Election of 1860 and Secession What were the effects of the election of Abe Lincoln, 1860? - Republican party had done well in midterms - Democrats were worried and nominated Stephen Douglas as candidate - Abe Lincoln was candidate for Republicans ○ Was against spread of slavery due to free soil platform - Democratic party was divided between north and south, it was not unified - Northern ○ Represented by Stephen Douglas ○ Wanted slavery question answered by popular sovereignty - Southern ○ Represented by John Breckinridge ○ Wanted slavery in new territories protected by federal slave code ○ Once they became new states then they could vote by popular sovereignty - Lincoln won 40% of popular vote but won majority of electoral votes ○ Was not on ballot in southern states ○ Showed the south even if all political power was employed into this election, they still lost. Showed slavery had the potential to be abolished - December of 1860, South Carolina seceded out of fear of losing slavery ○ Many states followed and became Confederate States of America - Confederate States of America ○ Constitution ○ Severely limited federal power ○ Slavery would never be abolished Why did the states secede? - One group says slavery - One group says states rights Confederate state charges boiled down to being against the anti-slavery sympathizers in the north Words spoken by the states shows that: slavery must be protected at all costs
Wrong on South Carolina They secede because of tariffs Slavery was legal and constitutional No southern state left because of slavery The reason the other 6 eft after 7 was because Lincoln called up 75,000 troops to invade the sovereign states and what are you going to do stand there and let them come in and steal and burn like they did eventually are you gonna protect your home Your state was your country. I’m sick of the slavery crap If war was over slavery then there would not been secession Remember it was legal and constitutional all through the war and close to a year after also there was slavery in northern states!!!!!!!!!!!! Everyone condemns the south for slavery but praise the founders that had slavery all through history ? The so called patriots of today ignore that fact because it doesn’t fit there narrative!!!!!!
Timestamps: 0:33 Republican Party 0:43 Stephen Douglas, Abraham Lincoln 1:41 Northern Dems (Pop. Sov.) vs Southern Dems (Slave code THEN Pop Sov) 3:09 Confederacy Formed (S Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, N Carolina) 5:54 Jefferson Davis, Alexander Stephens' "Cornerstone Speech"
Usually I don't take notes and when I do, they're not organized.. but the way you structure your information and the way you present it is so organized and amazing that my notes are my organized than I've ever seen them, and I'm not even trying to organize them. Don't stress out about the people asking you for more content, we all appreciate that you even make these videos for free! Thanks you!!!
This is such a stupid reply to that. "For many people of the Era, the Civil War was not Solely(Or even Explicitly) about slavery. It is worth nothing that Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, and Delaware, the Border States, were slave states that fought for the union. Most southerners described their cause as fighting for their state's rights to govern themselves. But slavery was the issue that had caused thr argument for states rights to escalate into war." Anybody who says that phrase clearly forgets that the South was losing in the house and would lose the Senate too, you being a member of that group.
@@AE86FTS but I knew your intention was to act like that's a bad reply by showing their stunned reaction in their inability to answer. Don't cop out by saying that it was a joke, because your joke is based on misinformation.
@Cynthia Li wtf? So if I support states rights, I’m a confederate traitor? You make no sense. They cared about other things than that but I guess ur too ignorant.
YOU ARE THE BEST RU-vid TEACHER EVER!!!!!!! I am taking APUSH independently and it now makes sense because of you! I love you how tell a story with causation instead of just plain unconnected facts
Thanks for the content and the fact based explanation of the Southern reason for secession. This gives me another way to help my students understand their DBQ!!
someone made a bad pickup line that made me remember lincoln's election --> south panic and secession "Are you Abraham Lincoln??? Because you’re causing an uprising down south"
Hooray! You got it right so far. I taught U.S. History for 40 years and your explanation is right on. In addition I suggest that you include an examination of the Constitution of the C.S.A. as well as the individual State Constitutions of the member States. There use of slavery and defense of slavery clearly defines slavery as THE CAUSE of their choice to seceed and open fire at Fort Sumter. Once again Very Well Done.
@@heimlershistory Dear Sir, Thank You for your "vote" of approval. I meant every word. I am so very tired (Disgusted) with the all to common distortion of historical inquiry and the treatment that this clip gives to the Civil War deserves all the praise that I can offer.
I love the deathbed picture of lincoln! He was a piece of human garbage who who got exactly what he deserved. What's this stuff about him and his kids? Who cares about his brats. He didn't care anything or anybody. abe started a senseless war that resulted in over 600,000 battlefield deaths plus the injuries that were worse than death. Now, add in the widows and orphans he created. (What's this stuff about his kids dying how sad ole abe was. Like anybody even cares about his brats) WIDOWS AND ORPHANS. This death and desrtuction added up to about two million ruined lives. OK. Are any of you getting a more realistic picture of abe? abe's kids, yeah whatever. TWO MILLION LIVES RUINED . No man in history did more to earn his fate the lincoln. Imagine the kids abe made fatherless, and how removing hundreds of thousands of grandfathers removed from the family structure. Poor ole abe lost some brats he got sad. HYPOCRITE SCUMBAG.He had it coming for a long time. He was a dimwit to. Anybody with half a brain who did what he did would stay hidden or travel with a hundred body guards. Totally CLUELESS. Think about it. good ole boy abe i'm headin' to the theatre me and my family gonna have a good time who cares about the 2 million everybody loves me. Nobody, but abe was suprised his second term ended early.
I agree that the first 7 states to secede did so based on the perceived threat to slavery. But why did the last 4 states to secede (VA, NC, TN, and AR) wait until Lincoln called for troops to put down the rebellion to secede? In fact a couple of these states (e.g., VA and TN) had explicitly voted to stay in the Union. Why the turn around after Fort Sumter???
One of the primary difficulties we have looking back is that we implicitly accept a democracy that was very limited. This particularly matters in the South; in 1860 there were multiple states in the region which were majority Black, but the voices were not included in the political process, and they were largely devoid of political allies who would speak on their behalf. This makes decisions the governments of such States more like Athenian or Roman democracy than how we view the theoretical ideal of representative democracy today.
There's an interesting experiment you might want to try someday. Write up a hypothetical scenario involving two factions based on the relationship (especially concerning economics) between the Northern and Southern states from their days as colonies up to the Civil War (in a manner that won't immediately give away who those factions represent.) Only replace the South's morally repugnant economic system of slavery with something morally neutral (like simply calling it their economic system.) Then include a questionaire for the reader to determine which faction they thought was more justified in their actions. You'll be surprised by the results.
I think the north due to how even if it wasn't slavery, rebelling because you disagreed with an election and worry that your main source of income would be outlawed and attacking the people you just rebelled several times seems like attacking to me
That would be a loaded question. The fact that the south’s economic system is slavery - even forgetting morals - is critical to the question. The “Free Soil” platform was made purely to argue for wage labor compared to forced labor. It’s not like the South we’re practicing socialism. You can’t just take away a major factor from a historical fact and act like you proved a point. The war was about protecting the slave empire of the south
Alright, here I found the channel which helped me to earn 4 [not really great score tho] in AP W.History and it's time for AP US. History's amsco book to trash it and takes notes from here.
Lincoln got 10% of votes in the slave state Missouri! He got 2000-1000 votes in the slavery states Kentucky and Maryland. In some Southern states the Lincoln list was forbade by the local authorothies so we did not know he would have got more votes in the South?
It's so insulting Wikipedia is supposed to understand context for content better than viewers. Shows the corporate state parasites really think we are dumb as a bag of hair.
The constitution of the Confederate States of America says in article 1 section 9 states the following: The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same. Congress shall also have power to prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territory not belonging to, this Confederacy. Also the North Carolina and Arkansas secession ordinance mentions not one word about slavery. It says the reason for secession was Lincoln's invasion of the South. The Cherokee Declaration of causes to join the Confederacy says this fact as well. It states the following: Maintaining in the field an army of 200,000 men, the war became for them but a succession of victories. Disclaiming any intention to invade the Northern States, they sought only to repel invaders from their own soil and to secure the right of governing themselves. They claimed only the privilege asserted by the Declaration of American Independence, and on which the right of the Northern States themselves to self-government is founded, of altering their form of government when it became no longer tolerable and establishing new forms for the security of their liberties. Throughout the Confederate States we saw this great revolution effected without violence or the suspension of the laws or the closing of the courts. The military power was nowhere placed above the civil authorities. None were seized and imprisoned at the mandate of arbitrary power. All division among the people disappeared, and the determination became unanimous that there should never again be any union with the Northern States. Almost as one man all who were able to bear arms rushed to the defense of an invaded country, and nowhere has it been found necessary to compel men to serve or to enlist mercenaries by the offer of extraordinary bounties. But in the Northern States the Cherokee people saw with alarm a violated Constitution, all civil liberty put in peril, and all the rules of civilized warfare and the dictates of common humanity and decency unhesitatingly disregarded. In States which still adhered to the Union a military despotism has displaced the civil power and the laws became silent amid arms. Free speech and almost free thought became a crime. The right to the writ of habeas corpus, guaranteed by the Constitution, disappeared at the nod of a Secretary of State or a general of the lowest grade. The mandate of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was set at naught by the military power, and this outrage on common right approved by a President sworn to support the Constitution. War on the largest scale was waged, and the immense bodies of troops called into the field in the absence of any law warranting it under the pretense of suppressing unlawful combination of men. The humanities of war, which even barbarians respect, were no longer thought worthy to be observed. Foreign mercenaries and the scum of cities and the inmates of prisons were enlisted and organized into regiments and brigades and sent into Southern States to aid in subjugating a people struggling for freedom, to burn, to plunder, and to commit the basest of outrages on women; while the heels of armed tyranny trod upon the necks of Maryland and Missouri, and men of the highest character and position were incarcerated upon suspicion and without process of law in jails, in forts, and in prison ships, and even women were imprisoned by the arbitrary order of a President and Cabinet ministers; while the press ceased to be free, the publication of newspapers was suspended and their issues seized and destroyed; the officers and men taken prisoners in battle were allowed to remain in captivity by the refusal of their Government to consent to an exchange of prisoners; as they had left their dead on more than one field of battle that had witnessed their defeat to be buried and their wounded to be cared for by Southern hands.
The reality: Great Britain managed to abolish slavery without civil war through compensated emancipation in 1833. The United States could have done the same thing. But there was no Henry Clay around in 1860 to propose this alternative. 👎
The radical abolitionists movements led to northern states passing gradual emancipation laws. The south on the other hand was facing abrupt emancipation that would create hardships to all people. This is why the Mississippi secession document says that emancipation does not offer a better condition for the slaves. Also Virginia state law required that the freed slave have a trade so they could survive. The southern states were denied gradual emancipation and to the detriment of the former slaves.
Your video analysis is incorrect. The federal government used slavery as a means to gain more power against the states. In reading the defined declarations of secession from the union, the southern states speak of government overreach into state and individual actions. Slavery was catalyst but years after the civil war ended the federal government created the 14th amendment making all " persons" ( who have sovereignty) citizens of a central federal government which don't. This is the classic case of Hamilton vs Jerfferson. Jefferson lost to a more powerful enemy, the federal government.
Really enjoyed the video up until the end. I would like to point out that slavery was a State right. Slavery was a Constitutionally protected institution. I would also like to point out that Abraham Lincoln never had any authority to end slavery. The only way to end slavery in the United States was the amendment process. The only way to end anything constitutionally protected is the amendment process. Presidents have nothing to do with the amendment process. I would also like to point out that Abraham Lincoln's comments are little different than the comments of the Vice President of the Confederate States of America. And Lincoln made it very clear he was absolutely 100% in favor of the Corwin amendment. An amendment whose purpose was to keep the institution of slavery lawful in the United States forever - FOREVER AND EVER! Below are the Corwin Amendment, Lincoln's response to the Corwin Amendment, and Lincoln confessing to being a white supremacist. Corwin Amendment "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State." March 2, 1861 Lincoln's opinion of the Corwin Amendment in his first inaugural address. "I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution which amendment, however, I have not seen has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."--Abraham Lincoln, first inaugural address Lincoln admitted he has no authority to end slavery - 22 months before his Emancipation Proclamation stunt. “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”--Abraham Lincoln, First Inaugural Address Lincoln professing his white supremacy. "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."--Abraham Lincoln, 1858 BONUS: Lincoln's opinions on secession - obviously influenced by the Declaration of Independence. "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right - a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much territory as they inhabit."- Abraham Lincoln, 12 January 1848 From the Declaration of Independence: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
The relative position of Whites and Blacks was not just held in the South but in the North and even by Lincoln himself. Slavery was legal and the South did not HAVE to secede. But even if Slavery were the primary reason for secession, it and you still do not explain why there was a War. Why did not the North just let the South go? The North entered the War to PRESERVE THE UNION, which is virtually entirely forgotten in today's cancel culture. The North set out to reclaim the South by conquest and subjugation, not unlike Imperial Rome or the Soviet Union, resulting in over 600k casualties. Slavery may have been the reason for secession but secession was the reason for the War. But perhaps the worst thing your video does is make Slavery solely the problem and fault of the South, and not the Nation as a whole. The USA inherited Slavery from England. Slavery was perpetuated by the Founding Fathers, by the Constitution and even by Lincoln. The notion that the North entered the war to "end Slavery" I call the second Lost Cause Myth.
So let me get this straight you decided to pick the only four Confederate States that said anything about slavery in their letters of secession and not the other nine that did not mainly Virginia. You also failed to mention the passing of the Corwin Amendment also the increase of the Morrill tariff by 35% due to the sinking of the SS Central America. You also mentioned the Cornerstone speech from Alexander Stephens but also failed to realize that he said it was his own interpretation of the drafting of the Confederate Constitution which clearly states the importation of new negro slaves was illegal. Also that slavery in the South was only >2%.
It was actually about 30 percent of all families, however the people who profited from it were the ones who "led the charge" on that front. Slavery was why the south left, and they also left because they disagreed with the election. Heck, it even states that the confederacy was based on the " truth that the white man is superior to the negro". I may have misremembered the smaller details, but you get the jist. The lost cause myth is such a pain to deal with sometimes, I believed in it for a good section of the time I was being educated.
The causes of Secession is not the cause of war. Secession causes were multiple and varied state to state but came down to self determined power over their own choices and direction. The cause of war however was the effort to prevent Secession. One can argue over causes of Secession...but no matter, the cause of war was only one...preventing Secession. And for that motivational cause none of it had to do w slavery but according to their own words was for a forced union to collect tax revenue and strengthen the central government.
it's not what is stated these days it's what in my opinion is left out which is important & intentionally left out to influence perception. you can't just read the secession documents & understand what the Southern States seceded for. The Declaration of Causes & South Carolina's Address to the Slave Holding States are more comprehensive of the reasons they seceded; representation, protective tariffs, distribution of revenue from tariffs to New England states, slavery & states rights vs central government authority over states. Every one calls out Alexander Stephens Corner Stone speech, excludes that Stephens is restating the language from Justice John Campbell when the Supreme Court struck down the Missouri Compromise.
New York paid bout 64% of the federal budget in the 5 years prior to the war. Yes, the South should have been paying more in taxes, which at the time were based on tariffs. Here's a real simple series of questions: if the Confederacy wasn't about slavery, why did the CSA bury General Patrick Cleburne, why did the CSA refuse prisoner exchanges involving black union soldiers, why did they refuse to arm black men, why did England and France refuse to support the Confederates, why did CSA units slaughter some black union units when they tried to surrender, why after the war did CSA members join textbook companies and schools to try to alter the historical record on the behaviors of the South, why did the Daughters of the Confederacy begin a propaganda campaign to try to rehab the stained image of their fathers, why did Union contemporaries at the time write about how the war was about slavery and they hoped that the historical record would preserve that truth, why was there an attempt to deify an incompetent Lee and lambaste Longstreet who was strategically and tactically correct in his assessment at Gettysburg?
@@RS-xx5md I ask the same style questions. Why did Northern states pass black codes? Why do they suppress that real reason the Wilmot Provisio restricting slavery in the territories was to prevent whites from competing for labor, David Wilmot’s own words. Why did the North use USCT for cannon Fodder? The north feels in its treasury of virtue feels its sin are exhonerated because of the emancipation & suppress the truth of its own racism. We can go down this rabbit hole, but just as the US government’s policy was to eradicate the native Americans the their policy was not only to free Africans, but to colonize them to South America. When that failed containment in the South. When did Northern States have their first African American in Congress, When did the South?
It' was a very difficult and complicated event , for sure. The States had the right to leave the Union no matter the reason. Slavery was but one issue. The Emancipation proclamation didn't free slaves under federal control and didn't have the authority to free slaves in the Southern States which was, and still should be, a separate country. We were forced back into the Union at gun point. So much for " conceived in liberty " Lincoln squashed that. So much for " this nation...shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people and for the people..." Lincoln squashed the fact that the Southern States seceded by vote and began a new government. Money, it was about tariffs etc. Educate yourselves. The school certainly y ain't going to tell you. If Lincoln had not sent troops into the South, then there would not have been a war and four Southern States probably would not have seceded. The war was not primarily about slavery. If the Emancipation proclamation freed the slaves why didn't he just free all of the slaves by executive order on the first day. An executive order of that magnitude is illegal. The 13th Amendment freed the slaves.
Wait so liberty matters for you but not for the enslaved? Weirdchamp argument to whine about liberty when you're literally supporting the side that fought exclusively to enslave other human beings. There's not constitutional provision for secession. New York paid about 64% of the entire Federal budget in the 5 years leading up to the civil war. The troops were already in the South on military bases established for those States protection, which the South attacked and disarmed. The war was absolutely about slavery, and the South's adherence to slavery wound up losing it the war when it rejected proposals from Patrick Cleburne, refused to do prisoner exchanges with black soldiers, slaughtered surrendering black units in some instances, and couldn't secure international support due to their backwards adherence to slavery which made the British and French populations uncomfortable and effectively ended any hope for international recognition or support from a Western power. The rush to Secession was directly correlated with slave holding status, and the reason the border states didn't join the South is because while they were technically slave holding states, they had the lowest populations of slave holders. Also, the State's rights argument completely falls apart because the slave holding states wanted the federal enforcement the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 which was later...........YOU GUESSED IT........ruled unconstitutional on the basis of state's rights. Next.
That's not what the Confederates themselves said. Confederate cavalryman John S. Mosby himself said in 1907: "The South went to war on account of Slavery. South Carolina went to war - as she said in her Secession proclamation - because slavery would not be secure under Lincoln."
It’s time to stop talking about slavery, no one today supports such a thing. The real issue is that if secession by the south was wrong then the secession of the 13 colonies from Britain was wrong. Every group of people should be free to govern themselves, no matter what institutions they support
![The Election of 1860 and SECESSION [APUSH Review Unit 5 Topic 7] Period 5: 1844-1877](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
