But most significant of all was the attitude assumed by the Federal
Government in dealing with the secession of the South. Long before that
secession some of the best observers had clearly pointed out how the
influence of climate, and much more the special type of industry and
character which slavery produced, had already created a profound and
lasting difference between the North and the South. Both Madison and
Story had foreseen that the great danger to the United States was the
opposition between the Northern and Southern interests. Calhoun was so
sensible of the difference that he proposed the establishment of two
presidents, one for the free, and the other for the slave States, each
with a veto on all national legislation. Guizot and Tocqueville had both
distinctly recognised the same truth. Though language and religion were
the same, and though race was not widely different, two distinct
nations had grown up, clearly separated in their merits and their
defects, in character, manners, aspirations, and interests.
More @ The Abbeville Institute
We often mistake in not seeing the civil war in a wider context particularly as to the British.
ReplyDeleteSince the beginning of the industrial revolution the Brits were determined to control the global markets in cotton and textiles.
It was a major factor in subjugating both India and Egypt.
The pattern was set in India where the local farmers could only sell their raw cotton to the East India Company while at the same time banning all commercial weaving in India and forcing them to buy British finished cotton goods.
In Egypt cotton was long just as in the American south. British establishment of Egypt as a Protectorate state gave them control of the cotton,caravan traffic across the isthmus and major stake in the canal being constructed.
This left only the American cotton production outside their control. Add in that American finished textiles were becoming competitive in the European and South American markets.
It becomes clearer then that the Brits (never our friends) had a vested interest in becoming the sole buyer of American cotton and choking off their Northern manufacturing competitors. They would rather see to that no one got southern cotton than the North got it.
The writings and speeches of British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston make all this very clear.
Agreed good Sir.
DeleteAs we've seen in this past century, wars are started for economic reasons, and morality is used as a cover.
Interesting and thanks for the history.
Delete