Follow

@deinol

Lincoln was very much not representing the anti-slave party.

@zleap @KawaTora@kolektiva.social

@KawaTora @ericjmorey @zleap

Correct. He would be more accurately described as the “no new slave states party”. As I said, the south wildly over reacted. They seceded in January 1861, two months before Lincoln was even sworn in. We can only speculate what his policies might have been had the civil war not occurred.

Had the south not been sore losers who started an insurrection simply because they lost an election, slavery would have lasted decades longer.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.