Debunking neo-confederate revisionist propaganda
Many southerners "claim" that that the civil war was not about slavery. However it must be remembered that the south were the aggressors, and therefore their claim that they were only defending themselves should at least hold up to some scrutiny. While the neo-confederates "claim" that they went to war over states rights, idea of state's rights is little more than a smokescreen to allow the obscuring of the idea that continuing an institution of racially based slavery is good policy (this is especially something to pay attention to with a "states rights" advocate, Ron Paul, in the reTHUGlican race).
In their declarations of independence, many states actually admitted that they went to war to save slavery, and in particular the slavery of the African-Americans. To wit:
Mississippi Declaration of Secession
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world.
and
[The north] advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.
Georgia secession document:
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America...with reference to the subject of African slavery.
The whole concept of States rights as a cause for secession was 100% tied to slavery. Anything else was heaped on after the fact.
The conscription of soldiers from every Confederate State and the supremacy Confederate courts gave to the Confederate Congress really strikes a chord against "states rights", when opposition party members in the Confederacy challenged the draft, as a formative cause of secession. That the draft in the South preceded the draft in the North, a fact noticeably absent from history textbooks, is rather telling as well.
...More to come later on!
= new reply since forum marked as read
