Quote:I love that "states rights" argument. Yeah, the right for citizens of that state to own slaves. That "right" always seems to be avoided when discussing states rights. And owning slaves was what the rancor was all about for the 30 year run up to the Civil War. Which states could you or could you not own slaves. Period. It was considered natural law.

 

I'm sure there are (still) a few Germans who thing the swastika wasn't about Jews at all; it's a symbol of the strength and vibrancy of the German nation.

 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">Easy for you to say, if you weren't one of the slaves. Hey, it's only been 300 years! Just hang on a little longer.

Like I said, the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 certainly quelled state's rights.  They very much were against state's rights, particularly northern state's rights to be against slavery.   They certainly didn't want abolitionists in other states to have the right to assemble.  Many like to look upon the Confederates as a symbol of State's Rights.  I think they'd do better to find a better symbol.  The states rights that the south was most concerned with were the right to own slaves as you said.


As for ending slavery... that's a very easy argument for people to make.  You can't really disprove it.  But I see no reason to believe that it'd have ended within the next 40 years.  I mean giving up on Free Labor?  And then you have the idea of white supremacy which continued in the South even after the Civil War.  The end of slavery wasn't in sight, and would likely have taken a long time before it could no longer be supported.  Sure, there were many southerners who didn't own slaves (some of which did not support seceding) but many of them hoped to one day join the upper class elites and own slaves themselves.  Much like we have people today in similar frame of mind.    Slavery was the defining cultural institution in the South.  How much progress had been made in the many years leading up to the civil war to end slavery? 


If the South never seceded, and we don't have a civil war, I'd say Slavery probably would have lasted until around the turn of the century.  If the south succeeded in seceding on the other hand, I'd say it might not have happened until the First World War or so.  

---