Posted on 08/01/2022 9:00:05 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
For some time I have wondered how to explain the cause of the Civil War in simple terms that are easy to understand. I now see that Ayn Rand did it years ago. Laws passed by a Northern controlled Congress routed all the money produced by the South into Northern "elite" pockets.
Ping.
EXACTLY
Atlas Shrugged, Animal Farm & 1984 were supposed to be prophetic WARNINGS, not instruction manuals.
Absolutely. They’ve been running that scam for some time. From what I gather, the wealth of some of southern cities at the time was larger than in NYC. Just like Congress today, they see money, they go for it like sharks seeking blood.
As I recall, senators were equally appropriated between North and South states, with the Southern states all slaving states. In fact, new state admissions had to be split between free and slave, to keep this symmetry.
However, the South had a perverse advantage over all free states in representation, because they got 3/5ths benefit from every slave they could create (breed) or import in, while the North wasn't benefiting from that.
I think the OP is blind to the truth, because he's proven he's blind to what Ayn said “about the Civil War.”
And that was before the Federal Income Tax and the IRS.
And before the Federal Reserve Act.
….
So duties and tariffs and taxes on liquor were most of the revenue?
It was called the correct term “war of Northern Aggression”. The South rightfully wanted to secede. If your daughter or son wanted to leave the house and venture out, why stop them?
If Free Republic had a "like" button, I'd be mashing it right now.
Read this excerpt of Thomas Jefferson’s thoughts on slavery:
“The bill on the subject of slaves was a mere digest of the existing laws respecting them, without any intimation of a plan for a future & general emancipation. It was thought better that this should be kept back, and attempted only by way of amendment whenever the bill should be brought on. The principles of the amendment however were agreed on, that is to say, the freedom of all born after a certain day, and deportation at a proper age. But it was found that the public mind would not yet bear the proposition, nor will it bear it even to this day. Yet the day is not distant when it must bear and adopt it, or worse will follow. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government....It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation and deportation peaceably and in such slow degree as that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their place be pari passu filled up by free white laborers. If on the contrary it is left to force itself on, human nature must shudder at the prospect held up.
page 51
Thomas Jefferson Redivivus
[I]ts foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.[3]
The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution—African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. [...] Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.”[5][6]
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science.
May we not therefore look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgement of the truths upon which our system rests? It is the first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society. Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws.
But if you just “read between the lines”, there is no limit to possible interpretations.
Blankenship wasn't going to be able to undue those tariffs anyway even if he had won.
annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd here we go!
What d’ya say boys, 300 pages minimum?
As I understand it, cotton and tobacco were the USA’s biggest exports before the Civil War, but somehow the North made more money off them than the South did.
The proper sequence is to identify an event, then look for an explanation.
But it seems like here we’re starting with the explanation, then trying to tack it on to an event.
No disrespect meant to the original poster. Just my two cents.
And thanks to BidenInflation, two cents ain’t worth much anymore.
It’s strange and quite sad to see so many folks here pretend that the cause of the Civil War was something other than what the Vice President of the Confederacy actually stated at the time.
Nreckinridge?
The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union described:
https://www.history.com/topics/early-us/articles-of-confederation
Breckinridge
“ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION AND PERPETUAL UNION BETWEEN THE STATES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, MASSACHUSETTS BAY, RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS, CONNECTICUT, NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY, PENNSYLVANIA, DELAWARE, MARYLAND, VIRGINIA, NORTH CAROLINA, SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA”
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/SMAN-107/pdf/SMAN-107-pg935.pdf
The United States was a “perpetual union” as far as South Carolina was concerned.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.