Should Lincoln have let the South secede?
Yes
Side Score: 4
|
 |
No
Side Score: 0
|
|
|
|
|
Lincoln ought not to have bothered with the Southern States once they left the Union. They should not have been forced to continue in an association they deemed injurious to their causes. Aggression on the part of the North is understandable, though, for how could one who started his reign with a whole country be joyful to end it with half? Still, such violence on Lincoln's part is unacceptable. If certain states strongly disagree with a federal dictate, they should nullify and, if that doesn't work, remove themselves of their association with the feds. Side: Yes
The Civil War destroyed many southern (and northern) families and property. And it did very little to actually end slavery. The Federal government failed to live by legislation that it FORCED the South to abide by, and it failed to come up with any reasoning for the South to actually stay with the Fed. Secession was unnecessary, but inevitable at the point of when it happened. All Lincoln proved was that when you fuck things up to this point, the only answer is to kill a shit load of people and destroy as much as possible. Side: Yes
|
No arguments found. Add one!
|
