Thanks for the recommendation, I may take a look at it.....
I grew up in a border state, and we used to argue about which side we would have been on during the Civil War. Without exception, those who supported the rebellion were proud of their relatives in the Klan, or supported the (segregationist) George Wallace, or otherwise were unself- conscious white supremacists. Those who would have been pro- Union were horrified at the idea of human bondage, and looked upon Lincoln primarily as an the Great Emancipator.
As an adult, the Southern apologists that I have met have denied that it was about slavery, and yet have never been able to explain to me why the election of Lincoln was sufficient provocation for secession. I am led to conclude that it was, in fact, his opposition to the expansion of slavery into the territories that was the cause, and therefore that slavery was the issue. I have posted Jefferson Davis's farewell to his Senate colleagues, and some other material, which admits as much.
Libertarians have invoked the principle of self- determination to favor the South. My answer is that the dissolution of political bonds must have a good cause, and that the defense of slavery was not it. Constitutionally, the argument that sovereignty resides in the States, and was merely borrowed by the Federal government, does not hold up. "We the people" formed the Union, not the several states. Ratification through the states was a matter of convenience. In any event, it was inevitable that there be war, the Confederacy fired the first shot, and therefore must answer for the justification. Legalism is insufficient.
I do not understand how anyone of libertarian inclinations can defend the South anyway, since it does amount to a defense of the right of one one race to determine the status of another. And the subjugated race would not even have been on these shores without an active, and deplorably barbaric, slave trade.
The Southern aristocracy shows the decadence of aristocracy generally, and it is ill- becoming a republican to defend it. There is little to show for Southern aristocracy, in respect of literature or art, and certainly less than New England bequeathed the nation. Their cotillions and elaborate manners are an offense, since their gentility was bought through bondage. Courtesy, in any case, was not their exclusive possession.
I realize that Robert E. Lee was an emancipationist, and fought for Virginia. He also opposed secession, but felt a primary loyalty to his home state...... |
