Do you REALLY think that the Northerners would WALK a thousand miles -remember that 1\8 of slaves (where were the other 7\8 of them?) were supposedly in the South- to fight, kill and DIE for somebody that they didn't know? Of a different race? Oh, and why didn't a tariff on the South cause a Civil War? Um... Did you read about the American Revolution, sir? It kind of took a LOT of tariffs before the Boston Tea Party took place... Also, the American government started making it's own currency after the American revolution. Or, wait, no... After the Americans fought for their independence from the English, they kept making and using the English currency... Really...? And you seem to be leaving out that Ulysses S. Grant was a full-blown alcoholic, and that he just sent wave after wave of Union soldiers to die, because the Confederates will have to reload some time... But he was a great general... He literally out-manned his enemy. Or -maybe- the reason the Union had more soldiers was in large part due to the potato famine in Ireland, and the Union Army was meeting people on the docks with promises of citizenship, a job and three square meals a day; or that the English and French were willing -and about to- send troops to fight for the Confederacy ... You leave out a lot of vital information, sir. But as you made it clear at the start of your video, "I'm jus' an unenumecated sout'ener," and that you're a Yankee that's read nothing but modern Yankee history books. Seriously, if one wants to learn some-what real history, buy a history book from the teens or twenties... I'm not going to say they're accurate, but they're more reliable than the modern stuff.
Keith Harvey (2 months ago)
9:04 That is a soldier from the 11th Virginia Infantry, "Lynchburg Rifles" company. They formed in my home town of Lynchburg, Virginia, in the spring of 1861 in response to the bombardment of Fort Sumpter. You can read more about them on my instagram history page @centralvirginiahistorian
Matthew Tenney (2 months ago)
The call for secession was about the north imposing it's will on the south, whether it be on slavery, taxation, education, anything and everything. The war was entirely Lincoln's effort to keep the country united, to keep the Republicans in power and to keep himself as leader of the Republican party.
quiflington (1 month ago)
Lincoln was the Trump of his day.
BowTie 8 Bit (2 months ago)
Username: Jenova183, profile picture: Cloud Strife. Username doesn't quite check out but great reference CrashCourse!
William Hazelwood (2 months ago)
The civil war was fought over taxes. And the argument of anything to the contrary is offensive.
Evan McConnell (1 month ago)
William Hazelwood The Southern states issued Declarations of Secession which essentially laid out why they were seceding. They mention slavery 85 times and taxes only once, which was in relation to slavery. I’m sorry history offends you but it is what it is. If you want to be a true historian then you need to shed your sensitivities.
Nevermore (2 months ago)
A government at war against its own citizens is genocide. There is no way to sugar coat it.
Marit de Vries (2 months ago)
Thanks! I hope I'll pas my test tomorrow, if so I will give another book by you a chance!
Lancelot Xavier (2 months ago)
A clown's view.
zhang tony (2 months ago)
Why in China we need to learn about USA civil war ?
michael88h (2 months ago)
It's amazing to this day people still try to b.s. around the fact the the civil war was about slavery.
NCDProductions (2 months ago)
Be careful with these YouTube videos they are usually biased and leave out a lot of information. Of you want to know the truth go reasearch it for yourself and take off your cap of assumption.
Chris Diaz (2 months ago)
Arizona doesn't observe daylight savings time. Thats some secession, right there.
mrdave2112 (2 months ago)
Lincoln clearly stated he was an advocate of slavery. Wars are fought for land not morals. Lincoln was a dictator.
ejames80 (2 months ago)
'Murica, they are good at killing, destroying, destabilizing countries...
James Carmody (2 months ago)
This was a better military history than the military history video.
camilizer 4life (2 months ago)
The union were the northern states and the confederacy where the northern states right?
Paper SMG4 (2 months ago)
3:54 My dad made me read that book. I hated it so bad, I swear on my life i'll post a link of my essay describing why I hated 'The Red Badge of Courage' in a reply.
Tucker Fowler (2 months ago)
I have another way of studying. (Other than crash course) Read More
Tucker Fowler (2 months ago)
Did I get anyone?
Tucker Fowler (2 months ago)
W Wh Why Why d Why di Why did Why did I Why did I d Why did I de Why did I dec Why did I deci Why did I decid Why did I decide Why did I decide t Why did I decide to Why did I decide to d Why did I decide to do Why did I decide to do t Why did I decide to do th Why did I decide to do thi Why did I decide to do this Why did I decide to do this? Why did I decide to do this Why did I decide to do thi Why did I decide to do th Why did I decide to do t Why did I decide to do Why did I decide to d Why did I decide to Why did I decide t Why did I decide Why did I decid Why did I deci Why did I dec Why did I de Why did I d Why did I Why did Why di Why d Why Wh W I now understand the pain.
Tucker Fowler (2 months ago)
Bumbo cactoni. Piston door form. 2:19
Tucker Fowler (2 months ago)
You know, I know another way of studying. Read More
Jarod Farrant (2 months ago)
We can all free on one thing, the civil war should have never happened any civil war is insane.
CGGG Weaver (3 months ago)
I love to see debate and discussion of the Civil War. Though being a bit of a confederate at heart I have studied the Civil War and in doing so looked at the declarations of secession from most confederate states, and found that, yes while slavery was a driving force that caused succession the argument for states right's is not invalid either. So, instead of leaning towards one or the other because you are from the south or the north is no good reason to decide. Do the research before assuming either one is right, and John there are soem historians that will disagree with you too. Just saying.
Rob S (3 months ago)
Not funny. But trying to be funny.
Eu Sou Ancap (3 months ago)
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Abraham Lincoln
D Gray (3 months ago)
The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor. We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution. From the Declaration of Secession of South Carolina. Basically, the northern states were covertly trying to screw over the southern states and were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. And South Carolina had enough of it. Especially since Lincoln was hellbent on making the whole country one or the other and they knew where the wind was blowing. Underlying reasons are the difference between slave and non slave states. But not slavery itself. The difference between the states is the cause of the war.
Youngsung Sim (3 months ago)
9:03 It’s SPIDER-MAN
joseph baird (3 months ago)
lol the cactus is from terraria
Ethan_Blevins (3 months ago)
The south will rise again
ARMY 807 (3 months ago)
Lol. What's up with all the FFVII references?
Michael Marini (3 months ago)
The Civil War WAS about slavery. But what the guy seems to be forgetting though is that the Democrats supported slavery and the Republicans supported freeing all slaves.
Michael Marini (3 months ago)
+Samaria Thornton No, that isn't even close to true. You can't just slap an ideology on a party just because you don't like the party's history. In fact, what in your mind is a "liberal"? Because you obviously don't mean one of those blue and red haired, has 800 genders, thinks Islam is a peaceful religion, Social Justice Warriors that believe communism is a good thing, do you? Because Abraham Lincoln, the Founding Fathers, MLK, and JFK would puke at the sight of any of them. Those complete morons consider themselves "liberals" when they're the farthest thing from. So, no. The Republicans of back then were NOT like the Democrats of today. The Democrats of today absolutely hate freedom and rights. They wish to implement "hate speech" laws that regulate what someone can freely say, which isn't what any Founding Father would support. Not to mention that today's Democrats want a nation wide gun ban, which would also take away human rights. Democrats are the same people as they were back then, always taking rights away from people while the Republicans of today still support free speech, the second amendment, freedom of religion etc. They also don't deem it wise to elevate blacks upon a pedestal JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK. Unlike the Democrats of today who treat blacks like they're victims to society and claim whites have something called "privilege" due to their skin color. Yeah, the only racist ones I see are the Democrats, just like they were when they created the KKK. The partyswitch didn't happen, it's nothing but a lie because the Democrats are still the racist plantation owners that they were 150 years ago. They just aren't as outspoken. They'd rather keep blacks held down while claiming to support them than actually tell them if they want something they need to go out and get it themselves due to it being their own life, like the Republicans tell them.
Samaria Thornton (3 months ago)
Michael Marini southern democrats back then were conservatives and republicans were liberals. So that’s kind of in a way untrue. Don’t believe me, research it. Texas used to be Democrat back then, yet now they vote Republican. The parties weren’t the same, so it’s always been the liberals that supported ending slavery and the conservatives that supported slavery and racism.
Jakka (3 months ago)
Why so preemptively defensive about slavery being the cause of war or not? When you did that I suddenly felt dubious that you were being selective with what you were saying. It also gives me more questions: - Why would slavery--something that they seemed to tolerate up to that point--suddenly be reason to tear each other apart? Was there ongoing conflict around this issue before the war that began to crescendo? - Why did some of the slavery states fight alongside the union, and how could the union allow that if the whole reason of the war was slavery? Did they become non-slavery states the instant the war started? Americans probably learn this stuff in school, so please tell me what you know.
Alex Ray (3 months ago)
The war was about slavery, but its dishonest to say that it was only about slavery. In my college US history class, we had a discussion about this and the class consensus was that the three causes were slavery, succession, and the election of Abraham Lincoln. The class also agreed that there couldn't be just one or three causes, which the professor agreed with (and no, my college isn't in the south and my professor wasn't from the south)
D Gray (3 months ago)
State rights is the cause of the civil war, and the main issues under state rights are complext but many have to do with slavery yes. Taxation /tarrifs is in it too. And obligation to aid another state with their own practices like catching runaway slaves. That is not in itself "slavery" but the facilitation of what you deem immoral. Same could apply today for the death penalty. Lets say a state is very much against death penalty. A person is convicted to death and runs away to the non death penalty state and that sate refuses to hand the convicted man over. Actually helps the guy escape further. It is the same principal. The war could have been said to be caused by morality. What weighs more, the life of people your own sense of justice? Or the treaties and deals you struck with another entity, "state".
RonPaulHatesBlacks (3 months ago)
Foreigners and people from the 1960s? Wow, your response was even sadder than I thought it would be!!! America is the land of right-wing terrorism by white male snowflakes who are psychologically incapable of handling the loss of hegemony or the extension of empathy to other kinds of people. You should be PROUD of your fellow racists! They're taking the actions you would take if you weren't so fat, weak, and scared!!!
Diraphity (3 months ago)
Weather Underground, Students for a Democratic Society, Symbionese Liberation Army, May 19th Communist Organization, United Freedom Front, Black Panthers, New World Liberation Front, The Armed Resistance Unit, Black September, FALN, Antifa, Sam Melville, Jane Alpert, Luke Helder, James Thomas Hodgkinson... Yeah way more violence from the left.
RonPaulHatesBlacks (3 months ago)
You're the violent ones - Dylann Roof, James von Brunn, James Fields, Timothy McVeigh, Robert Lewis Dear, Jeremy Joseph Christian, Daryl Dedmon, Wade Michael Page, and all the rest. Luckily you're too fat, weak, and scared to do anything like that.
Echo Customs (3 months ago)
slavery was just the tipping point, it was about pretty much everything
Alex Games (3 months ago)
Well before the civil war happened Minnesota actually became a state during the war West Virginia became a state because it split from pro confederate Virginia
Chris Black (3 months ago)
Ugh... not to sound like one of those guys, but... a lot of countries freed slaves before and after the American Civil War. I never read about a bunch of civil wars around the world. I guess my question would be why was there not a non military solution worked out? Like.. even as gross as it sounds, why not buy the slaves from their owners to free them, etc...? It is just hard to beleive there wasnt a peaceful path without also believing Americans were some of the worst and most disgusting people to ever occupy our planet.
RonPaulHatesBlacks (3 months ago)
You can't buy slaves or any other property without a willing seller, and Southerners weren't willing to sell.
Cathy Roberts (3 months ago)
These are great but I wish the guy would talk just a wee bit slower.
johnny walker (3 months ago)
today we are going to leave out this this this this this and this. Talk about comprehensive.
olive oil (3 months ago)
in brazil 1/6,5 people were slaves
PinkWolf (3 months ago)
My state's almost to free states... We control Ohio River tho xD
Brak (3 months ago)
Why are we politicizing the war Abraham Lincoln was a white supremeist who wanted to prevent anyone but whites from becoming citizens and the south wanted to enslave human beings for forced work while treating them horribly and killing many their were no good guys here stop trying to make Lincoln seem like a hero
D Gray (3 months ago)
It just tells you the reason why they fought was not to free slaves. Neither was it for allies to "save the jews" Btw I am Jewish myself. They just stumbled upon it. Same with slavery it was stumbled upon. Though underlaying cause not the main cause. The main cause always will be state rights. The Southern states lost their faith in the union, and basically believed their slaves would be taken by force "illigaly by the constitution btw". So state rights. It is not a word play. It is a fact. If someone throws a ball in your face do you blame the ball or the one that throws it? You can say well if he didn't have the ball he could not throw it. True. Still, the action supercedes the object. It doesn't sound nice to talk over slaves heads. But it is just what it is. The south was fed up with the way the north treated them. Even if that is mainly slavery and tarifs.
RonPaulHatesBlacks (3 months ago)
And the Allies were anti-Semitic during WWII. That doesn't justify Hitler and the Holocaust. Moral Equivalency Fallacy.

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.