Replies

I do not see "the slavery question as the sole force dominating all decisions by the South." As for Jackson's point, he saw the South as having embraced a spirit of disunion during the nullification crisis. This made them ready to secede instead of finding a compromise to preserve the union.

I recommend that you read "The South as a Conscious Minority, 1789-1861: A Study in Political Thought" by Jesse T. Carpenter. He traces the development of the compact theory of the Constitution and of the South as beleaguered and put upon as providing the legal and moral justification for secession.

Once such thinking became current in the South, secession became a clear possibility in the region's political thought. An unpopular war, a disputed presidential election, tariffs, slavery, or some other cause could then provide the pretext, to use Jackson's term.

I recommend that you read "The South as a Conscious Minority, 1789-1861: A Study in Political Thought" by Jesse T. Carpenter. He traces the development of the compact theory of the Constitution and of the South as beleaguered and put upon as providing the legal and moral justification for secession. Once such thinking became current in the South, secession became a clear possibility in the region's political thought. An unpopular war, a disputed presidential election, tariffs, slavery, or some other cause could then provide the pretext, to use Jackson's term.

I'll check that out. The South clearly did feel beleaguered and put upon. Its difficult to argue they weren't. I think the Tariff of Abomination was the first really big traumatic shock to Southerners.....that their economy could be wrecked for entirely political/artificial reasons to benefit the corporate interests in the Northeast. That was immediately followed by a 30 year long struggle for political power which the Southern states could see they were losing due to mass immigration in the North.

Then add in the power struggle becoming much more violent, bitter and nasty with Bleeding Kansas and John Brown's raid combined with what Southerners saw as those same corporate interests in the Northeast coming for another round of the Tariff of Abomination - only this time the North was much more numerous and stronger thanks to immigration. Southerners feared that they no longer had the strength to stop it. Even if they could maybe put it off for a teeny tiny bit longer, it was going to happen and they knew it. That's why they decided to leave.

Slavery was connected to this in that it was used as a wedge issue to get the more agricultural parts of the Midwest to align with the Northeast even though their economic interests more aligned with the South's economic interests. For that reason, slavery was an important issue - not because there were any concerns about abolition without compensation at fair market value becoming a reality anytime soon.

Once such thinking became current in the South, secession became a clear possibility in the region's political thought. An unpopular war, a disputed presidential election, tariffs, slavery, or some other cause could then provide the pretext, to use Jackson's term.

So you are reiterating that the South wanted out of the Union, and were willing to use any "pretext" to make that happen.

How is this different from how I have characterized their secession? I've said all along that "slavery" wasn't the primary issue driving them out. You and others insist it was.

"Slavery", was a pretext. They wanted out for economic and probably cultural reasons, but you and others insist they only wanted out to "preserve slavery."

So clarify your position for me.