Economics Questions

To the 16 year old doing report on Civil War

Mike — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 02:38:49 GMT

Sorry I searched but could not find your original question.

A GREAT mises audio you need to listen to; Why the Empire must die - John V Denson. Under the Bannkruptcy of American Politics.

I think the second half is exactly what you are loking for. Starts with the Tariff of abomination in 1828 and goes from there. Excellent stuff

Good luck

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Southern — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:33:51 GMT

JadedRailman:
The Civil War happened when it did simply because the elites of the slave-based economy were slowly losing power.

This was the reason for Southern seccession. The overarching reason was the loss of political power and the perception that the south would be made into an income generating colony of the north with little or no political power. Keep in mind this was the heyday of imperialism and mercantilism. The threat to slavery, tarriffs, westward expansion was all about the balance of political power. But for some reason people wish to continually boil the issue down to slavery.

JadedRailman:
But, although slavery is central to the wider context of the Civil War, abolitionism was not.

You cannot uncouple to two. The claim is that the south fought to defend its institution of slavery from those who would destroy it. If that was central then abolition was too. Both were subordinate issues to the balance of power. After all if the South felt politically secure they would not be worried about slavery.

JadedRailman:
While the preservation of slavery was no doubt forefront in the minds of Sun Belt politicians from South Carolina and Georgia, the more northerly Southern states of the old Virginian Domain, as well as North Carolina and her daughter, Tennessee, hesitated in breaking the bonds of the Union over such an issue as their slaves. Only the mobilization of the Northern military finally thrust Virginia and the rest of the Upper South which looked to her for moral guidance into the arms of the Confederacy.

So then half the confederacy secceeded because they were opposed to the idea that the federal government could impose its will through the force of arms? I thought they were fighting to preserve slavery? So which is it?

JadedRailman:
So, was the ultimate, root cause of the split slavery? Yes.

Like most you ignore the fact that seccession almost took place 30 years prior, specifically over the issue of tarriffs. Now had SC actually left the Union and Jackson had sent troops. Would other southern states have come to the aid of SC by leaving the union as well? They did when Lincoln raised troops. So the issue of seccession and nulification were inseperable with the issue of taxation. But that dosent give moral justification to the federal cause.

JadedRailman:

Was it worth it to give freedom to millions of enslaved Americans? Definitely.

Sometimes there are no good choices or perfect solutions to the dilemmas life presents us with.

Slavery had been eliminated in the rest of the world relatively peacefully. It would have in the US as well. But it never had a chance. The south was a golden goose, cotton generated a massive amount of wealth that funded the federal government, provided a market for northern manufactured goods, and was of major importance to northern shipping. They werent about to let that goose go peacefully. It was about money and power, same as all wars that have ever been fought. There is no such thing as a morally just war.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

sicsempertyrannis — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 07:00:19 GMT

JadedRailman:

So, was the ultimate, root cause of the split slavery? Yes.

That ultimately caused the break of the gulf states? Yes. But not that issue alone, and certainly that issue did not cause hostilities to commence.

Was it worth it to give freedom to millions of enslaved Americans? Definitely.

Ah yes, the neo-libertarian thesis, advanced by the same libertarians that also support Radical Reconstruction and the 14th Amendment. By the same token, almost all wars are just fine; after all, Operation Iraqi Freedom was about freedom for Iraqis, right?

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Joe — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 04:54:58 GMT

JadedRailman:

Was it worth it to give freedom to millions of enslaved Americans? Definitely.

Sometimes there are no good choices or perfect solutions to the dilemmas life presents us with.

Surely there could have been a better way that did not involve so many people dying.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

JadedRailman — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:57:25 GMT

Ah, the Civil War, perennial source of embarrassment for the more doctrinaire libertarian. Like most things, we're tempted to try to see it in stark contrasts of black and white, good and evil. Slavery is downplayed by some so that Lincoln's tyrannical measures can be accentuated. Slavery is cast center stage by others so that Lincoln's tyranny can safely be excused.

Like most real history, the truth is more shades of gray than anything else.

In truth, slavery really was the main, fundamental cause of the sectional split that ultimately culminated in the Civil War. A slave-based, agricultural economy was pitted in the halls of the Federal government against a wage-labor based, industrial and commercial economy. The Civil War happened when it did simply because the elites of the slave-based economy were slowly losing power. You can see most easily on Wikipedia, of all places. Go to the first presidential election of 1789 and look at the map they have showing how each state voted. Move forward to the next election. Then the next. While some elections do almost look like they fall along the Mason-Dixon split that would almost define the Civil War, it is only in 1860 when the first President is elected who only received votes from Northern states, in an election where the combined total of the remaining candidates electoral votes still did not outweigh those of Lincoln. They were losing power and they knew it, so they took the drastic step they felt was necessary.

But, although slavery is central to the wider context of the Civil War, abolitionism was not. New Englanders (and their colonial descendants in up-state New York, northern Pennsylvania, and around the Great Lakes) WERE particularly passionate about abolition for morality's sake and for religious reasons. New England's Puritan Congregationalist heritage practically demanded the immediate and irrevocable abolition of the peculiar institution. But New England Puritans weren't the only northerners. The more cosmopolitan (but at this time still predominantly German descended) inhabitants of southern Pennsylvania, for instance, didn't see such a demand in their Lutheran religion. In fact, some were tentative supporters of slavery, the better to keep the black man from competing with his labor. The same story played out in the Ohio River Valley parts of Ohio and Indiana, which had been settled by Virginian veterans of the original Revolution. The Dutch commercial and landed elite of New York's Hudson Valley found slavery to be among the most natural of human institutions, second only to the neo-feudalism some of them still practiced on the rentiers who worked their land.

The same story of shades is on display in the South. While the preservation of slavery was no doubt forefront in the minds of Sun Belt politicians from South Carolina and Georgia, the more northerly Southern states of the old Virginian Domain, as well as North Carolina and her daughter, Tennessee, hesitated in breaking the bonds of the Union over such an issue as their slaves. Only the mobilization of the Northern military finally thrust Virginia and the rest of the Upper South which looked to her for moral guidance into the arms of the Confederacy. Religion played a similarly important role in the South as it did in the North: High Church Anglican blue-bloods on the Virginia Tidewater were almost as great firebrands as their fellow religionists in South Carolina. Low Church Anglicans out in what was once frontier country, however, needed a sign from the Federal government that the sacred trust of the Constitution had truly been abandoned before they would secede. In Kentucky, even the raising of a Federal Army with the intent of suppressing the rebelling states was not enough, and an intra-state civil war was fought to decide the question. Maryland and Delaware may well have followed the rest of the Upper South had it not been for Federal troops keeping them in line.

So, was the ultimate, root cause of the split slavery? Yes.

Were there a million other issues that motivated the hundreds of thousands of individual actors who had roles on this grand stage of history. Undoubtedly.

Did Lincoln and men under Lincoln's authority engage in heinous acts that any right minded liberal should be horrified at? Yes.

Was it worth it to give freedom to millions of enslaved Americans? Definitely.

Sometimes there are no good choices or perfect solutions to the dilemmas life presents us with.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

scineram — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:55:43 GMT

Sorry then.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Southern — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:37:44 GMT

Ty, did not realize that your post was the name of a book.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

scineram — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:06:10 GMT

Why don't you just read the book?

Try google books.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Southern — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:03:23 GMT

I was curious as to who Jeff Hummel was and what he said. So could you link the source. You have asked me to back up my claim. I would ask you to do the same.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Southern — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:01:10 GMT

scineram:

Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men

Well Im afraid that the Civil War was not about either of these things. They were two of the results possible but definitely not the goal of either side.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

scineram — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:38:50 GMT

Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Southern — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:45:42 GMT

scineram:

Southern:

scineram:

sicsempertyrannis:
But most South opponents use that speech like it supposed to be 'proof' the CSA was supposed to be some kind of proto-Nazi white supremacist republic.

It kind of was. A sort of war socialism.

Not even close.

Jeff Hummel called it that. Can you back up your statement?

Mind providing me with the source where he has linked the Nazis, socialism and the Confederacy.

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

scineram — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:53:01 GMT

Southern:

scineram:

sicsempertyrannis:
But most South opponents use that speech like it supposed to be 'proof' the CSA was supposed to be some kind of proto-Nazi white supremacist republic.

It kind of was. A sort of war socialism.

Not even close.

Jeff Hummel called it that. Can you back up your statement?

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Bert — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:45:18 GMT

In my AP history class (11th grade) we went pretty in depth with the civil war, and debunked the myth that most people believe that it was soley on slavery, but my teacher didn't go far enough and he talked about some Southern states teaching and beleiving in Northern aggression as if it's some backwards way of thinking. (I was also pretty certain he was a liberal )

Re: Causes of the American Civil War

Live_Free_Or_Die — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:13:27 GMT

Like most conflicts, diversity in belief was the cause of the Civil War.