Just read This article.
The Civil War was the last time we, as a nation, had to deal with the secession of states from the union to form national bodies of their own. It started because the Slave states of the South had become the minority in Congress and the population, and their views were on the way out. The measures they sought to pass were often blocked or denied, while northern restrictions on their well-being and business (plantations with slaves) became constrictive. The South felt they had no choice but to form their own government, their own currency, and their own exchange that saw to their needs. The Confederate States of America was formed during this time, consisting of all the states that had agreed to secede from the Union. The United States of America went to war to bring them back into the fold.
At first, the Confederacy was winning the battles. They fought and defeated several generals the North had claimed would trounce the South. The North raised army after army, and sent thousands of men to their death, while the South fought a war of attrition with what they had. In the end it came down to three major things that occurred during the war that lost it for the South:
1. 3 Gruesome and costly defeats - I'm speaking of Antietam, Vicksburg and Gettysburg. These three losses were what changed the course of the war for the South. They didn't have the population to match the North, and could not sacrifice as many as they at each battle without suffering irreparable damage to their numbers. Between the three of them, the battles took over 500,000 southern lives. When Grant took over, and used the North's 3 to 1 population ratio into effect to overwhelm the South, it proved the statement that winning battles does not win the war. The South could not compete with the loss of life like the North. They surrendered after four bitter years of struggle - grudgingly at that.
2. Raw Material Economy - Much of the South's economy was focused on the production of raw materials. Before the secession, they would ship their raw goods to the north, the north would turn them into manufactured goods, and the south would purchase those goods from the north. It was a cyclical symbiosis. Plantation owners made profits, while the common man often worked in the mines, had his own fields to plow, or worked on the sea in fishing or merchant vessels. When the secession occurred, this meant that the North had to find a new seller, and the south had to find a new buyer. It is always easier to find a seller than it is to find a buyer. The South didn't really have the industry to use their own raw materials, at the time, so they started building some. Their production didn't get too far off the ground. In essence, because they could not raise enough money as a government and country on their own, and because many of the buyers on the market were trading with the north as well, the south's economy suffered.
3. Lack of Political Alliances - Europe didn't want to get involved in the war. The South couldn't bring them over. France and Britain had their own issues, and a surplus of cotton. They didn't need the South's cotton, or other raw materials, and weren't in a situation to back either side. Russia was in full support of the Union. Because of this, the Southern economy fell, the more versatile northern economy grew, and, without friends, the south could only attempt to keep them uninterested in helping the north.
Okay - enough with the history. Let's look at it today. Right now, the federal government has a split between the House of Representatives and the Senate. Republicans (rural voice) have the majority in the former, and Democrats (urban voice) have the majority in the Senate. The Executive Branch remains in the control of Democrats. There was recently an election that affirmed the presidency of an African-American for a second term. States of the South, traditionally an ethnically prejudiced people, have just signed a petition to secede from the Union. In fact, many people from every state have signed such petitions - nowhere near the majority voice - but the conversation has gone there.
Is this a joke? Really? Has our unwillingness as a society to accept our neighbor's voice as legitimate gone to such an extent that people are willing to destroy their own country? Has the propaganda machine of the right taken this too far? Well, let's play this out, shall we?
Okay, so we let them secede. What do they have now? Untold trillions of dollars worth of debt to a foreign nation who has the most powerful weaponry on the face planet that may or may not accept your new currency that is backed by severely less population than it was before. They try to pay off the debt, but their GDP doesn't even cover the interest, so the U.S. knocks at their door with a drone and says pay up (from their bunker in Washington while they're watching the camera on the drone), or be conquered. They can't pay up, they become a colony, and have even less say in the government than before they seceded. How does that sound? Or, maybe we let them stay on as their own country, and we just blockade the interstate highways in and out - the U.S. did build them - and start charging them massive taxes on their incoming goods. Since they owe the US so much money, we can probably arrange some sort of deal where they become a protectorate, and they can start holding all of our manufacturing plants we would have otherwise built in China, because we wouldn't be paying them anything - they'd be working off their debt. Hell, that actually sounds like a good idea. Can we just enslave the whole former state that wants to secede, and then have them work off their tremendous debt to the federal government for all their nice public things - it'd be like a prison state, only a debtor's prison.
So, before you jump on this Secession bandwagon - please think. I just really can't believe that whole "The South will Rise Again" thing is still there. The "patriot" waving the flag of the Confederacy in the face of his unaccepted black president - it looks pretty sad doesn't it? Whether or not it is born of racism, the image is, in and of itself, something of racist creation. Perhaps this is the last gasp of a generation who embraced racial segregation - perhaps it is a sad look at our near future. What I am really glad about is the fact that many of those people voicing opposition are older crowds. I would have no concern about a bunch of old people taking to the streets - don't think it would last long or go very far. The March of the Walkers.
No comments:
Post a Comment