Jackson would have prevented the Civil War

It could easily be argued that the nullification crisis precipitated the events that led up to the Civil War. The result being a much more bloody conflict then would've been required had it been fought over tariffs.
 
Jarod said:
It could easily be argued that the nullification crisis precipitated the events that led up to the Civil War. The result being a much more bloody conflict then would've been required had it been fought over tariffs.
Click to expand...

Jackson was a southerner who defended slavery and owned slaves himself.

Jackson was the racist responsible for the Trail of a 1000 Tears.

Suggesting that he could have prevented the Civil War that happened 24 years after he left office and 16 years after his death is just as you've said .. incredibly stupid.
 
That's actually a valid question Trump ask on the Civil War. Why couldn't it have been avoided? That's pretty close to being a rhetorical question as, to state the obvious, it could have been avoided.

The U.S. With its many sovereign States, diverse geography and diverse peoples has had a political genius for compromise that has held us together as a nation. The Civil War is an example where that genius failed our nation completely as many compromises were available that could have prevented the war.

It's probably a fair assumption that Trumps view on Jackson and the Civil War is based on how Jackson handled the nullification crises. However there are some major differences between the nullification crises and the Civil War.

The cause of the nullification crises was tariffs. The cause of the Civil War was slavery, or more correctly, slavery expanding into the territories. Both were sectional disagreements. The tariffs that precipitated the nullification were intended to protect the nations developing industry, which it did, but it also harmed agriculture exports in the South. Having said that the tariffs were only opposed by half the Southern States.

On the other hand the abolition of slavery in the South at that time would have represented the largest transfer of property in human history as slaves represented a very large proportion of Southern wealth. It's unlikely that the Southern States would have simply given up that wealth.

In short the abolition of slavery, which was the cause of the Civil War, was a vastly larger political issue than tariffs and had Jackson tried a similar approach with the slavery issue it would have guaranteed war.

So in that respect Trump is wrong but Jackson's handling of the nullification crises in his time probably did prevent war.
 
Jarod said:
It could easily be argued that the nullification crisis precipitated the events that led up to the Civil War. The result being a much more bloody conflict then would've been required had it been fought over tariffs.
Click to expand...

From the standpoint that the States had the right to unilaterally nullify federal law or withdraw from the Union most definitely but the tariffs issue was not nearly of the scope that the slavery issue was to State the obvious.

However a Civil War over tariffs was unlikely as it had no where near the support of the Southern political establishment and it would have done nothing to address the slavery issue and would have mean two wars instead of one with the Civil War being just as bloody as it was a far larger issue than tariffs.
 
blackascoal said:
Jackson was a southerner who defended slavery and owned slaves himself.

Jackson was the racist responsible for the Trail of a 1000 Tears.

Suggesting that he could have prevented the Civil War that happened 24 years after he left office and 16 years after his death is just as you've said .. incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...
Agreed but his actions during the nullification crises probably did prevent war in his time...but not the Civil War.

However Trumps question that the Civil War could have been avoided is correct. It could have been...but not by Jackson.
 
Last edited:
Lincoln actually had a very acceptable compromise that would have prevented or stopped the Civil War of paying Southern slave owners for the loss of their chattel property. It would have cost orders of magnitude less than the war did.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Agreed but his actions during the nullification crises probably did prevent war in his time...but not the Civil War.

However Trumps question that the Civil War could have been avoided is correct. It could have been...but not by Jackson.
Click to expand...

It was never necessary for whites to enslave Africans in the first place .. thus, it could have been prevented by intelligence.

Trump would have defended slavery as property rights .. thus his argument is incredibly stupid.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
That's actually a valid question Trump ask on the Civil War. Why couldn't it have been avoided? That's pretty close to being a rhetorical question as, to state the obvious, it could have been avoided.

The U.S. With its many sovereign States, diverse geography and diverse peoples has had a political genius for compromise that has held us together as a nation. The Civil War is an example where that genius failed our nation completely as many compromises were available that could have prevented the war.

It's probably a fair assumption that Trumps view on Jackson and the Civil War is based on how Jackson handled the nullification crises. However there are some major differences between the nullification crises and the Civil War.

The cause of the nullification crises was tariffs. The cause of the Civil War was slavery, or more correctly, slavery expanding into the territories. Both were sectional disagreements. The tariffs that precipitated the nullification were intended to protect the nations developing industry, which it did, but it also harmed agriculture exports in the South. Having said that the tariffs were only opposed by half the Southern States.

On the other hand the abolition of slavery in the South at that time would have represented the largest transfer of property in human history as slaves represented a very large proportion of Southern wealth. It's unlikely that the Southern States would have simply given up that wealth.

In short the abolition of slavery, which was the cause of the Civil War, was a vastly larger political issue than tariffs and had Jackson tried a similar approach with the slavery issue it would have guaranteed war.

So in that respect Trump is wrong but Jackson's handling of the nullification crises in his time probably did prevent war.
Click to expand...
You just contradicted yourself.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Agreed but his actions during the nullification crises probably did prevent war in his time...but not the Civil War.

However Trumps question that the Civil War could have been avoided is correct. It could have been...but not by Jackson.
Click to expand...
Sure then any war could have been avoided.
Trump is an idiot and you know it.
 
It had to happen. you can't have a society where people enslave each other, or fragment into 2 separate counties.
I think slavery had to happen (stand) for Ratification - and the Civil War had to happen to correct that monstrosity.


One of the good things about the USA is it's ability to self-correct..
Not just slavery but voting rights, unions..things we need as a modernized egalitarian society.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top