Talk:American Civil War/FAQ

Q1: Aren't there problems with the title?
A1: The title "American Civil War" is used only because it is the most common international name for the war. It is used in order to be understood, regardless of whether it could be better. The title does ignore the South's point of view, and it ignores the fact that Central America and South America are also America, in a sense.

Q2: But shouldn't all the other names of the war be mentioned?
A2: They are mentioned in Naming the American Civil War. The main article links to this.

Q3: Wasn't the war more about states' rights than slavery?
A3: The original secessionists were not very careful in separating states' rights from the slavery issue. South Carolina's declaration of reasons for secession is one example out of many. However, Lost Cause historians did try to separate state's rights from slavery after Confederate defeat.

Q4: Wasn't the tariff issue the cause of the war?
A4: The tariff issue was a much bigger issue three decades before the war, and even then John Calhoun, who led South Carolina's attempt to nullify the Tariff of 1828, said that the tariff issue was related to slavery.

Q5: Didn't Lincoln say he didn't care about slavery?
A5: This is true only if you like very selective quoting. The things Lincoln said in favor of equality were many, the things he said against it were few, and those few were combined with a great deal of political pressure. This is especially true with regard to Lincoln's letter to Greeley at a time when border state people and War Democrats might reject emancipation and the war if the issue wasn't explained in a way that they would accept. Also, Lincoln's sole justification for emancipation was military necessity. Lincoln was inconsistent on the equality issue during the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 partly in order to deflect the politically damaging charge (by 19th century standards) that he was a "Black Republican" abolitionist.

Q6: Weren't northerners too racist to care about slavery?
A6: Neither side compared the North to the modern age, which didn't exist yet. Even though northern states didn't allow equal civil rights for blacks, they were still much more antislavery than the South.

Q7: Did the North start the war to free the slaves?
A7: No. The North didn't start the war, either to free the slaves or for any other reason. It was the South that seceded and attacked Fort Sumter.

Q8: Didn't some slave states fight for the North?
A8: Yes, the five border states. These states had less slavery and more support for the Union than the Confederate slave states. They opposed emancipation at first, but largely accepted the military need for it eventually.

Q9: Did Lincoln plan to immediately abolish slavery in the South when elected?
A9: No. Lincoln combined moral opposition to slavery (calling it "a monstrous injustice") with a moderate, gradual program of action. Lincoln, like most Republicans, believed that compromises of the Constitution (a three-fifths clause, a 20 year extension of the African slave trade and a fugitive slave clause) implied Constitutional recognition of slavery where it existed. However, Lincoln would not compromise on preventing any expansion of slavery in the hope that this would put it "in the course of ultimate extinction."

Q10: So what reason did secessionists give for secession?
Q10: They mentioned fears for the future of slavery many times in their declarations of reasons for secession, political speeches and editorials.