The REAL cause of the Civil War.

Vanity | 1957 | Ayn Rand

[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.

[devere]

There was slavery, and the attack on Fort Sumter, and that was it. Confederate Secretary of State Robert Toombs pleaded with Jeff Davis not to attack, but Davis wouldn’t listen. Toombs is alleged to have exclaimed that an attack on Sumter would be “suicide, murder,” and would stir a “hornet’s nest” of hostility to the South. “It is unnecessary; it puts us in the wrong; it is fatal,” Toombs pleaded. He was right, but wasn’t listened to.

[DiogenesLamp]

Who fired the first shot?

Abraham Lincoln. You weren't taught this in history because it goes against the "official" preferred version of what happened, but Lincoln sent a fleet of warships to go attack the Confederates around Sumter.

*THIS* is why they attacked Sumter. They wanted it neutralized before Lincoln's fleet of warships arrived to attack them.

I believe that is the confederate states...
Against Fort Sumpter...
Try again..
You lose

You may want to know the full truth before you make such statements next time.

[Lower Deck]

They were fewer Southern states, and yes, Southern cotton, etc. were being taxed and the money was spent in the North.

Doesn't the Constitution prohibit tariffs on exports?

[DiogenesLamp]

The cognitive dissonance on display with this comment almost makes me think you started this thread just to troll the Confederate sympathizers on FR.

By the rules of 1787 to 1863, Americans had a right to own slaves and this right was recognized by the government. Both slavery and subjugation are violations of human rights, but the slavery was legal and recognized by all parties when this conflict began.

I am merely pointing out that the subjugation by force of the Southern states by the North is built on exactly the same foundation as slavery.

[Wuli]

“It just so happens that her statement applies in 1861 for those who have learned how to see it.”

No.

It only happens that her statement seems to apply to 1861 for those who choose to believe it applies. Simplistic corralaries - not all the variables - do not prove like causes.

[DiogenesLamp]

Excellent points and excellent links. The war was clearly not about slavery so far as the North was concerned.

That was just the ex post facto rationalization for the destruction they caused.

[DiogenesLamp]

Thanks for that information.

[DiogenesLamp]

As to who, exactly, "made money" off those crops, obviously, everyone who handled or processed them got paid something,

Having the government force people to buy your services at excessive rates is very profitable.

We are still seeing this tactic used by modern day liberals too.

(And they still live in Martha's vineyard and the Hamptons.)

[dblshot]

Well that is a yankee perspective. The north, a manufacturing economy, was essentially requiring the south, an agricultural economy to buy northern farm tools or pay high customs on cheaper English imported tools. The Feds sent the Star of the West to resupply Fort Sumter in Charleston S.C. harbor. Fort Sumter was there to enforce the customs tariffs. S.C. objected and drove the Star of the West out of Charleston Harbor by force. This was the first shots fired in the War between the States. Slavery had nothing to do with it. The 3/5’s comprise had been reached in congress by congress to keep the south in the union. Otherwise the southern less populated states would have no voice in a united government. And of course would have likely seceded. But as we know, a deal is not deal when it comes to politicians and money.

[DiogenesLamp]

Astute summary.

[Pelham]

The 3/5s compromise even pre-dates the 1789 Constitution.

3/5s was part of a proposed amendment to the Articles of Confederation in 1783. The Articles assigned tax obligations to the states based upon their population. James Madison came up with the 3/5 number.

[livius]

Blame a tiny handful of wealthy men in Charleston. Most southerners didn’t own slaves, lower income whites actually resented slave
labor because it enabled the wealthy to avoid hiring workers they would have to pay, and nobody - except for the Middletons, the Moultries, the Pinkneys and their ilk - thought this would be a good idea in any way.

[DiogenesLamp]

Which laws in which Northern controlled Congress are you referring to?

There were several. The one causing the lion's share of trouble for the South was the "Navigation act of 1817." It gave Northern shipping industries a virtual monopoly on the carrying of Southern cargo.

There was also the "Warehousing Act" and several others who's names I have forgotten.

Subsidies paid to Northern industries (such as fishing subsidies) also hurt the South to the benefit of the North. Mail carrying contracts were given to Northern shipping companies which made them more profitable than shipping companies that did not get such contracts.

Expenditures on railroads, canals, and harbors greatly favored the North

You may be surprised to hear this, but virtually *ALL* of the South's trade with Europe was controlled by New York companies. They also controlled the packet shipping industry that took goods from port to port.

[DiogenesLamp]

There was only an import tax. How would Southern cotton be taxed by that?

Have you ever seen the movie "Kidco"?

The movie features a bunch of kids that create a business selling horse manure from their father's farm to people as fertilizer.

The State comes after them for failing to pay taxes on the "product."

The Kid calls his father into court and asks him if he pays taxes on the horse feed when he buys it. The Father says he does.

The Kid tells the court that Taxes were paid on his product before they went into the horse, so the product coming out of the horse has already been taxed.

It works like that.

Depends on whether you are taxing the back end of the horse or the front end of the horse. It's still taxing the same product.

The kid wins his case.

[DiogenesLamp]

There was slavery, and the attack on Fort Sumter, and that was it.

Not quite. I'm getting the impression from your message that you are unaware of the fact that Lincoln sent a fleet of warships to Charleston with orders to attack them.

Were you aware that Lincoln sent a fleet of warships to attack them first?

Well *that* is why they attacked Sumter. The first warship "Harriet Lane" arrived and fired on the Nashville. That is when General Beauregard decided the rest of the fleet wouldn't be far behind, and so Sumter needed to be neutralized before the other ships got there.

Very rational military decision that.

Lincoln shouldn't have sent those warships. That is what started the war.

[DiogenesLamp]

It only happens that her statement seems to apply to 1861 for those who choose to believe it applies.

The more you dig into the economics, the seemer it seems.

Given what we see of the same behavior nowadays, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the same sort of corruption and power grabbing was happening in 1861.

[Glad2bnuts]

How many people in the Southern States heard or read what the VP of the Confederacy said?

I don’t really know for certain why the South seceded, but it surely was because they didn’t want to be dictated to by the Northern hypocrites, or the Central government. It doesn’t matter what the specifics are of why the North wanted to dominate discussion. Any and ALL States have a right to leave the Union. At least until brute force changed that.

I for one, would love to live in a State that removed itself from the FedGov, and chose its own path.

[DiogenesLamp]

The Feds sent the Star of the West to resupply Fort Sumter in Charleston S.C. harbor. Fort Sumter was there to enforce the customs tariffs. S.C. objected and drove the Star of the West out of Charleston Harbor by force. This was the first shots fired in the War between the States.

Here is an important detail about the Star of the West incident that you probably need to know.

The Star of the West was secretly carrying troops to reinforce Sumter.

The Brooklyn was spotted at sea by Southern ships transferring soldiers and equipment onto the Star of the West, and these Southern ships immediately made for shore and telegraphed the Confederate authorities that the Star of the West had Soldiers on board intending to reinforce Sumter with more troops.

The captain of the Star of the West told all the soldiers to remain below decks while they attempted their approach to Sumter.

And *THAT* is why cadets at the Citadel fired on the Star of the West. It was on a covert mission to reinforce the soldiers that had seized fort Sumter.

[DiogenesLamp]

Most southerners didn’t own slaves, lower income whites actually resented slave labor because it enabled the wealthy to avoid hiring workers they would have to pay, and nobody - except for the Middletons, the Moultries, the Pinkneys and their ilk - thought this would be a good idea in any way.

This is why most northerners hated slavery too. We are led to believe that Northerners hated slavery because of concern for black people, but this is as far from the truth as it is possible to get. They hated slavery for two main reasons.

1. It took away wages for people who would be paid to perform work. People who trade their labor for money saw slavery as a threat to their livelihood.

2. Northern people absolutely hated blacks, and did not want them in their communities. Slavery caused blacks to associate with whites, and the very prejudiced whites wanted none of that.

3. A third and lesser reason is they hated the rich slave owner getting rich without having to work for it. This was an envy driven hatred.

[Wuli]

“Given what we see of the same behavior nowadays, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the same sort of corruption and power grabbing was happening in 1861.”

That is not a display of cause and affect as to the civil war.

Northern farmers of grains were as disadvantaged as southern tobacco and cotton farmers, compared to those who bought, sold, distributed and exported any agricultural goods.

It seems there is never a lack of excuses to dismiss slavery from the causes of the Civil War.