RE: Let me get this straight... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States



Message


Treefrog -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/14/2008 8:06:31 AM)

Although the abolition of slavery was certainly a major consequence of the war, I think the consequence that is seldom identified is the complete transfer of political power from the states, north and south, to the federal government.

The Tenth Amendment* died long before slavery was ended.

* paraphrased: Powers not given to the Federal government are reserved to the states and people, respectively.

Very hard to find much evidence of the Tenth Amendment anymore. The Federal government controls everything, [:(]largely by giving back the tax money it bleeds from the states and people, respectively.




wargamer123 -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/14/2008 6:26:40 PM)

Maybe not inciting riots but fear enough for South Carolina to start the Whole Shabang with Harpers Ferry? Did the war not start in SC the first state to succeed from the Union and I might consider that a riot or rather I correct my words.... spreading of panic and fear amongst the Hard Line Pro-Slavery State in SC


quote:

ORIGINAL: heroldje


Abolitionists were considered extremists even in the North.  Before the war they had an extremely small political footing.  It wasn't until well into the war that ending slavery became a viable platform.  The emancipation proclamation elicited mixed reactions at best.  There were no raiding abolitionists inciting riots.  You need to shop at a new book store.   The war radically changed the country in so many ways I don't even know where to start...





John Neal -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/14/2008 7:04:44 PM)

It's informative to read how the states in rebellion justified their actions.
Note the clause in the Constitution they cite: article 4, section 2, 3rd paragraph

Party Platforms and Secession Documents





elcidce -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/14/2008 7:23:32 PM)

There were plenty of New England ship owners who owned slave ships and were hesitant to give the trade up. Northern interests gained economically from the trade as well as the South. Abolition was not popular in those Northern circles for that very reason.




elcidce -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/14/2008 7:23:32 PM)

dup.




elcidce -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/14/2008 7:23:32 PM)

Dup




Doc o War -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/15/2008 8:26:56 AM)

Treefrog- the Federalizing of the United States had so many huge effects its hard to begin to list them- the most important I think- which was later stated by many veterans on both sides- was that before the War Between the States, people were from their states- few people considered themselves Americans- except maybe when discussing it with a Brit. They were Virginians or Rhode Islanders first, and Americans as an after thought. But after the War,  being a person from x state became secondary to just being an American- Lincoln's goal to preserve the Union worked. This has been pointed out as a very singular effect- I read a great article about it in the Civ war Times a few years ago. There are distinct social measures of this. These days we are Americans first, from x state second.

Further- as one of my Black Army Buddies pointed out once- the only "state right" that the old south was really ready to fight and die for was to preserve an economic system that was built on slavery- (which by the way had also included indentured whites and later sharecroppers- who were effectively slaves also.)  Each land owner who owned slaves got to gain an extra 3/5s of a vote for every slave they owned. So a big slave holder, with say 500 slaves- had 1 + 300 votes in the local election, that could swing local elections to candidates of their choice.- slave owners dominated southern state governments and ruled the roost, in every way.

The world would have been a very different place after 1865 if there had ended up being two weak countries- north and south- after the war- some scholars have said it would likely have split even more-maybe to 5 or even six small countires.
   What would have happened in WW1- if the Doughboys had not arrived?
    What about WW2?
    
The South clung to their old way of agrarian life that was already changing any way- possibly they might have given up slavery eventually,  but that question- one which they died for- was settled for all time right there. It opened up many other issues, and those too were eventually dealt with. Not to take away anything from the south's honor, but they are much stronger and more vibrant today than they were in the Anti Bellum times. Because they are part of the United States.
       
Finally- the Federal power to tax- as Oliver Wendel Holmes said in one of his Supream Court Decisions- "Taxes are the price  people pay for Civilization."
          Think about all the ways taxes you pay effect your life every day- do you drive on roads? Eat safe food? Fly in safe airspace? Enjoy the protection of a modern Military?  Are your kids going to a school that is supported witth tax dolllars, are your kids getting student loans? Was your house loan federal money? Is your local hospital supported by goverment dollars.
             We are not living in caves anymore- civilization costs money.
And government- since the time of the Cities of Ur and Mesopotemia, has been the engine that paid for social advancement and progress through taxes.
   
Many people over the Last 140 years have said the Civil War was a bloody but necessary step in our developement into a modern state.




wargamer123 -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/15/2008 11:15:59 AM)

Interesting ideas Doc,

"Unionizing the Union?" I like the sound of what you write. Whether over the subject of Slavery or a greater Right of Independence, I might debate. I disagree, IMO The Union and the CSA would have been brothers and Allies and Doughboys would've been in the WW1 Trenches, perhaps even Johnny Reb! Especially if the CSA's won freedom was on British Ships! History is a series of possibilities, not an ending grinding halt. That's why we play these games! The Fracture of States into Countries does weaken the whole but sometimes strengthens the Individuals to such a degree, i.e. Prussia during the 18th-19th century, that the Individual could be a Super Power in itself.
Perhaps we can debate a second War, of the first Civil War or a Third in some hypothetical late 1800s altered History, that or fight over the New Western Territories.

Great Discussion though regardless




John Neal -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/15/2008 3:09:07 PM)


quote:

....the only "state right" that the old south was really ready to fight and die for was to preserve an economic system that was built on slavery- ...


The truth of that can be readily seen if one reads the justifications I referenced in my Post #32, contrary to the grade school history I was taught




heroldje -> RE: Let me get this straight... (8/15/2008 7:37:09 PM)

"The North did go into the South with Raiding parties, Abolishnists hellbent on changing things. Causing all sorts of havoc or so I read. "

Thats a far cry from John Browns raid in Harpers Ferry, VA... which I assume you're refering to.    A raid conducted by about 15 men, half of which were slaves who refused to partake in the conflict. It's a gigantic stretch to say it started the whole 'shabang', if anything it reinforced the South's wild beliefs that a mass slave revolt was imminent.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.577637