GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies

Jack Lawrence jlawrence at kc.rr.com
Thu Jan 5 14:17:57 CST 2012


At the end of the day, it all folds back into slavery.

And I think the cotton gin thing is vastly overblown.

Slaves produced a myriad of crops.

But the root cause of the war was salvery.

Its like saying that a fertilized egg caused a pregnancy. There was 
something else in there first.

Regards,

jack

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andy Mills" <amills at jplcreative.com>
To: "GDG" <gettysburg at arthes.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies


> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> But the basics of slavery was money.  Money was the underlying factor that 
> kept slavery alive.
>
> Had slavery resorted in losing money and the decay of the plantations, 
> slavery would have been thrown out and replaced with something profitable.
>
> Money kept slavery alive and until slavery wasn't profitable or outlawed, 
> it would continue.
>
> Without the invention of the cotton gin, slavery would have most likely 
> faded out as it wouldn't have been profitable and there would have been no 
> need to protect a system that costs you money.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com] 
> On Behalf Of Jack Lawrence
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 2:53 PM
> To: GDG
> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> Jim,
>
> All of the money reasons fold back into slavery.
>
> If you want to claim that the civil war was not about freeing the slaves 
> at the beginning, I will be the first to support you.
>
> If want to say that the Civil War was not about freeing the slaves at the 
> end, I will say Fortress Monroe.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jack
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Ferguson" <jaferg at comcast.net>
> To: "'GDG'" <gettysburg at arthes.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 1:20 PM
> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>
>
>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>> I wish you had gone further in your discussion; money was the root cause
>> of
>> the Civil War in my opinion. And by root, I mean the one and only one
>> thing
>> that if removed from the slavery equation would stop the event from
>> happening. The slave trade had become such a major portion of the South's
>> GDP that none of the major players in the region were going to accept the
>> elimination of it in the westward expansion.
>>
>> There are many work's on this subject, of course, but I like Bancroft's
>> "Slave Trading in the Old South" for an semi-technical unvarnished
>> explanation.
>> Jim
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com 
>> [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com]
>> On Behalf Of joadx1 at netscape.net
>> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 12:59 PM
>> To: gettysburg at arthes.com
>> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>>
>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>> This is not a simplistic view; in fact, a number of modern analyses of 
>> the
>> Civil War focus precisely on the economic aspects of the conflict.  One
>> that
>> I have read indicates that one of the reasons why non-slave-owning
>> southerners fought to protect slavery was because so much of the southern
>> economy was founded upon it that everyone would suffer economically if it
>> disappeared.
>>
>> And while it would take us too far away from the parameters of this
>> discussion board, I would argue (and do argue in my own professional 
>> work)
>> that the peculiar institution of money has a particularly powerful role 
>> in
>> our history, past and present, that is often misunderstood or ignored.
>> But
>> I will go no further on that.
>>
>> But I will add that the matter of slavery and the Civil War is
>> overdetermined--that is, there is more than one cause at work here.
>> Beyond
>> the very real economic dimensions of the matter are the racial ones (I do
>> not want to dwell on this, but racial hatred and feelings racial
>> superiority
>> are also involved); the social class ones (the plantation aristocracy was
>> able to paper over the class inequalities in the south by telling 
>> southern
>> yeomen that without slavery they would be part of a menial class, but 
>> with
>> it they were part of a ruling caste); and simple fear: the southerners
>> were
>> very well aware that they had, in many regions, established slave
>> populations that were much larger than the white populations, and they
>> were
>> terrified of a slave rebellion on the order of the successful rebellion 
>> in
>> Haiti.
>>
>> There are yet other parts to this ugly puzzle, but your own suggestion is
>> a
>> very important part of it all.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andy Mills <amills at jplcreative.com>
>> To: GDG <gettysburg at arthes.com>
>> Sent: Thu, Jan 5, 2012 9:44 am
>> Subject: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>>
>>
>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>> My apologies as I am not the best at getting ideas and thoughts out of my
>> head
>> and rationalizing them so others can understand.
>>
>> Having made my disclaimer, I am curious as to why the war wasn't all 
>> about
>> money?
>>
>> Secession caused the war and slavery caused secession, I think based on
>> emails I
>> have read over the last couple days, everyone agrees with this statement.
>>
>> But what caused slavery?  The immediate cause was the need for cheap 
>> labor
>> centuries before the civil war, so the underlying cause of slavery was
>> money,
>> ergo money caused slavery and slavery caused secession so the root cause
>> was
>>
>> money?
>>
>> I understand that by 1860, there was also a racial element to America's
>> slavery
>> and part of the reason for maintaining the system was this racial element
>> but I
>> don't think this was the major force in maintaining the "peculiar
>> institution",
>> as the major force was simply put:  money.
>>
>> So why wouldn't the root cause then be economics, that without allowing
>> slavery
>> into the territories, slavery would slowly die and as a result, so would
>> the
>> way
>> of life for the slave holding aristocrats of the South and their desire 
>> to
>> maintain slavery was a desire to maintain their statuses, income, etc.
>>
>> One example would be Hampton Plantation outside Baltimore.  It was one of
>> the
>> largest and richest prior to the Civil War but slowly fell into a period
>> of
>> decline once slavery was banished from the country until the NPS saved 
>> the
>> mansion future generations (yes, I know other organizations originally
>> saved
>> it
>> in 1948, but didn't want to go into all the history of it).  We can look
>> at
>> many
>> of the James River plantations that had to open their doors to the public
>> to
>>
>> preserve and protect their properties because they were no longer
>> sustainable
>> once slavery was abolished.
>>
>> I agree that the original south seceded to protect slavery, but 
>> underneath
>> that,
>> slavery was there to support their income / economies, so if you want to
>> say
>>
>> slavery led to secession which lead to the war, why can't you further
>> define
>> it
>> that money led to slavery which lead to secession which led to war and as
>> such,
>> the root cause is the all powerful dollar?
>>
>> I understand this is a simplistic view and possibly an incorrect view of
>> the
>>
>> situation, but to me, secession caused the war and a desire to protect
>> slavery
>> led to secession (I understand that you can't separate slavery from 1860
>> South),
>> but the root cause of slavery was money.  American slavery / chattel
>> slavery
>>
>> wasn't like the Native Americans that took slaves from rival tribes to
>> help
>> replenish their population, or Rome that took slaves from captured 
>> armies.
>> Slaves in those societies were not the basis of the economies as it was 
>> in
>> the
>> Antebellum South.
>>
>> I hope this makes sense, but wanted to get some viewpoints to see if this
>> is
>> a
>> valid opinion or is full of holes.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com 
>> [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com]
>> On
>> Behalf Of John Lawrence
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 8:48 PM
>> To: GDG
>> Subject: Re: GDG- NPs & Slavery
>>
>>>--------------------------------
>>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>I am not arguing  whether not Lincoln could have  have chosen another
>>>method to react to secession.  I'm not arguing Lincoln did not go to
>>>war to preserve the union.   I am simply stating the  historical fact
>>>that secession was caused by slavery and war was the result.
>>>
>>>It is impossible to have any discussion of the causes of the war or the
>>>cause secession without the inclusion of slavery.
>>>
>>>The indisputable point is  slavery was the cause of secession which was
>>>the cause of the war.
>>>
>>>The other what-ifs do not apply to that.
>>>
>>>
>>>Take Care
>>>
>>>Dennis
>>
>>
>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>> -to
>> unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>
>>
>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>> -to unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>
>>
>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>  -to unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>
>
>
>
> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com 
>  -to unsubscribe
> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>
> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com 
>  -to unsubscribe
> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
> 





More information about the Gettysburg mailing list