But the British said no because 1. They could just get cotton from Egypt, 2, the south didn’t really have anything to offer them with the delegates being unprepared to actually negotiate, and 3. The north made it a conflict of slavery meaning that the British had to support the north considering they already outlawed slavery

Not to say that there weren't plenty of abolitionists in the North, and a great lack of them in the South. But politicians are politicians. Even the Founding Fathers didn't make slavery illegal, when they knew it was wrong. They wanted the support of the Southern States in the revolution (who wouldn't) and that meant getting in bed with the devil.

So of course Northern members of congress were hesitant to even approach the topic. They weren't so very different from today's politicians in that avoiding controversy altogether is the easier way of running a campaign.

well, early on in the Civil War, the Brits and the French had traded with the South for Cotton, however that quickly came to an end when the North utalized the Anaconda plan, which cut off the Confederates to Europe, which also as a side effect caused both france and Britian to enter a Cotton Famine and both nations gave the Confederacy a chance to either win a significant battle or punch through the Union Blockaid and they would send in their support

and since the South failed to do either, both Britain and France withdrew any support and delved into interests elsewhere

the issue of Slavery wasnt one that played a huge role in either nations support of the South, since both nations well practiced it in their territories outside of their nations borders, with Britian having used it well up till the early 20th century

what is interesting tho is that, while Canada was still a territory of Britian at the time and had to follow lock and step with their mother nation, they had pledged support to the North, going against their mother nation

frankly the issue of Slavery in the Civil War wouldnt pop up till after the battle of Gettysburge, in which the Address givin by Lincoln would state that only the rebelling Southern states slaves were to be declared free. However this was ultimately all for show as he had no power in deciding what the Confederacy did and explicity made it where it didnt ban slavery in the North, as there were still several very key Northern states that used slavery. the 2 most notable being both Maryland and Delaware. Going against their wishes was in essence a literal suicide move as it would give the Confederacy enough land and men where they could mount an actual offensive against the White House and win the war

politicians then were very much no different than they are today

and the only reason why Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address was because he was frankly losing the war not just on the frontlines, but inside the very homeland as citizens of several states were growing tired of sending their husbands and sons off to war just to die, even going so far as Draft Riots breaking out in New York City

Not "The only reason". By the time of the Gettysburg address, Lincoln was a staunch abolitionist. He had a personal interest in seeing the slaves freed.

He was not losing the war, but people were growing tired of it. The political willpower was there to win in the White House. Grant may have been a butcher, but he understood the numbers game. 5,000 Union troops were replaceable. 500 Confederate soldiers? Not nearly so much.

Add to this that the South was short on everything needed to win. Ammo, guns, food, clothes, horses, cannon, powder....Yeah. There was no way the South was winning that fight if there was the willpower on the part of the Northerners. Had we had the balls to use the same tactics we used on the South, we would have won in Vietnam, Korea would still be unified, and Afghanistan would have never been a problem.

That being said, there is no doubt that it was one of the most tragic events in our nation's history. The fact that Americans would take to the field against one another is one of those things that makes me wish to punch a wall. A kid from Texas is no less human than a kid from Minnesota. The fact that we spent nearly five years slaughtering each other pisses me off.

Well...are ya ready for round two....?

Do we count people who don't believe in the Constitution as Americans?

I mean.. “lawfully” they are. But hey soon everyone will be an American...sooo...yes...yes

I think it makes more sense to judge people by their practices than their words. They don't like our nation. They're actively seeking to destroy it. They say the people who founded it were evil. They enact segregationist policies. They view their fellow citizens as enemies in every sense of the word. As far as they're concerned, the Bill of Rights needs to be torched so that they can enact their grand cultural revolution. Which, in everything but name, is a witch-hunt for heretics and blasphemers against that which they hold sacred.

I don't believe they're Americans. It's not a civil war. It's...what is it exactly?....

Fascism/ communism

And not the good kind.

Ahhh. Radical fundementalist terrorism.

That too. Communism in name, fascism in practice.

They are literally the Nazi’s they claim all republicans are.

I know. When a corporation does something they don't like, they say corporations are evil, that private property is a sham. When corporations do something they like? "But Muh Private Property."

We probably won’t have it. My dad has been preaching, and he’s talked about things that’s going to happen in the Biden/Harris administration that has happened, but not mentioned

Probably won't happen.

He nailed them barricading themselves in at the White House with national guard and a wall since December

I just noticed something.

There *are* four factions. Which I knew, even if I forgot it since November. But it's crystallizing now. But I was always mislabeling them.

I said something like "Among the politically aware, there are four groups. The Establishment Democrats, the Populist Democrats, the Patriots, and those who simply wish to be left alone."

But what does the populist Left stand for? Communism. They hate the Establishment Left as much as we do. Maybe even more so. The were the Bernie Bros.

What are the Establishment democrats? Well, they're the Fascists. They're all about big corporate power as long as it acts within the interests and the confines of the State.

Then there are the Patriots and the right-wing anarchist groups. We know who they are.

We know the Establishment is going after Antifa. And we know Antifa is rioting in protest of the establishment. We're watching the tankies and the Fascists have it out.

So the populist left is basically the left wing version of us?

Yes but no?

I mean they kinda are, we both oppose the establishment because they cheated us in some way

Difference is in details

No because of the baseline philosophical divide.
Because we're more devoted to creation and preservation.
I don't think the tankies want to create or preserve anything. They say they love the poor, but I think the reality is that they simply hate the rich. And if they have burn the whole world just to spite the rich, they totally would.

You're right in the strictly political sense, though, Thicc.

Speaking of the establishment factions, aren’t they mostly congressmen, or and their supporters(major corporations)?

And I guess the Establishment Right would be the Aristocracy. Bush, Cheney, the like.

Question...has Biden made that special tax for those making over $400,000 a year yet?

id say there is 3
populist left
populist right
and establishment
you can say people want to be left alone but that isnt a real group they can hold these views and keep quiet.
its in history too ww2 and modern civil wars comes to mind

I think he did that at the same time he removed the Trump tax cuts

Those who wish to be left alone are their own faction. They have guns too, but they're not aligned with us. Narcos, Ancaps, that kind of thing? They don't believe in national pride. They think the whole idea of Nationalism and having a cultural identity as some sort of stupid joke.