How the American Civil War Happened - Road to the War

[@mikedorava7961]

One slight inaccuracy I wanted to point out only because I feel it is relevant; George Washington's last will and testament stated that his slaves were to be freed upon the death of his wife, Martha Washington. Martha, being an astute woman, recognized that this gave the slaves a vested interest in her death and promptly freed them. All in all, this was well done. I'm looking forward to the next episode.

[@Fepers24]

Martha 9999 IQ play

[@Akumasama]

@@Fepers24 Makes you wonder what Washington was thinking... but then again he wasn't a very good tactician, was he.

[@TheReaperEagle]

It was cut from the final script. The will said that Washington's valet Billy Lee was to be freed immediately. The rest of his slaves would be freed on Martha's death or her discretion, whichever came first. Martha freed them in 1801, and the Washington estate paid for some former slaves' care and education into the 1830's.

[@NolanDraconis]

Didn’t Washington also try to get one escaped slave back? Like knowing that it has been confusing me for some time on his complete view of slavery Could be just false information, but I don’t know

[@nicolausg7058]

Don't forget Kościuszko and his will to give all of his fortune to his slaves that he fred, so they could get education.

[@SauceFring]

It’s hard to create a sequence of facts and events like this thoroughly not just informative and enjoyable, but entertaining. I’m sure it ms really hard. Well done.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@richeybaumann1755]

14:50 There's a quote, likely apocryphal but certainly in keeping with the man's personality: "John Calhoun, if you secede from my nation I will secede your head from the rest of your body." He also said after leaving office that his only two regrets were that "I didn't shoot Henry Clay and I didn't hang John C. Calhoun."

[@TheReaperEagle]

Jackson definitely thought it pretty loudly. We know he did threaten Calhoun, but there's no proof that he actually said that quote.

[@bmoney2011]

@@marcpeterson1092 who else had a publicly scandalous falling out with John C. Calhoun, that was also mentioned in this video?

[@kylegates6043]

“American leaders repeatedly failed to diffuse the tensions” some things never change.

[@Keseleth]

In all fairness if tensions are of a structural character, the diffusion of them is going to take you only so far and if you try to actually change the structure then it is very likely lead to the open conflict with people who have vested interest in maintaining it.

[@stevenlake5278]

They Create the The chaos they don't want to diffuse it.

[@MMm-vx7uw]

I dont think the intended goal failed. I think it was successful. They did what they wanted. They recked the economy and started increasing their prices. Not one at a time. All at once. Just wait till you cant go shopping anyomre. Cause no one can afford food and everyone becomes a professional food theif. Lmao. And the weell equipped pyssy americans wilp do nothing. Not when their guns are confiscated. Not when they are reduced to slavery. But when the mother and children are tired of starving and start raiding the prisons and food depots themselves. A pure chaos. With no goal or target. Just locusts ready to eat. And they will be so hungry some will kill and eat each other. Why. Because theyre seems to be a population of 150 men in all of america. The rest are just spineless pretenders.

[@ArmyOfTennessee]

The American civil war was bound to happen with or without slavery. The South had a lot of militia groups more than anywhere else in the nation and the federal army was on high alert over it. Part of the reason confederate soldiers used grey is because a lot of militia groups did. In the Civil War one’s loyalty was to their state than their country

[@ArmyOfTennessee]

My Dad’s family didn’t emigrate from London, England until the Great Depression so I don’t feel any guilt and if I’m being honest because England ended slavery decades before the Americans did and had the Industrial Revolution and capitalism before the Americans did so it’s always been a game of catch up. I think Britain would have rocked America’s world if it wasn’t for Napoleon in 1812 being a distraction, and the French winning the American Revolutionary War but I digress

[@Anglomachian]

“Andrew Jackson never made an idle threat.” Too right. Guy was a nutter

[@dogsbecute]

my favorite andrew jackson fact is at his funeral, they had to remove his parrot because it was cursing too much.

[@grandadmiralzaarin4962]

So glad your channel is covering the lead up to, reasons for and the American Civil War itself. As a historian, it is also heartening to see the 'Lost Cause' myth being decisively disproved more regularly.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thank you!

[@ArmyOfTennessee]

Cool story bro, but I couldn’t care less. Some people do just fight for their country. The Union wasn’t any better, after all it displayed millions of Native Americans and hunted all their buffalo as a means to starve them. You really think the Union has the moral high ground 😂 God will dispute that I suppose.

[@ArmyOfTennessee]

The Union displayed millions of Native Americans during the Civil War in the western United States and stole their Gold and silver in California etc to fund their war of invasion

[@TheReaperEagle]

The Writer Here: I'll respond to any questions about the video here. Some details that didn't make the final script: 1) Washington felt particularly trapped by slavery, as he couldn't free all the slaves which worked Mt. Vernon. Over 300 worked for him, but he only owned 123 of them. The rest were from Martha's first marriage and were actually owned by the Curtis family. They were legally on loan to her until her death, at which time the Curtis' would get them back. Knowing they would be treated worse prevented Washington from giving them back early, despite him writing that he only needed 100 workers at Mt. Vernon after giving up on tobacco planting in favor of wheat farming. 2) Jefferson's attitude toward slavery is paradoxical. He tried to get rid of slavery in his lifetime while simultaneously working to hold onto all his slaves until his death. He might have been aware of the irony. 3) The Northwest Ordinance was one of the last things the Confederation Congress did before being replaced. Reaffirming it was one of Congress' first acts after the Constitution was ratified. 4) The early 20th Century saw the Napoleonic Wars, the Barbary States, a series of civil wars in the Ottoman Empire, and the Greek Independence War make Eastern Mediterranean trade very unreliable and dangerous. Trans-Atlantic trade was far safer, despite being further. 5) While William Walker's Nicaraguan adventures are the best-known and most successful filibustering expeditions, he was quite prolific and also launched coups in northern Mexico and Costa Rica. The most common target of other American filibusters was Cuba. 6) The Poli Sci lesson of the Tariff of Abominations is "never propose legislation unless you want it to pass." 7) Despite his hatred of Henry Clay, Jackson accepted his compromise because he'd been persuaded that actually marching on Charleston was a stupid idea. He'd have done it anyway because he never backed down, but he loved the union enough to give Clay a win and let the compromise go through. 8) While the Underground Railroad had been operating for some time, it's not clear how many slaves _actually_ successfully escaped pre-1850. Southern rhetoric makes it sound like a major threat to planters' livelihoods, but the actual evidence points to it being a minor annoyance for the upper South and barely a problem in the Deep South. Given how many slaves were being brought in through illegal smuggling, it's unlikely that escapees had any impact on the number of slaves. However, paranoia and fear blew it out of proportion in southern minds.

[@jesenjin8467]

A typo in point number 4. It should be 19th, not 20th century

[@davidrobertson2826]

Great details, would point out that Martha Washington’s family was the “Custis” family rather than “Curtis”

[@MollymaukT]

I sadly learned lesson 6 on Frostpunk 2

[@TheReaperEagle]

Yes. Wrote it on mobile and autocorrect doesnt like Custis

[@MrBatica123]

Why hadn't George Washington free his slaves before he died?

[@lucasalvarez8524]

i cannot express how excited i am to see Kings and Generals recount Sherman’s March to the Sea 🥹

[@theirisharchangel2766]

You guys really are godsends. Masterfully crafting this series of events into an interesting watch is amazing. This will never not be important. You all can never be thanked enough for how well you have covered such a pivotal part of our history here. Hats off to all of you and amazing work! It was so good I've now become a member. Keep up the great work!

[@jordancee6595]

So excited to see Kings and Generals tackle the American Civil war. Cant wait to see VTH's reaction series as well. No way he skips this

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@legacyvaultchannel]

The nuanced perspective on figures like Washington and Jefferson shows how deeply conflicted the Founding Fathers were about slavery. Amazing content!

[@michaelrredford]

Thanks!

[@Volkmargrim]

Incredible that the way the colonies were organized 200 years prior lead to the civil war, not to mention the obvious climate difference which manifested differing economies. Ive even heard the population and North/South divide mirrored the English civil war after their families/descendants left to America.

[@dazai_.992]

Most of the northerners were descendants of the Anglo-Saxon Puritans, while the southerners were descendants of the Norman conquerors.

[@chasechristophermurraydola9314]

I can’t wait to see the next episode as my guess is that it will include bloody Kansas, The Dread Scott decision and John browns raid on Harpers Ferry.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Yep

[@chillin5703]

One of of the worst supreme court rulings. Probably still the worst, but they've been fighting for a new selection as of late...

[@Imatrollwhofucksyourmom]

John broooooooown

[@mattries37315]

@@JoshuaKevinPerry No, Dred Scott vs. Sanford (1857) said American citizenship did not extend to those of African descent and is considered the worst decision in Supreme Court history. The case you're thinking about is Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) which established "separate but equal" and became arguably the second worst decision in Supreme Court history.

[@chillin5703]

@@JoshuaKevinPerry the case you're thinking of is Plessy, and you are misremembering it. A Black activist group attempted to get segregation ruled illegal by creating an incident on a train where a white passing black man was kicked off the train, so they could challenge the practice. The court ruled that "separate but equal" did not violate the civil rights acts of the 1870s, which were supposed to guarantee black Americans legal equality, thus legitimizing Southern Segregation and enabling Jim Crow.

[@iluvtriggeringpeople7]

Im a Dad who, along with Mom, homeschools Our Daughter. I use Your videos for a good "summary/starting point" for History subjects! THANK YOU SO MUCH GOODSIR 🙏🏽

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks for watching. Not my place to advise anything, but you are 100% correct in only using this as a summary.

[@iluvtriggeringpeople7]

@@KingsandGenerals Indeed! I've always tried to instill into Her, that You can never obtain information from just one source. WE really do love Your channel though! Keep up the GREAT work. Shout out to You n all tha magnificent people behind the scenes, Goodsir! We have to try and keep the Youth knowledgeable about ALL THINGS. Knowledge is power! "Those who stand for nothing, fall for anything" -Alexander Hamilton

[@MollymaukT]

This video is pretty much 20 minutes of Southern slave-owners shooting themselves in the foot

[@Rafterman955]

Not really, they made two big political blunders over the course of about a century, while abolitionists made plenty of their own. I'm not surprised that someone with a purple anime elf profile picture would choose to interpret events that way though.

[@blackflagsnroses6013]

@@Rafterman955their first blunder was relying on a slave economy

[@Sceptonic]

​@@Rafterman955touche

[@metaflight9495]

American history is sucessive generatioms of southerners shooting themselves in the foot.

[@augustosolari7721]

​@@blackflagsnroses6013apart of the morally obvious, how so? The became extremely Rich for decades. They had the war, but retained their priviliges for generations after that. Banks and railroads Also profited from the institution. Sometimes bad guys win.

[@Luisjoseglobal]

Been watching you guys for years, just became a member!! It would be a dream if you can do a video on Dominican War of Independence, very interesting history .

[@Jay-jb2vr]

Yes, slavery had as much to do with the Civil War as Adolf Hitler had with WW2. This is long-standing common knowledge and should not be shunned, ignored, covered up, or lied about 💯

[@zerk813]

Not a great comparison but it’s also a generalization. Slavery was more like the underlying foundation on alot of separate issues. These being the national bank, tariffs, congressional representation and industrialization. The Republican sentiment under Lincoln in the Lincoln Douglas debates regarding slavery was basically the straw the broke the camel back. A better comparison would be slavery was like the Treaty of Versailles not Hitler. I’m not saying you are doing this but I get quite irritated at the notion of slavery being the only issue of the Civil War. I mean what issue in history can really be boiled down to one singular issue, not many imo.

[@alamedaslim9438]

The "Good guys" wouldn't even allow black men to lead whites

[@Jay-jb2vr]

@zerk813 OK what exactly are YOU saying because my comment wasn't wrong. Sounds like you're trying to deflect or downplay the significance of slavery. Lots of people do that, for some strange reason..

[@alamedaslim9438]

Let's not forget the "good guys" didn't even allow black men into leadership positions over their caucasian counter-parts

[@guilhermeSilva-mg8kv]

​No, he is only being rational, i am not even american but i studied and there was a lot of reasons for the north-south divide​@@Jay-jb2vr

[@lkgrave4959]

Like I commented before: You cannot demand your freedoms while denying fellow Americans theirs simultaneously.

[@francisdotso8594]

They didn't

[@tjwhitley5284]

@@francisdotso8594 They did

[@flackstar007]

Bingo and nothing has really changed. For instance when one person does not want to wear a mask but in turn says what another person can or can not do with their body the hypocrisy is bluntly obvious. Yet such people will deflect and deny this obvious reality for it's in their vested interest to be the ones who can have it both ways and as long as they believe it's possible to do this or are allowed to coin up excuses for their double standards they will continue to reject any notion of them being in the wrong on the matter and become more aggressive against those who would point out their moral wrong doings.

[@somethingmoredecent]

They didn't see them as fellow Americans, otherwise they would have. That's the whole point.

[@lkgrave4959]

@somethingmoredecent A lot of slave owners didn't even see them as Human.

[@georgeprchal3924]

The Simpsons episode where Apu takes his citizenship exam: Proctor: Name the cause of the Civil War. Apu: There were several contributing factors; the Missouri Compromise, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, growing support for abolition... Proctor: Just say slavery. Apu: Slavery it is Sir. (Pass) Apu: Hooray I am a citizen!

[@KingsandGenerals]

Well, if Simpsons are saying it, then it is true

[@nickyman5557]

@@georgeprchal3924 all of those things have to do with slavery

[@georgeprchal3924]

​@@nickyman5557yeah that's the joke.

[@Juinor]

love this !!!!!

[@Fordo007]

@@nickyman5557 Someone saying the cause of the Civil War as just 'slavery' has the same feel to it in Sunday School when the teacher asks a student a theology question and they just say 'Jesus'. You aren't wrong but the simplicity of the answer leaves much to be desired if you actually understand the concept.

[@jasperzanjani]

a video like this would've made social studies much more interesting in junior high

[@theawesomeman9821]

I usually am weary of Non-American KZbinrs covering American history but I am very impressed by this video and could not find any historical inaccuracies. I give this video an "A+".

[@tjwhitley5284]

They have Americans who work on the team too

[@MrPunkbeto]

Imagine Non-Americans that have to endure American Youtbers commenting about stuff outside USA ;-)

[@bkhai1041]

If we can't even agree on what the Confederacy fought for, being an American, talking about American history, then it doesn't mean all that much. We don't live in the 4th century anymore, learning about another country's history is not some difficult and life-long journey, anyone can do it, from anywhere, you just gotta care a little. The hard part is knowing the truth from the lies, case-in-point, the Confederate States explicitly wrote that they seceded because of slavery, yet some people today will try to say that they didn't.

[@anthonyfrench3169]

This was an amazing and well thought out video. Your team were able to really dive into some detail, that as an American wasn't aware i.e. Washington and his view on slavery and all in around 20 minutes...that's awesome!!

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@usapatriot4163]

As a life-long Kansan, I eagerly await the next the next episode!

[@patsfreak]

My friend once went on a school trip to Missouri and ran into some kids and went, “Hey, we’re from Maine, we’re kinda sibling states.” They had no idea what she was talking about

[@PeteMoss-zf6tx]

Why should they?

[@patsfreak]

@@PeteMoss-zf6tx I mean the Missouri compromise is right here in this video. I don’t know what to tell you.

[@Aerostarm]

@@patsfreakthat is not remotely obvious

[@Sceptonic]

Would make more sense if it was Maine and Massachusetts seeing as Massachusetts once had Maine

[@patsfreak]

@@Sceptonic Massachusetts is our alcoholic Dad who likes to harass us every summer with his sense of moral superiority.

[@yourbuddyunit]

The biggest crime of public education, is being totally unable to get this kind of focus on the civil war from INSIDE America. The single greatest lesson of this conflict and it was no where near a grade school textbook. Thanks guys!

[@HistoryandOtherStuffwithBV]

7:31 I probably already said that in the comment section of a previous video, but I still can't help but be reminded of the tragic irony that Eli Whitney, the inventor of the cotton gin, the invention that prolonged slavery's lifetime in the US, earnestly believed that his invention would hasten the end of slavery in the US. 18:12 - 21:00 Lmfaooooooo. They self-fulfilling prophecied themselves into a corner.

[@tomredd9025]

It is my understanding that Eli Whitney was also instrumental in developing the earliest techniques of mass production and an assembly line of interchangeable parts, especially with rifles. This was called, "The American System." This system was used by the Union to produce its much more numerous (than the South) weapons and other military equipment. So, while Eli Whitney helped inadvertently bring on the Civil War, he also helped win it for the Union.

[@ericnetterstrom8050]

Nobel had the same idea about inventing dynamite ending the need for wars as it would become too costly in lives to fight anymore.

[@rampaginwalrus]

Crazy to remember that our grandparents could have personally known and talked to people who lived during the civil war.

[@mahdmahmud9776]

About the ACS: it had very little support to begin with. For the most part, abolitionists and slave-owners alike would mostly oppose it, the former did not want to force people to a land they had never lived in and the latter did not want the idea of a haven for their slaves. The idea of the ACS was that these freed-black men would not be fully accepted in the US, and would perhaps have a better life in their "homeland". The earlier ACS expeditions were failures with many dying. Surprisingly, even after the conclusion of the Civil War, the ACS continued to function for a few decades. ACS would lead to the birth of Liberia. Source: I worked on this for a video project in college. Apologies for errors. Please feel free to correct me.

[@thechosenone1533]

Ironically, the African Americans set themselves up as a minority ruling class over a majority African population. They were an elite and practiced a form of segregation similar to that in the American South.

[@angusyang5917]

And in a sad twist of fate, the former slaves who managed to get to Liberia and survive the diseases there ended oppressing the native African population for over a century until 1980, after which Liberia was plunged into over two decades of brutal civil war.

[@suriahsuriah2043]

Just this week, I have watch Ulysses S Grant documentary

[@saidtoshimaru1832]

"He was a slave owner, but he felt really, rally bad about it". Come on!!!

[@301MG]

right, like i doubt he REALLY felt like that lol

[@AFree1Month]

i don't.

[@saidtoshimaru1832]

@@AFree1Month I suspected Donald Duck to be a slave owner. After all, it was created by Walt Di***y.

[@okami425]

​@@301MG I'm not an expert, but it's my understanding, that there were legal reasons involved. They weren't allowed to just free their slaves. Best they could was treat them as like family as they could. Which people certainly did, as well as others treat them inhumanely. Wealthy people treat their live in staff like family all the time. Taking them on trips with them, paying for their school, and buying them stuff.

[@dr.johnwhalen9348]

Terrific! This is my favorite period of history.

[@bluebubbadog2080]

It's interesting how you dont learn about Washington wanting to end, only how he owned slaves. Thanks for talking about that

[@stevenmugnaini2938]

???? i learned about it in school. do you happen to live in the bible belt?

[@bkhai1041]

​@Ben-ek1fz I prefer the back of a cereal box, it helps me feel smart when I solve the puzzle.

[@strategygamemike]

Love that you are jumping into one of my favorite history periods. Looking forward to more!

[@milesgarrett4096]

Ive been waiting for this to be a series for a while now. Im very excited you should do it day by day like the pacific war series.

[@andreaslindahl9687]

It's better to make more episodes based on the specific months! Or you could make an episode based on different campaigns!

[@thehungarian7930]

Just started and i already love it! I'd like to thank in the name of everyone for such content :)

[@georgekokkos5347]

Fascinating arguments. Barvo!

[@KHK001]

Another amazing video as always KnG!

[@ocirontariocryptidinvestig8010]

my family had to flee south Carolina for Ontario Canada when our plantation was burned and most of the land confiscated. my grandfather and his father always called it the war of northern aggression its interesting to hear an outsiders take on what happened.

[@KingsandGenerals]

I hope you are more introspective than your ancestors

[@ocirontariocryptidinvestig8010]

@@KingsandGenerals I know it was all about slavery now in my 30s but when I was a kid and a teen I was convinced it was about northern aggression and slavery being a secondary cause.

[@MichaelMansi-is4pc]

South Carolina is an eerie place. Just drenched in history. Most of it dark and sad, but the history is there and demands to be acknowledged.

[@Ewout578]

Great. Please include the Wide Awakes (and also their dark, Know Nothing origins) in episode II or III.

[@GoatTheGoat]

5:19 The Vermont was the first to outlawed slavery when the Vermont constitution was ratified in 1777. Though at that time Vermont was an independent Republic. Not a state.

[@paskberger1152]

Good work, cant wait to see the ''serie'' on Civil war. I presume that the Americain Revolution of 8 episode is completed? I watched up to 5 but others priority come up. If so i will make a Marathon in the next few weeks on it.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Yep, it is completed, with a long video coming up

[@ronjohnson6916]

Nice short introduction to a complex topic.

[@emmet3219]

Wow, this came out just as I was starting to get interested inthe civil war! Thanks!

[@SouthernSlaveryUncovered]

It's easy to forget the horrors of slavery when we watch historical videos like this, but we can't gloss over how terrible the institution and the society built around it in the Antebellum South really was.

[@ItzJustHistory1916]

As an Iowan I was appalled to see how horrifyingly off-center the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers were on the maps in the video. Iowa’s Eastern and Western borders are almost perfectly aligned with those two rivers, so to see the Missouri hardly touching Iowa and the Mississippi cutting off fully 1/4 of the Eastern part of the state was jarringly noticeable

[@Findinavia]

I don’t know if I really buy Washington’s defense to him not emancipating his slaves. Sure it was illegal to free the slaves, but it was also illegal to rebel against the king. The punishment was significantly worse for rebelling than whatever punishment Virginia could come up with to punish Washington for freeing the slaves. What was Virginia going to do? Arrest the hero of the Revolution for freeing slaves? That would have made things much worse. It sounds like Washington saw the hypocrisy of slavery but still wanted to maintain it, for what reason he may have wanted to keep his slaves we will never know

[@TheReaperEagle]

Two General Reasons: 1) Rebelling against a distant tyrant was easy. Rebelling against Virginia? His home? That was something Washington and most other Americans couldn't countenance. While it's hard to imagine today, back then you were a citizen of your state first, an American citizen second. The laws of America were easier to criticize and/or defy than your home state's laws. 2) You're right that had he just freed them Washington wasn't going to suffer legal consequences (probably, anyway). However, he was never going to openly defy the law, any law. Especially post-presidency. If the father of the country thumbed his nose at the law, what kind of example would that set? That's how you get anarchy and disunion.

[@travisryan847]

You gotta think about/ remember it is easier to rebel against the king of England not only because of how far away he is and because of how much of a tyrant he was towards the colonists but because they were rebelling to build something new, to build a country for themselves. But rebelling against what you just fought a bloody war to make isn’t that easy. He definitely knew rebelling against virgina would tear everything they fought for and built since ,apart. And there is no doubt if he did rebel is would have weakened the country so much that outside intervention would have been possible. Case in point our civil war, look how many foreign empires were involved during it , yes they didn’t send military aid but Britain and France still both help supply the south. The difference is if it happened earlier like during Washington time our country wasn’t established enough yet, part of our country definitely would of fell under one or more different empire again, just because the unity of being there own country was still new and not everyone thought it would work. Atleast during the civil war time the unity of not being apart of a foreign empire and being their own country/ even if it was 2 separate countries was way more established

[@theforcedmeme]

Maintaining the institution was a compromise to Maintain the union becausethe prevailing theory at the time was that slavery would gradually fade away. This was the case right until Eli Whitney invents the cotton gin. Though we need to specify the institution of slavery was primarily a southern one as the nothern states abolished the practice by the time of the war of 1812

[@B.V.Luminous]

Apparently, Virginia and other southern states interested in keeping slavery alive would turn to Civil War instead of freeing their slaves, so I suppose your question is the first stupid question in all of history. Record this day.

[@theotherohlourdespadua1131]

Also to add here, slaves - being property - have monetary worth and represent a considerable part of his estate. By the 1850's, slaves constitute roughly 80% of any big plantation owner's wealth (they are more valuable than either the land or the animals that are in the plantation). Owning more than 100 slaves at any one time makes their owners the richest of their states by mere possession alone. That is why the Fugitive Slave acts were enforced with such devotion: those slaves are literal assets running away from their owners...

[@Squiddysquid]

Great video! Wish this version was taught in schools!

[@k.a.2253]

Dredd Scott being present even before his time

[@DoctorXProducer]

Was looking for this comment. Thank you for pointing this out

[@Onthejazz247]

Really good episode. I presume later episodes in this series will be more battle focused on the k&g style, but seeing this series get at least 3 episodes on causes and background and more of the sociopolitical groundwork is great

[@KingsandGenerals]

Yep

[@Patriciaball-rp1jz]

One of my favourite things to do on K&G videos is scrolling to the bottom section of the comments and seeing how BASED K&G is towards idiots who think they’re the best

[@KingsandGenerals]

We do love a little comment section tussle

[@SlippyBiz]

Based or biased?

[@johnevergreen8019]

@@SlippyBizbased

[@eamonreidy9534]

Based ​@@SlippyBiz

[@josephwait7384]

"The industrial revolution was gaining steam" haha. I see what you did there. Clever boi.

[@xcw4934]

It's wild that Virginia didn't allow a slave owner to free his slaves. Even the ancient Romans let owners free their slaves if they so wished. As much as I find slavery itself abhorrent, I'm doubly offended that the government imposed itself on how a man could treat his property and not for humanitarian reasons.

[@lettucearsebiscuits8375]

That's because slavery is a catch-all term for many types of human servitude. Many people in the ancient days entered into "slavery" willingly so they could be fed and housed. The Atlantic slave trade was forced upon the blacks.

[@xcw4934]

@@lettucearsebiscuits8375 But the idea of not letting someone free his slaves in an era no one gave a damn about the life and wellbeing of slaves is like telling me I can't wear socks with sandals. I mean sure you're crazy if you want to but should we really have laws stopping people doing what they want to do with their own property if it's not hurting anyone?

[@lettucearsebiscuits8375]

@@xcw4934 You answered your own question. Nobody gave a damn about their health and wellbeing.

[@XandateOfHeaven]

Much Southern thinking in this era needs to be understood in the context that their greatest fear was a Haitian style slave revolt, in which free black people played a large but complicated role. They saw free black men as a threat.

[@Abdus_VGC]

I would wait keenly for your video on Battle of Gettysburg and Chickamauga, the two bloodiest battle of American Civil War

[@snowflakeprince]

This video needs to be used in schools in the US and everywhere! Thank you so much!!

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@alemander_01]

I am so looking forward to this series. This is going to be epik!

[@williamcarter1993]

I love this video. There's no varnish or pretext, just southerners and their slave economy and how they slowly destroyed themselves. and the animations are so, so good

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@Nathan-vt1jz]

Great job covering the topic!

[@OnePunchHam]

Nothing gets a civil war in the comments going quite like a video on the American Civil War

[@KingsandGenerals]

You'd think so, but check the previous video. That comment section was super fun.

[@DistantLights]

This civil war series will be great!

[@Algenro]

Haitian Revolution next please

[@stevenmugnaini2938]

bruh, we still have the entire civil war to hash out. youre gonna be waiting a longass time

[@kaiserjoe2316]

Looking forward to more of this. Like many others here I found the series by Ken Burns very moving. In terms of books I can heartily recommend the author Bruce Catton. Brilliant Channel.

[@tategarrett3042]

I'm currently trying to debunk the lost-cause myth that a few friends of mine hold to - key points of contention include that the tarrifs and taxes levied on slavery in the south were "unconstitutional" but I doubt that. Does anyone have resources on this and other sources showing that the reason for southern secession was slavery?

[@alexsantosfigueroa9946]

@tategarrett3042 Yes if you look up Checkmate Lincolnite series. They do a deep dive into slavery and the civil war. Some jokes are made and it's still a great source with alot of evidence. It's on KZbin

[@tategarrett3042]

@@alexsantosfigueroa9946 Oh I have seen most of those - I guess he probably links some of his sources in the videos too maybe? What I need is primary source-type stuff since these guys I'm talking to would likely disregard Atun-Shei as being biased, especially due to the slant and humor in his videos. Good resource for primary sources though I'd bet.

[@zerk813]

@@tategarrett3042 here is the problem trying to argue it that way. Most of the economic “sanctions” of the south were relatively aggressive and objectively harmful to the south. Hence why people try and use them when justifying why the south pushed succession. For instance go look at the nullification crisis it’s a prime example of where this narrative got its roots. The best way to really argue against it is to show why these polices were put in place to start. It was all about representation in congress in relation to slave state status. The North wanted to curb the political clout of slave holding state politicians. As such they put in place policy that was meant to cut them at their knees and keep the abolitionist north politically in power. Now is that WRONG?? 🤷🏼‍♂️ For me, I think it was objectively a good thing to do. Tariffs which was the main way they targeted the south was within bounds of the constitutional powers of congress as listed in the first articles of the constitution. On top of that it was a moral duty of the north to try and uphold as best they can the moral promise of the nation. It’s literally the reason Lincoln got elected just go look at the Lincoln Douglas debates. So the question to ask your friends is why is what the north did “justify succession”?? Economic policy regarding trade and tariffs were and still are constitutional. Even if they disproportionally impact a section of the economy. In reality the south had no legal justification for succession it simply was a issue of cultural economic stratification that spanned over many issues all tied together nicely by the institutions of Textiles and Slavery.

[@tategarrett3042]

@@zerk813 Thank you for that. Any sources on any of your points are appreciated so I can use them/give them to others. This is similar to the point I was making to them - absolutely the tarrifs had a big effect in the south, but that is because the industries being tarriffed (to my knowledge) were regionally located in the south. As such the tarrifs themselves weren't wrong because they weren't saying "the southern states will pay 30 percent taxes but the North only has to pay 10 percent" or something like that. And the fact that the taxes had such an impact is just a further illustration of how deeply slavery had become rooted in the south and that it was not going to fade or die a natural death. Especially sources showing the constitutionality of the taxes/tariffs as that is one of their biggest arguments - that the mere fact of the tariffs affecting the south more than the north makes them unconstitutional.

[@Rinzler511]

If you cannot organically support your own argument, and must beseech strangers on the internet to make your argument for you, perhaps you need to re-examine your own position.

[@michaelstone5298]

Very interesting thank you but I thought you made a series on the American civil war like 3 or 4 years ago?

[@michaelstone5298]

Probably the most well-researched and unbiased views of this very complex, hotly debated and often misrepresented, part of History. Thank you very much.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@michaelstone5298]

@@KingsandGenerals you are very welcome sorry for not being on much lately, I had a kidney stone 🪨😖and issues with my TV

[@KingsandGenerals]

@@michaelstone5298 get well soon

[@michaelstone5298]

@@KingsandGenerals thank you very much! 👍🏻👍🏿👍👍🏾👍🏼 I seem to be getting better.

[@joshhoffman1975]

Great video, thanks! 🎉❤😃

[@Joshua-yf5mh]

Don't think I knew that it was the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act that turned the North from apathic to hostile towards slavery.

[@KingsandGenerals]

It basically made the northern states active participants in the practice. One can ignore passive participation in evil, we all often do, but when it becomes active, we are forced to make a choice.

[@dogsbecute]

Well yeah, i cant imagine it going down too well forcing northerners to try and discern slaves from "freedmen", let alone actual northern black people that were never a part of slavery to begin with. Imagine, selling a hat to some black kid for a nickel, and then you get beat up by the police for aiding a suspected slave? Fk off, people shouldnt be owned to begin with, and now youre forcing me to report potential slaves or i can get fined/jailed? Because the south is too backwards and morally bankrupt? Good thing the north governments scoffed at the notion and didnt enforce it, as a big F U to the south

[@XandateOfHeaven]

Something I don't think its talked about enough that clears up a lot of confusion is the fact most of the immediate conflict was about the expansion of slavery and not its abolition. It explains why Lincoln was willing to make concessions to keep slavery in the South, and why Northerners who held racist views were willing to fight the South over the issue.

[@sankarchaya]

good to see only one lost cause comment here ... its interesting to think that the Mex-American war might not have happened without the controversies over slavery. They needed more land for slave states, and Texas's rebellion that would create the eventual causes for the war was motivated in no small part by the desire to own slaves, while slavery had already been abolished in Mexico. Its worth asking why they immigrated to Texas in the first place knowing that.

[@TheReaperEagle]

We are going to do that one down the line. To answer your question, the Mexican government invited them. They wanted to settle Texas, but didn't want to lose Mexican citizens to Commanche raids. Inviting in Americans with their guns, and letting them keep their slaves, worked perfectly. Until Mexico City reneged on a lot of promises they made.

[@sankarchaya]

@@TheReaperEagle I am familiar with that part of the story I just think it’s interesting that the Anglo settlers moved to Mexico while not wanting to follow Mexico law then rebelled when they didn’t like the laws in Mexico.

[@Rafterman955]

@@sankarchaya Seems like you are intentionally misreading them. Mexico invited American settlers with a number of promises, one being that they would be allowed to keep their slaves. When Mexico went back on several of its promises, took a more authoritarian stance on Texas and on governance in general, backed up by leadership from an intensely unpopular and dictatorial Santa Anna, you get the Texas Revolution. Worth noting too Santa Anna's government was so unpopular domestically that there were not-insignificant numbers of Mexicans in the Texan revolutionary forces.

[@sankarchaya]

@@Rafterman955 i think if you view depriving slaveowners of the rights to own slaves is "authoritarian", you're telling on yourself. If there's ever a promise worth breaking, it would be the promise to let a slaveowner keep his slaves. Santa Anna was a profoundly flawed individual and I know well his role in Mexican history. That doesn't change the fact that the Texas rebels were mad that the Mexican government didn't want them owning slaves and were refusing to live under the laws of the very country they moved to.

[@Rafterman955]

​@@sankarchaya As I suspected, you are just trying to virtue-signal and accuse anyone who disagrees of being pro-slavery. I am a half-Black half-Asian man myself, so you can guess what my personal views on slavery are. The fact of the matter is that Mexico explicitly promised Americans settling in Texas that they would be allowed to keep their slaves. When they reneged on this, and a number of other promises, it contributed to the overall authoritarian stance the Mexican government was adopting, alienating many Texans as well as Mexicans.

[@ArmchairFilmCritic]

Another great video. I recently became a subscriber, and looking forward to other great videos on this and other topics - especially the war of 1812.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@matthewslentz5481]

14:45 Rare Jackson W

[@rocistone6570]

I still find Clark Gable's line from the film version of "Gone with the Wind" (1939) to be so fitting. "All the South has is Cotton, Slaves and Arrogance."

[@nugsnjugs9954]

Meanwhile my college professor insisted it was about states rights and even marked me down for checking slavery.

[@Nathan-vt1jz]

Really? How could they possibly come to that conclusion?

[@BreweryDuke]

As an historian and archaeologist by profession I’m very curious to hear why your professor would pursue such a factually unsupported lesson plan. 🤔

[@nugsnjugs9954]

@@BreweryDuke not sure either, he had a very propagated view of history

[@ericgrider4]

Maybe not so much state's rights but more about equal representation. Ive heard that Lincoln won the election without a single vote from the south, although i find it hard to belive not one vote was cast for him but you get the point.

[@nugsnjugs9954]

@@ericgrider4 yeah I think my professor made that point, which loosely is true but missing a lot of context. The issue why the south didn't vote for him was 100% because of Lincoln's stance on slavery, despite not really calling for emancipation until well into the war.

[@YorkGod1]

One of the best things to come out of the American Civil War is the Music! oooo I do love to sing Songs from that era!!!

[@barbiquearea]

George Washington implored Jefferson to free his slaves, and Jefferson initially fully intended to. But as this video points out, once importation of slaves was banned, the holding of slaves became more profitable. Jefferson literally did the math and decided the money was more worth it to him than giving freedom (the ideal that he publicly espoused so often) to the over 600 souls that he enslaved.

[@ScrogginHausen]

He couldn't later in life since he was so much in debt and the slaves were considered by the banks to be part of the estate.

[@Scorv2112]

Evidence?

[@dr.yogendrasinghthakur2874]

From Bharat with a big thank you for such informative videos.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks for watching!

[@Johnny-bm7ry]

The Civil War was about states' rights. A states's right to own slaves!

[@patgray5402]

It was about a state's rights to secede, which they were absolutely correct on.

[@chrisbabbage4004]

​@patgray5402 Nice try it was all about owning slaves state's rights don't come into it

[@soulknife20]

​@@patgray5402Where is this in the Constitution?

[@humbleherald2163]

@@patgray5402There was neither a constitutional basis nor a legal precedent that allowed states to withdraw from the Union. Once a legal body (the state governments) entered the Union, the implied and now cemented result was perpetual adherence to that system.

[@MichaelMansi-is4pc]

@@patgray5402 Andrew Jackson among others strongly disagree with you.

[@GeorgeFrancis-dq8hu]

Thank you for this! 🇨🇱🇺🇸🇮🇳🇬🇧

[@jeffcordova9633]

And to think there Americans who still believe in the lost cause not slavery … even over 260 years later

[@houm7571]

Awesome content ❤

[@SpoopySquid]

States' rights to do what?

[@aagelman80]

Looking forward to the next installment.

[@creauspssrb627]

The big WHAT IF in the civil war is that if france and UK decided to intervene and help the south, this would have been a different timeline

[@zombieoverlord5173]

True, but it's also completely unrealistic

[@theforcedmeme]

I have to disagree on this one, but that depends on what we mean by intervention. The only way the CSA comes out on top is direct military intervention from Europe, which would never happen. Other than that the CSA did not have the bodies, logistics, or the economy to wage a war of attrition despite their early war victories

[@darbyohara]

Yes. The south would have seceded and become the CSA basically from Virginia and the mason dixon line south The the south needed was the help of a foreign navy to open up their ports and the balance of power would have swing towards peace. After the first couple years the north was against the war as they kept losing badly

[@joshuafrimpong244]

The likeliness of that is near zero

[@sarpyasar5893]

That would have been politically to awkward and it could have caused an uproar in the international community since Britain declared wars or send ultimatums on people who practiced slavery, supporting them now would have caused a formation of an international opposition and even an internal opposition against them. For France its even more interesting since France was occupied with an intervention in Mexico at the time but due to geopolitical reasons they wouldn’t dare to intervene without Britain.

[@bkos1917]

Traitors gonna be traitors. Nothing has changed

[@garrettmozley3312]

Well done, sir

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@uria3679]

The south can barley manage its prisons, it had no chance at managing a country

[@TrueXyrael]

Brilliant video, love it.

[@KingsandGenerals]

Thanks!

[@nohbuddy1]

Reminder they could not like slavery as much as they claimed but they still beat, raped, and killed slaves. There were no benevolent slave owners because that's an oxymoron

[@tomredd9025]

Thank you. This is very done. A little trivia tidbit. The rather short, Stephen Douglas, who was well intentioned but helped bring on the Civil War by the Kansas Nebraska Act earlier had courted a beautiful young lady by the name of Mary Todd. In the end, Mary chose another suiter, a tall lanky lawyer from Springfield, Illinois by the name of Abraham Lincoln. In the 1860 presidential election, Douglas and Lincoln ran against each other. Lincoln won and of course saved the Union, but Douglas supported him and the Union. History can be strange!

[@jonjonsson4270]

I had a racist teacher in elementary school that tried so hard to frame the civil war in terms of states' rights and not slavery. Something tells me he's had a tough, rage-filled life since then.

[@Moonthroughtheglass]

My on editorial comment would be about the openings "civil war wasn't inevitable" comment. You do a great job of laying out how the roots of the conflict go back to the constitution, but your video undermines the what if question by thoroughly showing how the game theory consequences of the South policies led to the war

[@Philip_of_Santos]

Checkmate Lincolnites!!! 😂

[@richardtabor8686]

Ty for the content. Keep up the great work.

[@Imperator6209]

Saying slavery was the the cause of the civil war is quite laughable rather it was the cultural, livelihood, and moral differences between the north and south which allowed slavery to exist in the first place

[@KingsandGenerals]

What moral difference?

[@Imperator6209]

@@KingsandGenerals the peoples that would make up the northern and southern states where from different backgrounds pre America Southerns where often more wealthy and more connected to the British crown they had no problem with purchasing war captives from African tribes and then working them as slaves while the north was often made up of people's with stronger religious beliefs and immigrants

[@Imperator6209]

@@KingsandGenerals but if you mean the specific moral difference thinking it's okay to own people says a lot about an individual, northerns thought it was wrong Southerns thought it okay and even a god given right

[@KingsandGenerals]

@@Imperator6209 so it was about slavery?

[@Imperator6209]

@@KingsandGenerals the south started the war to force the north to terms, Lincoln wanted to restore the union

[@Blindvanish]

As a Missouri native, I felt a lot of nostalgia for the study of state history from junior high, and look forward to the discussion of Bleeding Kansas. If you think that rivalry between Missouri and Kansas is over you are sorely mistaken, although it is luckily confined to college sports these days (mostly). The map of Missouri bothered me though, with Kansas City being placed too far north, and St Louis not being at the confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers. However the river placement itself might be off a bit, as the Missouri river seems too far north, or perhaps not at the proper angle.

[@urluelhurl]

If you're American and don't know how our civil war starts, then you shouldn't be voting

[@Bear15780]

Then all the illegals couldn't vote, and the democrats would lose

[@adamfrazer5150]

Many thanks for covering this 👍

[@CaptainTexas92]

Okay so here’s the thing, we have an industrial nation that hinges on production for Europe in the 1700’s and 1800’s. The northern United states fall heavily into manufacturing metal, textiles, and banking sectors. The south on the other hand is heavily dependent on agriculture both cotton and tobacco mind you it’s also 2/3 of the cotton production in the world. Nearly a hundred years passed since 1776 and technology is rapidly advancing the cotton gin reinforcing the use of slaves while the north is able to maintain its economic strength without the need for slaves. Tensions between the two sides spoil over the argument to what effectively would destroy the economic pillar for southern states. Was the civil war fought because of slavery? Yes, but the implication of the north being able to take the well being of nearly every man, woman, and child south of the Mason Dixon line is more than a yay or nay to slave labor. The morality aside it’s no different than taking coal mining from West Virginia or oil production from Texas it’s integral to the community. As a modern educated society we tend to look at things in the past as abhorrent and vile but fail to see the reasoning. For reference the crusades are often baptized as religious zealotry and a genocidal wave but in reality the Muslim nation had been poking and prodding the European continent and taking slaves from southern Europe.

[@darbyohara]

Exactly. Most people are too simple minded to look objectively at the situation in the mindset of that time and apply their own 21st century moral bias with no thought for “ok how would doing what you think it right affect the freed slaves” … which is basically what happened after the civil war. Instead of laying down a foundation to effectively integrate newly freed slaves into the society and have the association societal acceptance, they forced 100 years of “well they’re free” system but not really free cuz they made Jim Crow laws etc.

[@soulknife20]

Slavery was still seen as abhorrent then. Its not a modern lens when even the slave owners stated that slavery was a necessary evil.

[@jess_o]

"the morality aside...." LMAO listen to yourself dude

[@CaptainTexas92]

@@jess_o you didn’t read the sentence you saw the two words and immediately dismissed the thought. I understand slavery is horrible thing they did too but we still practice abhorrent things today that we turn a blind eye because it makes economic sense. Cobalt mining in Africa, sweatshop labor in China, and some of the worst human squalor in India so they can make brake pads and other items with harsh components that will eventually kill them.

[@stevenmugnaini2938]

@@CaptainTexas92 when is your next clan meeting?

[@ijpowers]

I did not know that it was illegal for Washington to free his slaves. Makes me feel better about him. I still think Jefferson's abolitionist efforts were nothing more than an exercise in limiting supply to drive up the price of his own slaves for sale though.

[@sarpyasar5893]

What I will never understand is that many Americans especially conservative ones feel like the federal government had violated their rights during the civil war especially their self determination yet they are also the ones who always supported their own country’s violations of humans rights and interference in other people business as well as destabilizing other sovereign nations.

[@sarpyasar5893]

@@willd7596 well we only see the party that defeated the southerners also defending them on their actions

[@sarpyasar5893]

@@willd7596 thank you for your suggestions. I am not an american so I always see that as an interesting situation if you think I am wrong I am more than willing to listen, but this my opinion after seeing and reading various incidents and statements. Thank you for your polite language and have a good day sir.