Posted on 05/03/2019 7:54:25 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
Conventional wisdom of the moment tells us that the great war of 1861—1865 was “about” slavery or was “caused by” slavery. I submit that this is not a historical judgment but a political slogan. What a war is about has many answers according to the varied perspectives of different participants and of those who come after. To limit so vast an event as that war to one cause is to show contempt for the complexities of history as a quest for the understanding of human action.
Two generations ago, most perceptive historians, much more learned than the current crop, said that the war was “about” economics and was “caused by” economic rivalry. The war has not changed one bit since then. The perspective has changed. It can change again as long as people have the freedom to think about the past. History is not a mathematical calculation or scientific experiment but a vast drama of which there is always more to be learned.
I was much struck by Barbara Marthal’s insistence in her Stone Mountain talk on the importance of stories in understanding history. I entirely concur. History is the experience of human beings. History is a story and a story is somebody’s story. It tells us about who people are. History is not a political ideological slogan like “about slavery.” Ideological slogans are accusations and instruments of conflict and domination. Stories are instruments of understanding and peace.
Let’s consider the war and slavery. Again and again I encounter people who say that the South Carolina secession ordinance mentions the defense of slavery and that one fact proves beyond argument that the war was caused by slavery. The first States to secede did mention a threat to slavery as a motive for secession. They also mentioned decades of economic exploitation.
(Excerpt) Read more at abbevilleinstitute.org ...
“He sent warships, soldiers, and supplies to Fort Sumter knowing that the South would fire on those ships and/or attack the fort.”
Knowing? How can any human KNOW what the other side in a conflict will do?
Lincoln had been in office for a month. On 1 April, his Sec of State (Seward) recommended evacuating Ft Sumter peacefully and declaring war on Spain and France to unify America. Happily, Lincoln ignored him. ( http://housedivided.dickinson.edu/sites/lincoln/lincoln-responds-to-seward-april-1-1861/ )
“I would demand explanations from Spain and France categorically at once. I would demand explanations from Britain ... and send agents into Canada and Mexico and Central America to raise a vigorous continental spirit of independence on this continent against European intervention. And if satisfactory explanations are not received from Spain and France, we would convene Congress and declare war against them.”
The idea that Lincoln was a master plotter with an organized government and a sneaky plan to start a war is just silly. He was getting conflicting advice from Gen Scott. Seward was off on a ridiculous tangent. His Sec of War was the corrupt and just installed Simon Cameron: “His corruption was so notorious that US Representative Thaddeus Stevens (also from Pennsylvania), when asked whether Cameron would steal, said: “I don’t think that he would steal a red hot stove.”[1] (Cameron demanded Stevens retract this insult. Stevens said to Lincoln “I believe I told you he would not steal a red-hot stove. I will now take that back.”)” - Wiki
One of the warships intended to protect the Ft Sumter resupply was sent elsewhere when Lincoln mistakenly signed the order in a stack of paperwork. When he tried to change the order, Seward signed the counter order - and it was ignored because Seward couldn’t override Lincoln!
And yet...supposedly Lincoln used mind control to make SC attack a Fort that would have needed to be evacuated anyways.
And yet all that crafty maneuvering by Lincoln could have been utterly undone if Davis had simply, you know, not ordered the bombardment of Sumter. But he had painted himself into a corner, and as I said, needed a war to get the other southern states to secede and to keep the enthusiasm for secession at a boil. So just as firm a case could be made that it was Davis who maneuvered the war into being.
Where's the "Not this sh!t again graphic?
Jesse Helms was probably the most conservative senator who ever served. He was Ronald Reagan’s NC campaign chair in 1976 and Helms’ well-oiled political machine secured Reagan his first primary win.
“Ford narrowly defeated Reagan in the New Hampshire primary, and then proceeded to beat Reagan in the Florida and Illinois primaries by comfortable margins. By the time of the North Carolina primary in March 1976, Reagan’s campaign was nearly out of money, and it was widely believed that another defeat would force Reagan to quit the race. However, assisted by the powerful political organization of U.S. Senator Jesse Helms, Reagan upset Ford in North Carolina and then proceeded to win a string of impressive victories, including Texas, where he carried all twenty-four congressional districts and won all ninety-six delegates at stake in the state’s first binding primary. Four other delegates chosen at the Texas state convention went to Reagan and shut out U.S. Senator from Texas John G. Tower, who had been named to manage the Ford campaign on the convention floor. Ford bounced back to win in his native Michigan, and from there the two candidates engaged in an increasingly bitter nip-and-tuck contest for delegates. By the time the Republican Convention opened in August 1976 the race for the nomination was still too close to call.
There’s a chance if Reagan had lost NC he was getting out of the race. He won the state and subsequently almost got the nomination. It paved his way for his crushing victory over the peanut farmer four years later.
Oh look who's back for the daily obsession
Oh gee. Look who's back again to spew more of his PC Revisionist BS.
WOW! Look who's back to spew his lies and BS again. We never would have guessed.
Lieutenant Porter! THAT is who fired the first shots! You are hiding from this fact. You keep trying to ignore evidence that this was a deliberate plan to create a war by Abraham Lincoln.
Again, look up Porter's memoir. He will inform you that *HE* fired shots first, and in compliance with secret orders from Lincoln.
Lieutenant Porter did not.
Have you read his memoir? He most certainly did fire the first shots.
No sane person doubts it was the South who first attacked.
Stop. Just stop. People have been brainwashed with this sh*t since the war. Of course people thinks the South attacked first. That is exactly how the history is written and repeated, and I had always believed it myself too until I finally read the real history of what happened.
Stop listening to your brainwashing, and start looking at the real facts surrounding the events in question.
This is like debating a 3 year old.
Yes it is, but I have hopes for you if you would just stop regurgitating the crap you've been taught, and start looking at the real evidence of what happened.
They don’t like to admit the South fought for slavery, either.
And here we go again! All you can do is regurgitate the same tired lines we always hear. You ignore the fact that the UNION was a slave Union, and you try to pretend that Lincoln didn't offer complete and total slavery to the South in an effort to keep them under Washington DC's control.
You just ignore facts that contradict your mantra, and you just keep chanting your mantra.
"The South attacked first!" The South only fought to keep slavery!"
Both are lies, but you very much want to believe them. You need to grow up and start facing ugly truths that you do not like.
Yes, it would be a complete and total mystery to understand how people would react if you sent warships with orders to fire cannons at them if they didn't cooperate.
Yeah, that's a real head scratcher, far beyond the ken of mere mortal man!
You need to grow up. Lincolns' own cabinet quite accurately predicted what would happen if Lincoln sent those ships. Major Anderson, upon hearing of the Fox plan immediately said it would start a war and his heart would not be in it.
Stop with this childish attempt to pretend you don't understand 1+1=2.
Lincoln knew fully well what would happen. He also knew fully well what would happen when Porter opened fire on those confederate shore batteries and those confederate ships.
Stop trying to cover up for Lincoln. It's unbecoming for a man to lie about something so clearly comprehensible.
One of the warships intended to protect the Ft Sumter resupply was sent elsewhere when Lincoln mistakenly signed the order in a stack of paperwork. When he tried to change the order, Seward signed the counter order - and it was ignored because Seward couldn’t override Lincoln!
You talk about me not understanding history! You are completely wrong on some very serious points.
Lincoln did not accidentally sign an order. He wrote out hand written sealed orders to both Porter and Captain Mercer about what he wanted the Powhatan to do. Mercer's orders are public. Lincoln deliberately relieved him of command and put a Lieutenant (two ranks lower than Captain in that era's ranking system) in charge of his ship. Mercer felt utterly humiliated even though Lincoln tried to soft coat it.
Porter's sealed orders have never been revealed, and Porter has only given hints about what he was instructed to do. Make no mistake, Lincoln did not send Porter to Pensacola by accident. It was quite deliberate, and if you had bothered to read Porter's account of what happened, you wouldn't try to pretend that Lincoln mistakenly signed a paper in a stack of documents.
Taking control of the Powhatan to stop the Mission to Charleston from attacking and then having the Powhatan open fire on confederates and their ships in Florida, was no accident.
Resupply mission. As everyone knew. Announced in advance. NOT “orders to fire cannons at them if they didn’t cooperate.” All the South had to do was NOT ATTACK FIRST!
“Lincoln did not accidentally sign an order.”
Yes, he did. And when Seward pointed out the order had been sent, he tried to withdraw it. That was the order sending one of the ships to Florida. But SEWARD sent the telegram changing the order and was ignored since the President had signed the original.
And Lincoln had one month in office. His administration was in a huge state of confusion. Remember, his Sec of State wanted him to declare war on France and Spain to unite America!
Perhaps you should stop believing every thing you read from Lost Causers. The SOUTH fired the first shot. Deliberately. And yes, SLAVERY was a huge part of what the South was fighting for. Slavery and the chance to EXPAND it.
I think that if I went and got this information and posted it for you, you would still ignore it. I had hoped by getting you to do it yourself, you would trust it, because YOU were the one who looked up your own sources.
I see now that you really don't care to understand the truth, you simply want history to be as you think it should be rather than how it really was.
I do not think you are capable of reasoned debate on an issue about which you feel emotion. You will simply dismiss anything that contradicts what you wish to believe.
My god disingenuouslamp has discovered something no one else has. There must be a grand conspiracy involved to keep this from being public knowledge. But luckily disingenuouslamp has discovered the truth for all of us! (Do I need a sarcasm tag?)
“I do not think you are capable of reasoned debate on an issue about which you feel emotion.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“It’s all now you see. Yesterday won’t be over until tomorrow and tomorrow began ten thousand years ago. For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it’s still not yet two o’clock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets and his hat in one hand probably and his sword in the other looking up the hill waiting for Longstreet to give the word
and it’s all in the balance, it hasn’t happened yet, it hasn’t even begun yet, it not only hasn’t begun yet but there is still time for it not to begin against that position and those circumstances which made more men than Garnett and Kemper and Armistead and Wilcox look grave yet it’s going to begin,
we all know that, we have come too far with too much at stake and that moment doesn’t need even a fourteen-year-old boy to think This time. Maybe this time with all this much to lose than all this much to gain: Pennsylvania, Maryland, the world, the golden dome of Washington itself to crown with desperate and unbelievable victory the desperate gamble, the cast made two years ago...”
William Faulkner, Intruder in the Dust
https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1121143-intruder-in-the-dust
I’m from Arizona. I have no dog in this fight. But while it is OK for a 14 year old boy to want Pickett’s Charge to turn out differently, adults need to face facts. Less than two weeks before the SOUTH fired on Ft Sumter, Lincoln’s Secretary of State was arguing in favor of war with Spain and France INSTEAD of fighting the South! Lincoln spent much of his first month in office dealing with people wanting jobs in the Administration and trying to get his cabinet into place. He was getting conflicting advice from every “expert”. He was willing to trade abandoning forts in the South in exchange for a border state staying neutral.
There was no grand plan. Lincoln repeatedly found he couldn’t even get his own orders obeyed on a regular basis, and cabinet officer were issuing conflicting orders on their own account. Lincoln had no grand plan. He was groping in darkness, trying to figure out the best response.
But all that conflicts with the Lost Causers image of the evil mastermind Lincoln, trying to wage unholy war against their pure society - pure, at least, for those who were not slaves! And in South Carolina, that would be about half the population.
[you]: Knowing? How can any human KNOW what the other side in a conflict will do?
Here is what Governor Pickens told Ward Hill Lamon, Lincoln's personal representative, in March. Lamon assured the Governor that Fort Sumter was to be evacuated [Source: "Recollections of Abraham Lincoln" by Ward Hill Lamon, my bold below]:
My interview with Governor Pickens was, to me, a memorable one. After saying to him what President Lincoln had directed me to say, a general discusion took place. [The Governor said the following at the meeting] Nothing can prevent war except the acquiescence of the President of the United States in secession and his unalterable resolve not to attempt any reinforcement of the Southern forts. ... Let your President attempt to reinforce Sumter and the tocsin of war will be sounded from every hill-top and valley in the South.
The Governor was quite agreeable to having the fort evacuated. The Governor's account included the following [my bold below]:
In a very few days after, another confidential agent, Colonel Lamon, was sent by the President, who informed me that he had come to try and arrange for the removal of the garrison, and, when he returned from the fort, asked if a war vessel could not be allowed to remove them. I replied, that no war vessel could be allowed to enter the harbor on any terms. He said he believed Major Anderson preferred an ordinary steamer, and I agreed that the garrison might be thus removed. He said he hoped to return in a very few days for that purpose.
There were earlier indications of the attitude of South Carolinians about the forts. From Major Anderson to the Adjutant-General of the Army in Washington on December 1, 1860 [From the Official Records; my bold again]:
Captain Seymour, just returned from the city, reports that the excitement there is very great. Col. E. B. White and other gentlemen, with whom he conversed, stated that the people of Charleston would not allow another man or any kind of stores to be landed at or for these forts. They say that anything which indicates a determination on the part of the General Government to act with an unusual degree of vigor in putting these works in a better state of defense will be regarded as an act of aggression, and will, as well as either of the other acts mentioned above, cause an attack to be made on this fort [Fort Moultrie].
Here is what Jefferson Davis said [source: page 263 of "Lincoln Takes Command" by John Shipley Tilley, quoting from McElroy's "Jefferson Davis", volume 1, page 289-290; my bold below]
The order for the sending of the fleet was a declaration of war. The responsibility is on their shoulders, not ours. The juggle for position as to who shall fire the first shot in such an hour is unworthy of a great people and their cause. A deadly weapon has been aimed at our heart. Only a fool would wait until the first shot has been fired. The assault has been made. It is of no importance who shall strike the first blow or fire the first gun.
If Davis was so intent on starting the war, why did he send Commissioners to Washington to negotiate a peaceful separation from the Union? Lincoln wouldn't see the Commissioners, and Seward kept telling them and implying that Fort Sumter would be evacuated. Once the Commissioners realized that a war fleet was heading South, they "charged the Lincoln Administration with gross perfidy in attempting to reinforce Fort Sumter under pretext of evacuation" on April 11, 1861 [as reported in the April 13, 1861 "Daily Picayune" newspaper of New Orleans, see my old post Link to post 417].
If they wanted war so much. why didn't Davis attack Fort Pickens earlier before Lincoln sent his expedition down?
Governor Pickens of South Carolina also believed that the coming war fleet with the intention of forcing their way into the harbor represented that a state of war existed [Official Records, Serial I, Pages 292-293, April 9, 1861; my emphasis below].
State of South Carolina,
Headquarters, April 9, 1861.
Hon. Mr. Walker, Secretary of War:
Sir: At the request of General Beauregard I inclose the within. I took possession of the mails this morning from Sumter, and retained the packages marked "official." These are all sent you. The private letters are all sent, as directed, to their owners. I did this because I consider a state of war is now inaugurated by the authorities at Washington, and all information of a public nature was necessary to us. The mails and all intercourse of any kind with Sumter are now forbidden, and I immediately refused Captain Talbot any interview with Major Anderson, and also his request to be restored to his command in the fort. I called in General Beauregard, and made Captain Talbot and Mr. Chew repeat in his presence what they had said and what the former desired as to Sumter, and General Beauregard entirely and immediately concurred.
You will see by these letters of Major Anderson how it is intended to supply the fort; but by God's providence we will, I trust, be prepared for them; and if they approach with war vessels also, I think you will hear of as bloody a fight as ever occurred. We now have three thousand seven hundred men at the different posts and batteries, and will have by to-morrow three thousand more, which I have called down. From my calculation, I think they will have about two thousand six hundred, and will attempt to land in Launch-boats with 24 and 12 pounders, and it will probably be on the lower end of Morris Island, next the light-house. If so, we will have a fine rifle regiment to give them a cordial welcome from behind sand hills (that are natural fortifications), and two Dahlgren guns will be right on them, besides four 24-pounders in battery. I have four hundred fine Enfield rifles that have been practiced at nine hundred yards, and on that island, altogether, we have now one thousand nine hundred and fifty men, and are increasing it today.
There has just arrived on the bar a fine rifled cannon from Liverpool, of the latest maker (Blakely gun), an improvement upon Armstrong, of steel rolls or coils, with an elevation of seven and one-half degrees to a mile. It throws a shell or twelve-pound shot with the accuracy of a dueling-pistol, and only one and one-half pounds of powder. Such, they write me, is this gun, and I hope to have it in position to-night. We expect the attack about 6 o'clock in the morning, on account of the tide.
Very respectfully,
F. W. PICKENS.
Of course, an incoming missile from North Korea isn't an indication that a state of war exists. < /sarc >
Of course, an incoming missile from North Korea isn’t an indication that a state of war exists. < /sarc >
Had the South previously rejected a resupply mission with force? Yes. But people change their minds, and what “the people of Charleston” wanted might give way to what was good for the Confederacy as a whole.
So no, in a war, until you actually TAKE an action, you do not KNOW how the other side will respond. In any case, the South had a choice. They could start the war, or insist the North start it. And the SOUTH CHOSE to open fire on Fort Sumter. No one “made them” do it! They were not defending themselves from a Union attack. It was NOT self-defense.
After all, Lincoln BELIEVED that the border states would stay neutral if the South fired first, and his belief was proven wrong. He lost Virginia, and he thought Virginia might stay in the Union.
No one KNEW anything. That is the way a war works. And Lincoln, with one month in office, was receiving a lot of conflicting advice. Conflicting advice is another way of saying, “No one KNEW”. If they knew, the advice would be uniform.
Once the ball started rolling all the colonies got involved. I don't think you could argue that the Constitution was the work of one state or region. It was worked out by representatives of all the states. It's true that Virginians were more inclined to distrust the federal government in the early years of the new republic -- Madison certainly did push for a Bill of Rights -- but what tends to get lost is the difference between the "High Federalists," the supporters of Hamilton and Pickering, on the one hand, and John Adams on the other. Adams - and Washington - pursued a more moderate course than Hamilton -- or Jefferson, for that matter. It was in the interests of the Jeffersonians to blur the differences between their opponents and present them as a united enemy.
Here is Madison on the use of force against a state [Constitutional Convention, May 31, 1787; thanks to poster southernsunshine for the Madison quote]:
The use of force agst. a State, would look more like a declaration of war, than an infliction of punishment, and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.
btt
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.