Replies

In 1861 when Confederate exports were deleted from Union accounting, total US exports fell only 35%, not 50%, not 65% and certainly not 75% to 90% as often claimed.

This is more of that nonsense thinking.

A more accurate statement would be along the lines of "Because we absolutely destroyed what would have been the Southern trade with Europe, and because we borrowed and spent our money into inflationary conditions and also stimulate a war demand economy while likewise killing off a chunk of our population, We got some numbers that look like the above."

None of your crap numbers would have occurred if the South had established direct trade with Europe. You keep acting as though your numbers were based on conditions pre war, and you are ignoring the fact that they would look nothing like that if the pre war conditions had stayed the same, but instead with the South trading directly with Europe.

Yes, the no competition from the South numbers would have looked like that, once you added in the Lincoln caused inflation into the mix. The competition from the South numbers would have looked nothing like that, and they would have all been bad for the North.

DiogenesLamp: "This is more of that nonsense thinking. A more accurate statement would be along the lines of 'Because we absolutely destroyed what would have been the Southern trade with Europe, and because we borrowed and spent our money into inflationary conditions and also stimulate a war demand economy while likewise killing off a chunk of our population, We got some numbers that look like the above.' "

Rubbish, total fantasy, not even loosely connected to facts.
Where do we even begin with this?
How about here -- as Texas Senator Louis Wigfall put it to William Russell of The Times of London (1861):

"We are an agricultural people; we a primitive but civilized people.
We have no cities-we don't want them.
We have no literature-we don't need any yet.
We have no press-we are glad of it.
We have no commercial marine-no navy-we don't want them.
Your ships carry our produce and you can protect your own vessels.
We want no manufactures; we desire no trading, no mechanical or manufacturing classes.
As long as we have our cotton, our rice, our sugar, our tobacco, we can command wealth to purchase all we want from these nations with which we are in amity."

Russell also wrote of his travels in the South:

"The tone in which

alluded to the whole of the Northern people indicated the clear conviction that trade, commerce, the pursuit of gain, manufacture, and the base mechanical arts, had so degraded the whole race” that Southerners could no longer tolerate association with them...
"There is a degree of something like ferocity in the Southern mind

toward New England which exceeds belief."
A South Carolinian told Russell:
'We are an agricultural people, pursuing our own system, and working out our own destiny, breeding up women and men with some other purpose than to make them vulgar, fanatical, cheating Yankees.' "

So now we see DiogenesLamp hoping to build up our "Southern gentlemen" into latent closet industrialists, manufacturing shipping & merchant titans-in-waiting, just chompin' at the bit & raring to go with Industrial Revolution the very moment they can knock the damnyankee monkey off their backs, right?

Total, complete fantasy.
Sure, Confederates in 1861 may have hated damnyankees, but none of them wanted to become one!

DiogenesLamp: "None of your crap numbers would have occurred if the South had established direct trade with Europe.
You keep acting as though your numbers were based on conditions pre war"

First, they're not my numbers, they come out of the same data set used to "prove" that "the South" somehow "paid for" 80% of 90% of Federal revenues.
I just looked at your numbers a little more closely.

Second, the issue here is pre-war Federal revenues, nothing to do with what mighta, coulda, woulda, maybe shoulda happened after Confederates declared war on the United States.
The question is: did "the South" really "pay for" 80% or 90% of Federal tariff revenues in, say, 1860??
The answer is: absolutely not, and your own numbers prove it.

In 1861 when Confederate exports were stripped out of US total exports, cotton did fall 80% but overall exports fell only 35% and many categories drastically increased, including such supposedly "Southern products" as hops (!) and clover seed (!!).
So the facts prove that alleged "Southern products" were not as important as some apologists like to pretend.

DiogenesLamp: "Yes, the no competition from the South numbers would have looked like that, once you added in the Lincoln caused inflation into the mix."

Totally irrelevant to the question, which is: how important to Federal revenues were "Southern products"?
Answer: not near as important as some like to pretend.