Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nihil who wrote (33311)	3/25/1999 6:45:00 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Important to avoid the trap of assuming that the civil war was fought over slavery. I believe that tariff policy had a lot more to do with it. The core issue, of course, was the right of a majority to impose its will over the interests of a minority. But if we look closely at the issues we see a steady and growing animosity over fundamental economic policies. The industrial north supported protective tariffs which would, in effect, have forced the agricultural south to consume American-made products. The southerners wanted access to cheaper and better quality manufactured goods from Europe, and resorted to smuggling - with official sanction - when tariff bills were passed. The north had a difficult time engaging on this issue, though, as the tariffs were also major burdens on the consuming classes in the north, and were not something the common man would be willing to go to war over. Slavery fit that bill much better. The tariffs promoted by the industrialists in the north would, in effect, have reduced the south to the status of an internal colony, a purpose that was eventually accomplished by other means.