Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > American History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

American History American History Forum - United States, Canada, Mexico, Central and South America


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 22nd, 2012, 03:23 PM   #11
Scholar
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 660

Quote:
Originally Posted by botully View Post
However, it has been shown that "states rights", tariffs and the like were, at best, an afterthought when it came to secession. The South seceded to protect and expand slavery.
....from violations of state's rights, protective tariffs, and the like.

Seriously, because slavery was an important root of the differences between the North and South doesn't mean issues like protective tariffs weren't important (whereas state's rights really were a mockery -- Southern politicians only cared about state's rights when it came to their states, not when it came to forcing Northern states to protect slavery).

Of course, there was more granularity to antebellum politics than just that: Southerners were not alone in opposing protective tariffs and the soft money policies pushed during the Lincoln administration and it wasn't just pro-slavery Northerners who were their allies on this front.
MAlexMatt is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 22nd, 2012, 04:13 PM   #12

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 6,453
Blog Entries: 13

Quote:
....from violations of state's rights
Like the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, and numerous other anti-states' rights measures pushed for by the South, especially regarding the expansion of slavery into the west?
Viperlord is offline  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 05:02 PM   #13
Scholar
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 660

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
Like the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, and numerous other anti-states' rights measures pushed for by the South, especially regarding the expansion of slavery into the west?
Get your hand out of the treasury of virtue and get off your damned high horse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAlexMatt View Post
(whereas state's rights really were a mockery -- Southern politicians only cared about state's rights when it came to their states, not when it came to forcing Northern states to protect slavery)
MAlexMatt is offline  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 06:10 PM   #14

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 6,453
Blog Entries: 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAlexMatt View Post
Get your hand out of the treasury of virtue and get off your damned high horse.
I'm a Southerner. It really helps your insults and enraged arm-waving when you get these facts straight beforehand, you know.

So what about these Northern violations of states' rights then? I seem to remember reading that Lincoln was promising to stop the expansion of slavery, not interfere with it where it already existed.
Viperlord is offline  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 08:58 PM   #15

Scaeva's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,614

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjadams View Post
Slavery in the US was a combined, moneyed, prosperous effort by the whole nation for
hundreds of years, blame should not be saddled on the Deep South alone. Blame for
slavery is an albatross that rest on the shoulders of America as a whole.
I don't think anyone heaps blame for the crime of slavery entirely on the South. For a very long time slavery existed both north and south of the Mason-Dixon line, and many merchants in the North benefited from slavery as well.

What the South is blamed for is sparking the civil war for the purpose of buying, selling, owning, and recapturing runaway slaves without federal interference. The Southern planter aristocracy sparked the bloodiest war in American history, a war which heaped devastation upon the South and struck down a large percentage of young Southern men, (most of whom didn't own slaves) simply because those planter aristocrats feared a Republican president would free slaves and/or limit the expansion of slave states in the West.

The South went to war in defense of slavery. It was the aggressor and committed treason, all in the name of keeping other human beings in bondage. To state that fact isn't slander, it is history.
Scaeva is online now  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 09:18 PM   #16

tjadams's Avatar
Epicurean
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Texas
Posts: 25,369
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaeva View Post
I don't think anyone heaps blame for the crime of slavery entirely on the South. For a very long time slavery existed both north and south of the Mason-Dixon line, and many merchants in the North benefited from slavery as well....To state that fact isn't slander, it is history.
Quote:
Are they absolved of their entire history? Does anyone believe that slavery could have existed without the explicit participation of the majority of the country, which was the North?
I am not denying slavery was the way of life for the wealthy planter class of the Deep
South and a key component of the conflict. I was answering the original question, and
I do not let the North off the slavery hook so easily as many do. The North cannot simply
excuse their historical participation in slavery with the "Yeah but...." answer.
tjadams is offline  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 09:27 PM   #17

Scaeva's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,614

No offense, but I think some posters are tilting at windmills on this one. I don't think anyone in the North blames the South entirely for the crime of slavery.

They do however blame the South for sparking the civil war, and for doing so in defense of the institution of slavery. In that, the Yanks are also backed by history.
Scaeva is online now  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 11:17 PM   #18

Baltis's Avatar
Goat Whisperer
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Texas
Posts: 3,003
Blog Entries: 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaeva View Post
No offense, but I think some posters are tilting at windmills on this one. I don't think anyone in the North blames the South entirely for the crime of slavery.

They do however blame the South for sparking the civil war, and for doing so in defense of the institution of slavery. In that, the Yanks are also backed by history.
Actually, I'm sure I blame the south for the crime of slavery. If the shoe fits. There is a certain reality involved here. The northern states abolished slavery (they didn't practice it extensively) in a natural manner about the same time as the rest of the civilized world.

But, I will ask, what exactly do we mean by blaming the south 'entirely'?

If we mean to say they are the only people who ever dreamed up slavery and the only ones to ever enslave their fellow man? no, they are not alone. If we mean to say the United States would likely have been slave free from its inception but for the southern states and their attachment to slavery? I say absolutely yes. They are to blame for that. The northern states may have their own fleas but slavery is a southern problem.

My opinion of course. Just interjecting my thoughts on the subject. Please don't anyone go holding your breath that I will be remaining for any length of time in yet another lost causer/southern defender thread.

And, like VL above, I am also southern born and southern bred.
Baltis is offline  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 11:40 PM   #19
Scholar
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 660

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
I'm a Southerner. It really helps your insults and enraged arm-waving when you get these facts straight beforehand, you know.
Well then, I apologize but your attitude felt like that of a Northerner (especially a Yankee) who seems to only feel like the slave dimension of the Civil War gave a pass to the horrific policies of the Whiggish Republicans.

Where in the South?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
So what about these Northern violations of states' rights then? I seem to remember reading that Lincoln was promising to stop the expansion of slavery, not interfere with it where it already existed.
The North jumped all over their new-found power. The Morrill Tariff, the National Banking Acts, all of it, they all ****ed the common man (North and South) in the favor of the wealthy, active man.

As someone who has an un-natural interest in geographic demography, this paper is one of the most interesting statistical studies I have ever seen:

http://econ.as.nyu.edu/docs/IO/18865...i_20110218.pdf

Not necessarily because I unequivocally believe in its conclusions, but because, as a whole, it ties its demographic conclusions into a set of policy premises. It's amazing because I haven't seen a whole lot of studies which dive into this level of cross-disciplinary analysis. What I like about it for the purposes of this thread are the fact that it's conclusions effected both the North and the South. The Whiggish Republicans ****ed everybody who wasn't them; and that included the Northern Democracy who paid out the nose for the next 70 years until FDR gave back a bit for a decade or so.

The slave lords were not in the right in 1861.

But neither was the Money Power.
MAlexMatt is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2012, 03:10 AM   #20

Rongo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Ohio
Posts: 5,685

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAlexMatt View Post
The slave lords were not in the right in 1861.

But neither was the Money Power.
The slave lords WERE the money power in 1860. The estimated value of slave property in 1860 was 3 BILLION dollars. The total U.S. government budget in 1860 was 78 MILLION dollars.
Rongo is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > American History

Tags
acw, crime, exonerated, myth, north, slavery


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Was North American slavery an act of racism? Gaius American History 100 May 2nd, 2014 08:34 PM
The Biggest Myth about Slavery. etamaze Middle Eastern and African History 75 March 29th, 2013 09:59 AM
The myth that the ACW was not over slavery Scaeva American History 1164 March 25th, 2013 08:00 AM
Slavery in the North and South Scamp American History 12 August 9th, 2011 07:35 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.