If the Civil War were fought today, which side would you fight on?

[Derby FALs]

The South went to war primarily over taxes.

Curious, then, that the representatives of the Southern states in 1860 hardly talked about taxes at all, but loved to talk about the threat to their "property in slaves," miscegenation, etc.

You got me. LOL

The South just wanted out of the Union. The North went to war over taxes.


 Here's a question for you. A slaveholding confederation
of states has separated from a "mother country" in which slavery is
outlawed, and they go to war. Name the newly-independent nation and
the "mother country" whose army invades with fire & sword to conquer it.



Answer: The American Colonies and England.

[Justin]

Neither.  An American civil war in the era of the 24-hour news cycle would be far too great a television event to actually miss.

[stevelyn]

Depends on the cause each side was fighting for. Considering that slavery was on its way out when the when the war kicked off, I doubt that would be what they would be fighting over in this day and age.

[doczinn]

RevDisk pretty much stated my position for me. The South had the right to secede, but they did so to preserve their "right" to own people. The North had no right to invade.

[thorn]

HA! shoulda went like this=
let the South form it 's own Union.
CRUSH them for oppressing the black people, beat  them silly until they free slaves.

let them keep their nation and do their own reconstruction.

[Jamisjockey]

I'd be a gunrunning privateer.  Whoever pays the most, wins.

but they did so to preserve their "right" to own people.

Actually, the South didn't just cecede over owning people.  It was primarily over taxes, which the North was jacking up on Cotton, and states rights.  Slavery is just a convienent and evil thing to blame.

[Jamisjockey]

Constitution applies to everyone.   That simple.

Nope, it sure doesn't.  It actually gave the South extra votes in the house of Representatives by counting slaves as 3/5ths of a person for census purposes.  The 13th amendment to the Constitution is what abolished slavery.

[Glock Glockler]

let the South form it 's own Union.
CRUSH them for oppressing the black people, beat  them silly until they free slaves.

Should the North have crushed itself for allowing slavery?  You do know that it was a US court decision (Dred Scott) that gave the thumbs up to slavery in the country?

[jefnvk]

An American civil war in the era of the 24-hour news cycle would be far too great a television event to actually miss.

GOOD call.

[Bemidjiblade]

A bit of a history geek, I still believe that the issues of slavery and union were high on the minds of many people when they decided to fight.

I believe it would have been on mine.  I'd say Union, like my ancestor.  He taught saber fighting to Union officers.  (Not that the sword obsession runs in the blood or anything).  I still have his blade.

[Paddy]

I would fight on the side of the South.  The 'Union' has taken a huge left turn into socialism in the past 150 years, which will ultimately lead to its demise.  If true independence and liberty is to arise again in this country, it most assuredly will come from the South.

[Wildalaska]

The North of course.

WildnomanshouldownanotherAlaska

[Bemidjiblade]

Jamis Jockey's got a great point.  I think the 'reasons' given for people to fight in the Civil War is very telling about the different priorities etc.

Many if not most Southerners were fighting for what they believed to be a right of self-determination and states rights.

Many if not most Northerners were fighting to preserve the Union and/or about the slavery issue.

*Pauses for a bit of nostalgia about the last war fought that actually used swords as combat-effective weapons.*

Hey, I come by it honestly!  See the above post.