Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: tgusa
The victor writes the history books.

There is definitely a Northern version and a Southern version of the Civil War, or as we in the South like to call it, The War of Northern Aggression. Mr. DeVore obviously buys into the Northern version.

He leaves out the Federal governments imposing tariffs on machinery imported from Europe to protect the Northern manufacturers but to the detriment of the agrarian South. The South traded cotton to Europe and bought machinery there. The Northern manufacturers wanted that deal, to buy cotton for making garments and to sell machinery to the South in return. So they imposed a tariff on machinery imported from Europe. Many consider that the true trigger for the war.

He ignores that the slavery issue was more a power struggle between politicians than a burning issue among the people. There were few slave holders and there were almost as many slaveholders in the North as in the South. Thus, the Missouri Compromise. That was all politics with slavery as the front issue, much like Global Warming is today. Harriet Beecher Stowe had just written Uncle Tom's Cabin and the Battle Hymn of the Republic to add fuel to the fire, very similar to Rachel Carson's Silent Spring which furthered the cause of the Left and banned DDT.

The plantation owners were beginning to learn that slavery was not a winning economic proposition with the upkeep and the original costs involved. Slaves sold for around $2,000 dollars each depending on age, health, gender, and the needs of the buyer. How much is that in today's dollars? A bunch! Add to that feeding them, clothing them, and taking care of their health. A certain number of slaves had to be diverted from the money crops just to grow food, make clothes, build houses, etc. Slavery was an expensive proposition.

The most labor intensive part of cotton farming was separating the seeds from the fiber. It was slow and it took lots of folks working on it. The invention of the cotton gin, by Eli Whitney, meant that one person could now do the work of many, further eroding the economics of slavery.

The colonization of this continent began in the early 1500's. Slavery began in Africa, made its way to England and from there to this continent. That was almost 300 years before there was a United States of America. The Civil War came 60 years after that. To me, that is all further evidence that slavery was a political issue manipulated by politicians rather than a citizens movement. Slavery was also a well established fact of life in the world, not some evil scheme by Southerners to subjugate the Negros.

DeVore also ignores that most of those Southern states only joined the union with the proviso that if it did not accrue to their benefit they could withdraw from the deal. Lincoln conveniently ignored that. Lincoln was a politician doing things for political purposes, not the saint that history has made him out to be.

That is my thumbnail view of the situation and you are right, the victors write the history.

116 posted on 08/05/2010 8:18:03 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Mind-numbed Robot

I’d say you are more correct than the south-north kneejerk reactions.


125 posted on 08/05/2010 8:28:35 AM PDT by beckysueb (January 20, 2013. When Obama becomes just a skidmark on the panties of American history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: Mind-numbed Robot

Don’t get me started. I grew up within a stone’s throw of Richmond.


167 posted on 08/05/2010 9:43:30 AM PDT by tgusa (Investment plan: blued steel, brass, lead, copper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: Mind-numbed Robot

The Battle Hymn of the Republic lyrics were written by Julia Ward Howe, to the melody of John Brown’s Body, obviously written after John Brown’s hanging in December, 1859. Harriet Beecher Snowe had nothing to do with it.


251 posted on 08/05/2010 3:51:14 PM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla ('“Our own government has become our enemy' - Sheriff Paul Babeu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
The most labor intensive part of cotton farming was separating the seeds from the fiber. It was slow and it took lots of folks working on it. The invention of the cotton gin, by Eli Whitney, meant that one person could now do the work of many, further eroding the economics of slavery.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

Reread your history. Slavery was indeed in the midst of a slow decline when the cotton gin came along and made it wildly profitable. Slave prices, the best market indicator of the economic value of the institution, reached their peak in 1860.

The cotton gin saved slavery by making upland short fiber, and therefore harder to gin, cotton economically viable for the first time.

272 posted on 08/05/2010 8:43:13 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
I would add: IIRC 25% of southerners were slaveholders.

A quote from Robert E. Lee 1970 a few months before his death:

"So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interest of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this that I would have cheerfully loast all that I have lost by war, and have suffered all that I have suffered to have this object attained."

---American History Revised-200 startling facts that never made it into the text books. Seymour morris Jr.

311 posted on 08/06/2010 9:53:49 AM PDT by whence911 (Here illegally? Go home. Get in line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
He leaves out the Federal governments imposing tariffs on machinery imported from Europe to protect the Northern manufacturers but to the detriment of the agrarian South.

What machinery would that be?

There were few slave holders and there were almost as many slaveholders in the North as in the South. Thus, the Missouri Compromise.

You are aware that the Missouri Compromise was passed in 1820? Forty years before the Southern rebellion? And that according to the 1860 census there were four or five times as many slave holders in the rebelling states than in those which remained loyal to the Union?

Slaves sold for around $2,000 dollars each depending on age, health, gender, and the needs of the buyer. How much is that in today's dollars?

That's a heck of a lot of money in today's dollars. So please tell us what other investment could the slave-owner put his money in to which was as valuable and as liquid as a slave?

Add to that feeding them, clothing them, and taking care of their health.

So...should they have done away with their horses, too? They had to feed and shelter and care for those as well?

374 posted on 08/06/2010 2:57:15 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson