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

To: wardaddy
Stevens and Seward were far from being Deaniacs. Both were from the rural portions of their states, all were for expansion of commerce nationwide and the free settlement of the western territories. Sure they were moralistic about slavery, and a little arrogant, but when you had to put up with snotty Southern landed gentry as colleagues, who defended the enslavement of blacks as part of their "way of life," you would get a little hot headed as well. The Senate has NEVER been a place for the meek and humble.

The funny thing is that Stevens and Seward were protectionists to the extreme who made Pat Buchanan look like Milton Friedman. I always get a kick out of Southern Paleocons who come across as old Yankee Republicans when it comes to "protecting jobs."

Througout the 19th Century and well into the early part of the 20th, both parties were largely defined by class and region rather than by ideology. Both Democrats and Republicans had liberal and conservative factions. Most of the Republicans were vehemently anti-slavery, but strongly anti-immigrant as well. That is why the Democrats were the party of both Southern Planters and the Irish American urban proletariat by the 1860s, while Republicans included both New England Abolitionists and "western" railroad barons and bankers.

Back to Stevens, it is well known that he had a second family with his black female servant, who he reportedly loved more than his wife. Its a shame the one movie that was done about this great (IMHO) Pennsylvanian didn't pick up on this, and instead depicted the great love of his life as a "laws of mercy" caricature.

One of the great things about visiting Beauvoir is that they were brutally honest in explaining how Jeff Davis was HATED by many, if not most, southerners for his incompetance during the war. It was only after he wrote his memoirs, and traveled through Europe (befriending Oscar Wilde!) that he revived his reputations.

I give Benjamin credit for his near successful feting of the UK for support of the Confederacy. Had the GA of the R been decisively routed at Antietam and later Gettysburg, the Royal Navy may have paid a visit to Baltimore Harbor.

119 posted on 03/17/2006 11:13:03 PM PST by Clemenza (Seattle: The Pesto of Cities --- George Costanza)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies ]


To: Clemenza

The zeal shared by Stevens, Sumner, Seward, Stanton and a handful of others was not by any stretch shared by many northern politicians of either party nor the Whigs before them.

And don't think those highbred WASPY northeasterners were any less gentrified than Southern plantocracy folks.

They desired to punish the South beyond an appetite most Americans had for such actions and that is why they ultimately failed and are only viewed positively by revisionist...even today by Northern scholars. I see a handful of race oriented folks on this forum who worship Thasddeus but that's about it.

Now...granted....Southern military leadership deserved better political management.

I'm not familiar with Southern paleocons over protectionism. They virtually offered blowjobs around here for the Nissan headquarters.

Southern paleocons down here are though very right wing on culture issues as you well know.

I often wonder why the radicals refused to discuss compensation to end slavery. The Brits and Dutch and others did....even the governments of Spain and Portugal offered some to smooth it along.

The Radicals wanted no part of that. They wanted war sure as the firebreathers did. And they both got it. Damned shame to me. Could have been avoided had cooler heads prevailed


120 posted on 03/17/2006 11:36:38 PM PST by wardaddy ("she's so FINE there's no telling where the money went.".........all my exes are hexes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | 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