Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ClearCase_guy

It’s not really about 1860. You can go back to 1812 and see that the north wanted commerce and the south wanted tariffs


Actually..that would be the reverse. The North preferred tariffs to protect their growing manufacturing infrastructure....while the South wanted “Free Trade” to find markets for their agricultural products (mainly cotton)

If any one thing cost the South the Civil War was their insistence of Free Trade. As we can see in modern times....Free Trade does not allow for a strong manufacturing base...and the South did not have the manufacturing to build the materiel and weapons to fight the North. The help from the South’s trading partners (mainly the British) did not come forth. The North had the materiel, weapons, and the transport to fight an expansive war.

The South was correct in their interpretation of the Constitution and laws....but got burned by the economics.


55 posted on 12/03/2010 7:17:52 AM PST by UCFRoadWarrior (Isolationism and Protectionism sure beat Globalism and Communism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: UCFRoadWarrior
Thanks. After I posted that I saw that I had screwed up the details -- but, as you appear to recognize, the overall point stands.

Lincoln's defenders want the ACW to be 100% about slavery, but that is too simplistic. There were important economic factors, foreign policy factors and also important factors relating to constitutional interpretation.

It was not a simple matter and I would argue that the eventual outcome (a powerful central government, with a greatly diminished role for state governments) was the wrong road to go down.

56 posted on 12/03/2010 7:23:47 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson