Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Just the facts, please: The New York Times has an Op-Ed that critically examines a book by Thomas Woods Jr., " The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History". The book presents lots of arguments that favor an extreme right-wing view of policy. We won't go into all the issues, but thought a few facts should be presented: In any event, the reason for this post is to combat the notion that the Civil War was not fought over slavery - something that Woods apparently claims (as do other right-wingers). What was the Civil War all about? Was it high-minded States Rights? Was it about slavery? Or perhaps economics? Let's turn to somebody who knows a thing or two about the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln. Here is what he said in his famous Second Inaugural: (emp add) [In 1860] One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war ...
posted by Quiddity at 1/25/2005 11:23:00 PM
6 comments
That's a bit simplistic. In fact, there were many reasons for the Civil
War. Some people were concerned about economics, others about
``States' Rights.'' The issue that was on everyone's plate, however,
was slavery. The South wanted, at least for the time being, a
continuation of slavery. The North wanted an end to slavery--either by
outright abolition or by a ``Free Soil'' change. For many, it was
probably not the most important issue--sort of like the Swift Vets in
the last election. Everyone had an opinion on it, and some people voted
on it, but many others did not.
The South knew that slavery was going to end in 100 years or so. The
ecology was changing, and most of the new states out west couldn't
support plantation farming, so the will to keep slavery going was going
to end someday. Of course, someday is not soon enough.
At the time that the Civil War was going on, England was still our
enemy, and they actually debated assisting the South. The Emancipation
Proclamation put an end to that, which is one of the reasons that
Lincoln issued it. In fact, the Emancipation Proclamation only applies
to ``persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a
State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the
United States.''
I remember a furriner once commenting that we had given meaning to our
senseless civil war by casting it in moral terms. It is good and right
and appropriate to do so. ``The Civil War was about slavery'' is true
in every important respect.
But that's not the whole truth.
And what did the confederates want to do with those "states' rights"?
Sheer sophistry. A bucket of whitewash.
The Civil War was about the economic issue of slavery, the same way the Gulf Wars are about the economic issue of oil control.
There is overwhelming evidence that the leaders of our cultures, then and now, have set up these issues in order to maintain control of the people as a whole.Slavery kept the majority of people under economic control, the same way our present dependency on fossil fuels does.
There's also this, in Lincoln's letter to Horace Greeley:
If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.
(he was also known to make racist jokes on the floor of the Senate)
Lincoln was probably closest to the Free Soil position.
Oh, and as far as allowing the South to secede and then attacking them as a separate nation, that's essentially whay Lincoln did, though he always claimed otherwise.
An interesting question to raise at this point is why would this guy be interested in spreading the idea that the civil war wasn't actually about slavery, but about something else entirely?
He's got a motive. What is it?
Lincoln's letter to Greeley ends with the phase "I have here stated my purpose according to my view of offical duty, and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men, everywhere could be free". Bringing up that quote to show that Lincoln wasn't opposed to slavery is a bit disenginuous.
|
