Nikki Haley is slammed for refusing to
name slavery as primary cause of Civil
War during tense town hall back-and-forth
with voter
Daily Mail (UK),
by
Perkin Amalaraj
Original Article
Posted By: Imright,
12/28/2023 8:46:19 AM
Presidential hopeful Nikki Haley has been slammed for refusing to say that slavery was the main cause of the Civil War.
Haley, the 51-year-old former governor for South Carolina, blundered her way through the question at town hall debate in Berlin, New Hampshire, on Wednesday night.
The former UN representative jokingly told the audience member 'well, don't come with an easy question', before claiming that the Civil War was fought for freedom and ideological differences in how governments ought to work.
Post Reply
Reminder: “WE ARE A SALON AND NOT A SALOON”
Your thoughts, comments, and ideas are always welcome here. But we ask you to please be mindful and respectful. Threatening or crude language doesn't persuade anybody and makes the conversation less enjoyable for fellow L.Dotters.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Venturer 12/28/2023 8:52:30 AM (No. 1625519)
There were many differences between North and South including slavery and States Rights.
But the book Uncle Tom's Cabin had about as much to do with starting the war as anything else.
20 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Jerseyden 12/28/2023 8:57:23 AM (No. 1625523)
Maybe she didn't think it was a trick question. In my opinion Slavery wasn't the main cause, but states rights were. Slavery was an add on and the emancipation proclamation was used to justify the war.
41 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Quigley 12/28/2023 8:59:07 AM (No. 1625524)
Why not just say it? The Dims wanted to keep their slaves so they started the Civil War which killed 600,000 people.
Now, the Dims want to bring millions of people over the southern border to disappear them into this country to live in modern slave conditions and to promote human trafficking and sex trafficking.
It's all obvious. Why not just say it?
37 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
bamapreacher 12/28/2023 9:24:53 AM (No. 1625538)
Tariffs were the main cause of the Civil War. States rights was another, and while that included legal slavery the fact is that 95% of Confederate soldiers came from families that had never owned slaves and could care less about it. Lincoln lied through his teeth in his inaugural address saying he would never try to abolish slavery but the South believed him and therefore wouldn't have gone to war over a single issue that wasn't threatened.
23 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
qr4j 12/28/2023 9:26:05 AM (No. 1625539)
I heard her answer. She didn’t say slavery. She talked about the government’s responsibility to protect human rights. Ending slavery is exactly that. I don’t see what the problem is.
12 people like this.
The democrats wanted to keep their slaves and illegally kept Lincoln off the ballot. They used working class whites as their cannon fodder in their rebellion.
It’s the same now, except their slaves are kept enslaved with government programs and making no sure they never integrate into society by keeping them speaking Spanish.
19 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
red1066 12/28/2023 9:32:08 AM (No. 1625546)
State's rights were the primary cause of the Civil War. When the southern states started to secede and created a separate country then proceeded to fire on Fort Sumpter, that started the Civil War. The issue of slavery became an issue a little later. The Civil War was fought to restore the country, and slavery was just one issue that needed to be eliminated to do that.
21 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
BarryNo 12/28/2023 9:39:01 AM (No. 1625553)
For the average man in the north, the primary reasons to fight was only partially about slavery. Many of them had entered this country as indentured servants, or had entered that state through endebtedness. They were sympathetic to the black man's condition. The main starter for "Yankees" was the arrogance of the Southerners. The Civil War began with a cannon shot by an anti-abolitionist at Ft. Sumter in the Carolinas.
Most people and cultures fight back when punched.
The arrogance of the "Southern Gentlemen" is mirrored today in their descendants, the Democrat Party (then as now) who cannot bear to be wrong, and use violence when you point out how wrong they really are.
15 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
faceincrowd 12/28/2023 9:51:41 AM (No. 1625563)
Next she'll be calling it "The War of Northern Aggression". Jeez.
9 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
LC Chihuahua 12/28/2023 10:06:13 AM (No. 1625569)
The south did not secede from the Union just to keep slavery. The south was unhappy about northern political influence. The US government did things that benefited the north than they did the south.
16 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Lazyman 12/28/2023 10:10:15 AM (No. 1625572)
Maryland was a slave state that fought for the north.
As usual there was many reasons for the war but with a bumper sticker mentality and lack of real education the voters go with what they are told. It is hard to believe that most rebels, who could never dream of owning a slave ,died for the rich to own them. Much of the literature of the time records the rebels saying they are fighting because the north had invaded their land. Simple people demand simple leaders.
13 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
joew9 12/28/2023 10:16:37 AM (No. 1625578)
It wasn't a civil war. A civil war is when there is a fight over who runs the government. This was a war for independence. The South had been treated poorly since before the country was founded. They wanted out. And it was not so they could own slaves. Sure a few rich people did but most of the people merely wanted to own shoes someday. Even Lincoln did not call it a war to free the slaves until he was losing support for the war. The North manipulated cotton prices and the poor farmers got ripped off every year. The English offered to buy cotton at a higher price but the Feds(before Lincoln and during Lincoln) passed tariffs to discourage the English from buying cotton from the South. The North did not like free market economy. And Lincoln was big into the tariffs because he was behest to the big money of the north.
25 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
mifla 12/28/2023 10:19:49 AM (No. 1625588)
The people slamming her don't know their history.
18 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Strike3 12/28/2023 10:43:52 AM (No. 1625611)
Actually, many of us Yankees were okay with slavery as long as the cotton kept getting picked and the money kept rolling into the country from around the world. Everybody benefited from it except those out in the fields. Slavery now is being pushed as the main cause of the war to keep up the drumbeat for the folks who were sold by their tribes in Africa and Madagascar and can maintain maximum sympathy and claim that victim status in order to deserve the huge reparations they think they have earned. Lincoln had a mass deportation planned and was shot before he could implement it. Modern blacks should be more concerned that many of their countrymen are still living in slavery in countries around the world, predominately the Middle East, but apparently that "brother" thing ends at America's borders.
16 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
janjan 12/28/2023 10:46:20 AM (No. 1625616)
#12 nailed it. Great post.
5 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
DVC 12/28/2023 10:57:19 AM (No. 1625625)
Slavery was a factor, no doubt, but a major was the fact that the North was crushing the South via import tariffs raisng prices on foreign goods to avoid competition for the goods from Northern factories, therefore government tariffs directly harming the agricultural south and benefiting the industrialized North.
Today industry is more broadly located so the penalties/benefits of tariffs are pretty evenly spread across the country, and is not seen as a direct financial attack on one region to benefit another region.
The Compromise of 1850 was a series of laws passed which largely removed the slavery issue from a top concern and dramatically reduced it's contribution the splitting of the nation.
IMO, this may be a plus for Haley more than a minus. Children raised in northern schools know extremely little about the real causes of the Civil War, only getting the Yankee propaganda version of history, which entirely ignores all the additional reasons that the Northern states were beating up the Southern states before the war started and try to pin the entire cause for the conflict on slavery, a MASSIVE distortion, intended to make the North look like heroes, and much of the reason that the average Yankee, even today is a bit of an arrogant ass when it comes to southerners. I have lived in the South and in the North and see both sides pretty clearly. I much prefer the South and the Midwest to the NE, where the people are all too often really hard to get along with.
14 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Laotzu 12/28/2023 11:13:44 AM (No. 1625640)
The entire debate is another ruse to continue to protect the Democrat Party from their horrific history in this Country. The Germans had the sense to purge Nazism after WWII. We gave the Democrats a pass after the Civil War, and we've been paying the price ever since.
13 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
formerNYer 12/28/2023 11:25:16 AM (No. 1625649)
One just needs to read the declaration of the states that succeeded them mention slavery as one of their main reasons.
GA: or the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.
MS: It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.
SC: The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.
Slavery was the main reason for the Civil War. Slavery was and is an abomination.
Although in hindsight it probably would have been cheaper monetarily to buy all the slaves and release them. It certainly would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives too.
6 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
nelsonted1 12/28/2023 11:28:32 AM (No. 1625653)
I sometimes wonder if gun control is a small scale mirror of the southerner. They wanted to be left alone. What was happening to the southerner was in your face obvious but northerners couldn't fathom what the problem was. Slavery wasn't important to a vast majority of southerners was. Arrogant northerners was telling a poverty stricken southerners they were stupid, useless trash who weren't up to northerner's standards. They didn't like it one bit.
6 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
LC Chihuahua 12/28/2023 11:33:23 AM (No. 1625658)
I recall the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Kansas wanted to join the Union but was blocked because it was seen as a southern state and the northern viewed it would give the south more power. A compromise was reached where two states would join at once. One southern and another northern. The second state was Nebraska which was more aligned with the north.
It shows the tensions between the states that existed at the time. This was shortly before the Civil War, I think.
6 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
MickTurn 12/28/2023 11:42:40 AM (No. 1625663)
Yep the Democrats are Still Peeved at Lincoln because he took away all their Slaves. I have to wonder if Nikki's family was into that as well...
4 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
whyyeseyec 12/28/2023 11:51:22 AM (No. 1625675)
I knew Haley was a fraud the moment she signed off on ridding South Carolina of the confederate flag. She played it off as a positive step forward when in reality all she did was aid the Democrat Party in hiding their ties as the Party of Slavery. That is what all the hullabaloo was about in regards to tearing down confederate statues in southern states too. Haley is not who she portrays herself to be. She's being funded by Corporate America to be the loser against whatever Democrat is the nominee in 2024 - that is if she secures the GOP nomination. Question is, what is the payoff ($$$$$) for her?
8 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
kennedylaw 12/28/2023 12:29:37 PM (No. 1625704)
If you read Lincoln's speeches and writings both before and early in the Civil War, it is clear that ending slavery had nothing to do with the North's entry into the war. It was all about preserving the Union, which Lincoln repeatedly said he would do without freeing a single slave if he could (e.g., "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it”). OTOH, if you read the Southern States' various articles of succession, they all stressed preserving slavery as a primary reason for secceding. So the North did jot go to war to free the slaves, but the Democrats that controlled the North went to war to keep their slaves.
5 people like this.
Reply 24 - Posted by:
kennedylaw 12/28/2023 12:31:45 PM (No. 1625706)
Typos.
So the North did not go to war to free the slaves, but the Democrats that controlled the South went to war to keep their slaves.
4 people like this.
Reply 25 - Posted by:
paral04 12/28/2023 12:33:06 PM (No. 1625710)
She is right. about that The issue was about the high tariff placed by the North on imported farm equipment. The North were in their infancy producing farm machinery and the best was made in England by a tariff making it too expensive to import and forcing the South to buy their poorly made equipment. Slaves were being freed as industrialization made the system no longer financially viable. BTW more than 10,000 Black families owned slaves and Michelle Obama's ancestors was one of them,
7 people like this.
Reply 26 - Posted by:
robertthomason 12/28/2023 1:44:35 PM (No. 1625729)
This is one of the great questions on which historians have written a library of books. The real issue was about the expansion of slavery. The founders did not have a viable solution to abolish slavery and at the same time create our nation. Their solution was to create our nation with provision of no expansion of slavery, thereby causing the gradual ending of slavery. Lincoln had the same position. Under the Constitution, the federal government had no power to end slavery in the states but could forbid it in the territories. There were other important issues like tariffs and states rights. but I think the fight over the expansion of slavery was the issue that led to Ft. Sumter and war. For the record both sides of my family split over secession. Some owned slaves, most did not. Of those that owned slaves, some were Unionists, others were Confederates.
3 people like this.
Reply 27 - Posted by:
ironchefw 12/28/2023 1:54:07 PM (No. 1625734)
Meaningless "Gotcha" question. Especially when Biden has said more than enough racist things that the Left ignores because he's one of them.
3 people like this.
Reply 28 - Posted by:
Foghorn 12/28/2023 7:08:07 PM (No. 1625846)
Nikki Haley is right, Gen. Jackson left the Northern Army for the Confederate Armey because he believed in the states' rights, not the issue of slavery. Slavery was secondary to the states' rights was Jackson's stance. Many others were of the same frame of mind as they feared that once the states lost the rights stated in the constitution would be used in other causes.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Imright"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)