TASCLASS: The U.S. Civil War: Why such mind boggling changes north and south?

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Why such mind boggling changes north and south?

We begin our exploration of the massive change in the U.S. between 1830 and 1860. Some argue that the tremendous differences between north and south made war inevitable. I do not believe that.

But combine tremendous increases in population, huge shifts in geography, and new technologies with incompetent political leadership and you have a big problem.

By the 1850's, the U.S. had a big, big problem.

First, however a review of Monday's class. Basically we discussed the conditions necessary for economic growth, capitalist style:

What did one need back then to get a factory underway?

LABOR: a large, cheap labor force. Both skilled and unskilled.

BUILDINGS, LAND, AND EQUIPMENT: the materials to build, the land to build on, land that is near labor, power, and supplies, and other factories and businesses to produce the supplies

POWER: Small rivers to power water wheels and coal to fire furnaces.

TRANSPORTATION: Roads, railroads, and canals to carry raw materials, replacement parts, and to ship finished goods out to other markets.

CAPITAL: investors to help raise money, banks to make and secure loans

RAW MATERIALS: iron, wood, cotton, hemp, etc

FOOD: Industrial workers do not raise their own. It has to be raised elsewhere.

Each of these elements build upon one another. How?

2 comments:

Pat said...: "We begin our exploration of the massive change in the U.S. between 1830 and 1860. Some argue that the tremendous differences between north and south made war inevitable. I do not believe that.

But combine tremendous increases in population, huge shifts in geography, and new technologies with incompetent political leadership and you have a big problem."

What?
That's such a contradiction. Those were the major differences between the North and South. Most Micks in the north were to busy being exploited and living in squaller to really care about the politics or even to learn to read newspapers. They only started to care when they were being drafted into a war they had no idea about and had no reason to fight in. And the hillbillies of the South resented the aristocrats on the plantations as well as the aristocrats in the Northern factories.

At least some of the elite in the South realized that the seeds of a technological revolution were already growing. In the mid to late 18th century Great Britain was a nexus of ideas that eventually led to the spread of the industrial revolution. A machine that needs coal for power can do as much work as 20 slaves and doesn't need to be kept fed, or clothed, or disciplined, or housed, or ect... And the most foreboding part was that these machines were constantly being made more and more efficient. What if those machines could be made to farm...

This scared the hell out of them because what if the North decides to grow and refine hemp instead, or what if the machines operate so efficiently and cheaply that the North won't pay a premium price for cotton. There are plenty of places in the world that could grow cotton and grow it cheaply. Hell, with the expansion west all it would take is some factory tycoon to buy up a bunch of cheap land and hire farmers that knew how to work steam tractors. What about the explosion in canal and rail road building in the 18th century. All of which were in the North. Those were equivalent to modern interstates.

On top of all that the North was experiencing a flood of immigrants.
The north had slaves too: the Irish, Italians, Chinese.
The factory owners barely had to pay them when they worked. When the owners didn't need them just fired and forgot.

The Southern elite was in a bind because they spent decades investing all their money in slaves and land suitable for growing cotton. They didn't diversify their investments and all of a sudden they found themselves about to get cornholed by the ever evolving economy. With the North's anti slavery sentiment and the explosion of eligible voters in the north it became be inevitable that in the near future the value of both commodities would plummet like a rock. That meant that these elites wouldn't be able to enjoy their lifestyle anymore. This was unacceptable to them and this is why things like the Dredd Scott decision were so political and later how the Kansas compromise turned into an orgy of violence.

The South was fighting to stall the North and the future from happening. One side choose exploitation and mechanization, the other enslavement. Those are the fundamental differences and the tinder for the flames of war. They had made their beds decades before and now they were forced to lie in them.; September 25, 2007 at 8:24 PM
pr said...: Excellent comments- very savvy. All your points make sense, and accurately trace out the economic situation north and south. But massive economic changes do not necessarily meet civil war is next: look at the US after WWII.
War can always be productively looked at as a failure of policies or political systems. US leadership was abysmal throughout the 1850's. And the leadership in the South- with the exception of Lee and Jefferson Davis, was almost uniformly poor as well.
I will address your comments point by point a little later on.

You write well. Very well.

pete; October 1, 2007 at 2:49 AM

Post a Comment

Class Overview

Part Three: War and Politics (4 weeks)

Here we look at the cascade of events that followed Lincoln's election in 1860, leading through the secession of the southern states, to the beginning of the war. We then will consider three of four crucial battles, each of which could have changed the war's outcome: Shiloh, the first battle with huge casualties; Antietem, both ghastly and inconclusive, the first invasion of a Union state; and Gettysburg, another attempt by the South to push to devastation off of its crucial farmland.

We then look at the two political leaders, Lincoln and Davis, and the two new and consequential military leaders, Grant and Lee. We will discuss the intersection of politics and military strategy in a democracy and the very important realization that in modern war, the political dimension is far more significant than what happens on the battlefield.

Then on to the most important aspect of the war: the vast changes the country begins to undergo, particularly the way in which slaves take their fate into their own hands and decisively shift the advantage to the northern armies.

We will then discuss the battle of Petersburg. As with so many of these battles it was notable for both tragic incompetence and incredible determination, was also strangely modern in its weaponry and tactics. This is the finally turning point of the war, the last realistic chance the South had for a military victory.

This portion of the class will end with a week long look at Lincoln's key speeches: Cooper Union, Gettysburg, and the Second Inaugural. We will then compare their effectiveness and clarity with those of some of his political opponents.
(thanks to P.W. for the idea...)

Part Four: Surrender and Reconstruction (3 weeks)

Grant has won. He offers very generous terms to the defeated Confederates, once again showing that he understands Lincoln's intentions better than any of the previous generals. Lincoln is assassinated and the country is plunged into mourning, fear, and anger. Reconstruction of the South begins with President Johnson handing the task over to southern whites, which eventually so infuriates northern voters that they hand over Congress to the radical Republicans, who promptly pass of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution. The Civil Rights Era had, in a way, begun. For the first time, Black Americans have a significant political voice in the South. Yet it does not last. The Federal Government begins to pull back and violent, reactionary elements in the South begin to terrorize, kill, and otherwise suppress these newly enfranchised citizens . A new political order forms, not based on slavery per se, but with the goal of pushing Black Americans out of power and into a new kind of servitude.

Part Five: The Civil War Now (1 week)

We end the class with a brief look at the rise of the Civil Rights Movement in the early 20th century and the various ways that the Civil War has shaped modern American. We will also consider how the struggle continues over what the war means for us today.

Part One: Dred Scott (3 weeks) (finished)

Dred Scott vs. Sanford is unquestionably one of the three or four most consequential court cases in American History. Scott was a slave transported by his owner from the slave state of Missouri through several territories in which slavery was not permitted. His claim was that since he had lived in a free state, he was thus free. The case forced the Supreme Court to decide a number of very important issues, among them the management of slavery in the rapidly expanding territories and the status of slaves in these territories.

We will discuss how and why the case was decided as it was and explore several crucial events that led directly to it including the Fugitive Slave Clause in the U.S. Constitution, the Missouri Compromise, the rise of the Republican Party, the Fugitive Slave Act, the Compromise of 1854, and "Bleeding Kansas".

Part Two: Economics (1 week)

The two regions of the United States had changed enormously since the country's founding. As the northern economy diversified and industrialized, the south grew ever more reliant on slaves and agriculture.

TASCLASS: The U.S. Civil War

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Why such mind boggling changes north and south?

2 comments:

Class Overview

Dred Scott

Blog Archive

About Me