I would like to express my gratitude to Con for accepting this debate, as I am confident it will be an engaging and fruitful discussion.
First argument: The first argument I would like to present that proves the CSA fought for slavery is a speech that Vice president of the confederacy
Alexander H. Stephens who made a famous speech known as the
Cornerstone Speech which was Delivered by Stephens in Goergia on March 21st 1861.
"Our new government['s]...foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."
This speech provides first-hand testimony from Alexander H. Stephens, one of the highest leaders of the Confederacy, second only to Jefferson Davis in the Confederate government. In his own words, Stephens not only affirms that slavery is the foundation upon which the Confederacy is based, described by him as "the great truth," but also argues that slavery was the natural and normal condition for enslaved African Americans. This leads to one of two conclusions: 1) The Vice President of the Confederacy is lying or does not know what his own government is founded on, despite being Vice President; or 2) The Vice President acknowledges that the Confederacy was founded on slavery and argues that it is a significant truth, as he believes that slavery is the natural condition for African Americans. Therefore, slavery is undeniably the reason for the Confederacy's existence, as evidenced by the Cornerstone Speech. It is the primary cause for the formation of the CSA and their participation in the Civil War to uphold this immoral practice of owning individuals deemed racially inferior.
Second argument: Upon leaving the Union in 1860, the original Southern states issued the Ordinance of Secession, formally separating from the United States. Despite variations in the wording of each state's
letter of succession, they all convey the same formal message. to leave the Union to protect what they call an "institution" which anyone with common sense can tell refers to
slavery. Therefore, not only does the Confederacy's leadership confirm that slavery is the foundation of their cause, but the Southern States themselves explicitly outline their reasons for secession as protecting slavery. The Confederacy believed so strongly in their right to practice slavery that they initiated and fought a long and bloody civil war to preserve it.
Conclusion: The Civil War was undeniably fought over the issue of slavery, with the CSA advocating for the right to own and sell slaves, and establishing itself specifically to maintain the South's slave culture. Moreover, the leaders of the Confederacy did not deny this; instead, they argued that slavery was natural and a normal condition for non-white individuals. Therefore, to deny that the Confederacy fought for slavery or that the Civil War was initiated by slavery is to reject reality and the words of the Confederacy's founders themselves.
WHY IS EVERYONE FORFEITING!?!
bump
The primary reason for the creation of the CSA was to preserve slavery because the wealth of the ruling class depended heavily on it. Slavery was long a point of contention since the birth of the US as a nation and for decades the US had fought to find a compromise.
"I am only interested in a serious and professional debate"
You won't get that debate by handcuffing your opponent to an opinion that no highschool graduate has. If you are confident they seceded because of a few Jews owning slaves than you should have no problem defending that position.
I understand that opinions vary regarding the cause of the war, and not everyone believes it was solely due to slavery. However, I am only interested in a serious and professional debate. Anyone with a basic education in history knows that the war started for one of two reasons: 1) The South feared that Lincoln's presidency threatened the institution of slavery, making it the central reason, or 2) Southern states felt the need to secede because they believed their states' rights were being oppressed by the Federal government. Any other view is not based on the history of the civil war and is thus ignorant.
What I am saying is that a lot of people think the war is not as simple as just saying it is about slavery.
That there was a myriad of reasons for the war and that slavery was the least of them. Nobody who says the war was not about slavery, argues it was about state's rights other than people dumbing down the reasons for rhetorical purposes.
I'm sorry that my rules do not allow for ignorant and baseless assertions to be argued on but I am not interested in hearing nonsense I am interested in debating in a serious and professional manner, Since that does not seem to be your criteria then the debate is not for you then simple as that.
No one has challenged it yet and the time in between arguments is three days apart so you should have plenty of time if you are interested in debating this.
"the slave trade in America was racially motivated"
Damn, I thought there might be some sort of financial motive to have free labor but I guess not.
"If you believe the South left to protect its states' rights or that slavery was not the cause then challenge the debate."
Your 2nd rule for the debate only allows con to argue it was for state's rights. So if I think it's because Lincoln was a faggot and southerners didn't want to associate with fags, I would automatically lose the debate for breaking rule number 2.
Damn, I would have loved to debate this if I had time
If you believe the South left to protect its states' rights or that slavery was not the cause then challenge the debate.
Your claim is illogical, as the slave trade in America was racially motivated and not related to Jewish matters. Furthermore, the primary debate surrounding the American Civil War for the past century has been whether slavery was the main cause or if it was due to the federal government forcing the South to secede in defense of its rights. Consequently, I am perplexed by your expectation for me to create a narrative that is not only false but also historically inaccurate, just as you are uncertain about why I should make Con argue that the Confederacy fought for states' rights instead of slavery.
you are arguing the south fought to preserve the jewish slave trade than argue it, not sure why you are forcing your opponent to argue they were fighting for states rights though