Civil War Interactive Discussion Board Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register


States rights and slavery - Other Civil War Talk - Civil War Talk - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  ...  Next Page Last Page  
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 05:35 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
61st Post
Albert Sailhorst
Member


Joined: Mon Sep 12th, 2005
Location: Aledo, Illinois USA
Posts: 555
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Well said, Texas Defender.

The South raised an army because, in their eyes, they were a soverign nation that didn't want a foreign army on their soil. This sounds kind of like the reason the Continental Army sprang up.....because they didn't want British foreigners on their soil......

Maybe I'm over-simplifying things, but it sure seems like a good reason to create an army---to keep potential agressors out of our "backyard".



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Tue Dec 4th, 2007 02:28 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
63rd Post
David White
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 909
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I think it's the seizing federal Property thing that is the declaration of war.



 Posted: Tue Dec 4th, 2007 02:46 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
64th Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

What examples are there of countries peacefully splitting?

East and West Germany? Pakistan and India? Taiwan and China? US and Britain?

If we're going to blame Lincoln for not being the *first* to allow his country to peacefully dismember itself, then we may as well blame him for not discovering penicillen, the internal combustion engine and rock'n'roll...


HankC



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Tue Dec 4th, 2007 04:16 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
66th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

There are examples of peaceful secession, Hank. Someone on another board is fond of citing Norway and Sweden. However, discussions of same usually involve two countries severing a tie -- not one country splitting.

Ft. Sumter was US property and deeded legally to the US government. It was built to defend Charleston from foreign naval invasion. It was not the property of South Carolina, whatever kind of nation it called itself. That SC could declare itself an independent nation does not change the fact that it had contracted with the "foreign nation" to encourage it to build an island and thereon build a fort to protect its interests. And then it changes its mind and declares: mine! That ain't 21st century eyes, Bama.

Try this. If we are neighbors and we both desire a shed to park our mowers in. So I build a shed on your lot. Gives us both a stake -- your lot, my building. Now, years later, you say it's your building because it's on your lot. And my John Deere SST15 is also yours.

Somewhere in there, saying my building is actually yours, because you say it is, misses a rather large point.

ole



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Tue Dec 4th, 2007 10:41 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
68th Post
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Let's all take a deep breath and go back and read the original post of this thread. It's a valid question and there's plenty of room for expounding on it. But we've strayed way too far. If yet another thread is needed on who was at fault for the war, start one. But let's make an effort to keep this on a constitutional/colonial-era base.



 Posted: Tue Dec 4th, 2007 11:27 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
69th Post
Doc C
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 1st, 2006
Location:  Eastern Shore, Maryland USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Many thanks Doc J. Again I pose the question, if slavery did not exist would the civil war have ever occurred or state secession ever been an issue. My thoughts are no.

Doc C



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 12:32 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
70th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Doc C:

Agreed. No.

ole



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 01:07 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
72nd Post
JoanieReb
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jan 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 620
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

So, for me, the question becomes, what would The South have been like without slavery?

Would The North and South still have had such notably different economic and cultural differences? After all, they were two very different societies occupying one continent before the CW broke out - an agrarian/agricultual society and an idustrial one. As such, slavery or no, they were destined to clash.

Last edited on Wed Dec 5th, 2007 01:07 am by JoanieReb



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 01:50 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
73rd Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I often hear that the North was an industrial society but the reality is a touch more than just that. There were considerably more farms north of the Mason Dixon than south of it.

There was more industry north of the mason dixon because there was a considerably freer economy there w/ more industry as well as more agriculture.

Farms were generally better & more efficently run. Why, a variety of reasons, IMO a lack of slavery being a major factor. Throughout the US areas that lacked slavery did considerably better, why? My father would say a different work ethic but I'm not certain about that. A variety of reasons... and I don't pretend to know them all.

The economics & mechanics of slavery created an elite slaveholding/property/land owner society that created a defacto feudalistic society.

IMO w/out the national sin of slavery this would have been a greater nation; and w/out slavery there would have been no Civil War.



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 02:11 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
74th Post
Doc C
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 1st, 2006
Location:  Eastern Shore, Maryland USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

As with any other war, think of the lives which were lost in the cw (approximately 600K?). Were there any among them who would have been great scientists, physicians, statesmen, etc.? Were there any among them who was great enough to end future wars? What would our country be like today if we had not had to deal with (and still do) the issues of race? We'll never know. Just another one of my rambling thoughts.

Doc C



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 02:17 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
75th Post
Doc C
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 1st, 2006
Location:  Eastern Shore, Maryland USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

JR

Both the north and south began as agrarian societies. It was with the initiation of slavery in the 17th century that the 2 societies began to differ. A question we'll never be able to answer is If slavery had never been introduced to the south and continued (the north did have slaves but eventually all of them abolished it in the early 19th century) would the 2 societies been so divergent?

Doc C



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 02:27 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
76th Post
BigPowell
Member


Joined: Fri Nov 30th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 24
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

"Again I pose the question, if slavery did not exist would the civil war have ever occurred or state secession ever been an issue. My thoughts are no."

Doc C

A civil war might not have occurred, but I do believe seccession would have inevitably raised it's head over some issue. For example: Utah and the Church of Later-Day Saints. Even today, there is potential for secessionest movements in the various States. I do not speak of the several dingbat causes that come to all of our minds; rather, there are some very valid scenarios that can lead into secessionist thought.

BiggiePowell (been listenin' to some NWA tonite!)

Last edited on Wed Dec 5th, 2007 02:40 am by BigPowell



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 03:13 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
77th Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 920
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Doc C-

  What you say about the divergence of the two societies beginning very early in our colonial history is substantially correct. Because it was never a profitable system in the northern states, the large plantation feudal type system did not develop in the northern states.

  There were slaves in the north, but not on the scale as there came to be in the deep south. The northern states gradually abolished slavery, at least officially. But a few slaves did remain. For example, in the 1860 Census, there were 18 slaves in New Jersey.

  Here is a short history of slavery in the north.

 

Slavery in the North

  As we all know, the Emancipation Proclamation only covered the slaves in the areas held by the Confederacy. Therefore, the few slaves remaining in the north were not freed. As I have read in more than one account, there were still nine slaves in New Jersey when the Civil War ended. They were not freed in New Jersey as the New Jersey legislature early in 1865 rejected the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. The last nine slaves were not freed until the amendment was ratified by the required number of states in December of 1865. Obviously, the number is insignificant, but it is ironic that the final slaves to be freed were in the north and not the south.

  The two societies diverged because what was in their economic self interest became different due to what the land gave them. Eventually, what was beneficial to one side became detrimental to the other.

  It was inevitable that the two would clash. For example, the Nullification Crisis showed a clash due to conflicting economic interests. The country might have come apart then if there had been a less energetic president than Andrew Jackson.

Nullification Crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  Your question is what would have happened if there had been no slavery? Its like saying: "Would there have been a civil war if the north had not been the north, and the south had not been the south?"

  If the plantation system had been profitable on a large scale in the northern states, it would have developed there. Men act in their own economic self interest. It is easy to oppose another system on a moral basis when it isn't in your interest to have it yourself.



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 11:15 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
78th Post
PvtClewell
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 13th, 2007
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

TD

I wonder if it's significant which part of New Jersey those slaves were located. Here's a guess: The southern portion of the Garden State is actually below the Mason-Dixon Line, if that imaginary line was extended through the state. Robert E. Lee's family had a summer home in Cape May. Do you reckon loyalties were significantly divided regionally in New Jersey in the way they were, say, in Maryland?

Even so, it's interesting to learn New Jersey, regarded as a northern state, did not ratify the 13th amendment. Very odd. Didn't know that. Perhaps NJ should have been considered as a border state.

Maybe New Jersey could have seceded from itself (like West Virginia? Uh-oh. New thread alert). Then we really could have had a South Joisey.

Just ramblin' out loud. I'm a ramblin' man.



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 12:36 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
79th Post
Doc C
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 1st, 2006
Location:  Eastern Shore, Maryland USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

These are figures from the 1790 US Census - New York slaves 21,324; New Jersey 11,423; These numbers pale to Virginia's 292,627 and South Carolina's 107,094. However, NY and NJ did have a significant slave population. The north's relatively small slave population made it much easier to abolish slavery vs the south. While visiting my daughter in NYC several years ago visited an excellent exhibit on New York's slave population.

To take this "what if" question a little further, if slavery didn't exist, would this have changed the make up of the colonial states (could Virginia have been a dominant state?) such that the Revolutionary War ever occurred or at a later period or gone down the road of Canada and other commonwealth nations? If the answer is yes, then one could speculate that without slavery the course of North American history would have been dramatically altered. Again, like the members of this board, I despise that horrible institution but only go down this road just for discussion purposes.

Pvt - Have to dispute your comment regarding NJ and the Mason-Dixon line. The M-D line was created in order to settle border disputes between - Del, Md, Penn, Vir. (now WV) in the 1760's. Be glad to see any information on the NJ portion that you have. By the way I live about 15 miles from the M-D line "on the good side".


Doc C



 Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 01:56 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
80th Post
PvtClewell
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 13th, 2007
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Doc C

You are correct about the M-D line taking a southerly heading when it hits Delaware. But the M-D line also serves as a cultural boundary between north and south, and this concept could make things a little grayer (literally and figuratively, I suppose). I brought this up only because, years ago when we visited Cape May and accidentally stumbled across the Lee vacation home, I remember reading somewhere — a brochure perhaps — that south Jersey was a vacation destination point for many southerners. In the technical sense, Cape Ma, et al, are not below the M-D line, they are clearly east of it. But in the cultural sense it might be an entirely different matter. When it's pointed out to me that something is below the M-D line, I can grasp what it implies. Who talks about east or west of the M-D line? I honestly don't know if this is true or not, but you have to figure southerners must have found kindred spirits in South Jersey. Why else head north for vacation?



 Current time is 11:42 amPage:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  ...  Next Page Last Page  
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.3545 seconds (13% database + 87% PHP). 30 queries executed.