My Account    
  Shopping Cart   ContactAbout
Home   Papers   History   T-Shirts   Concrete Calculator   Store
The Civil War: the Why part - Slavery? States's Right? Agricultural? Industrial? Or is it something else?

Last Updated: Thursday, February 8, 2018 9:36 PM
* * * note: rough draft * * *
Avoiding the war...

If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

- Letter from President Abraham Lincoln to the
   Editor of the New York Times,   Horace Greeley

Yet, looking beyond the Slavery issue (and even the Tariffs issue), one can see the first and overall military goals of the Union North during the Civil War below and then realize what was  unavoidable...
Avoiding the war...
Cotton was the chief crop exported and was 60% of all exports. And likewise tariff on cotton paid for most, if not all, of the government operations.

The reason being, American Cotton supplied 75% of the World's Cotton.

With tariffs and a future political outlook that a successful business practice of Slavery that paid for the entire government operations would be abolished and, hence a form of "taxation without representation", the South saw their basic economic needs of survival were totally left out of the nation's political decisions. Hence, state by state, each voted to leave the union.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union...
If the South were allowed to secede, could not others states like in the West also secede and form a 3rd nation? Hence, if the South were to secede, why not the West? And what about the North, could not that also break into North West and North East? Hence, America would be like Europe having constant wars between themselves? Or like Africa, who also have constant wars over food and water among themselves?

Nevertheless, the Civil was not about "Evils of Slavery" as the Slaves did really well and all of their basic needs were met as Cotton was King. Moreover, if the Slaves actually wanted to run away, it should be asked that if absentee plantation landowners existed before the Civil War, then the "masters" were never at the plantation. Hence, the slaves had ample time to run away.

But isn't the Civil War about *not* creating another Africa or Europe where there are constant wars between the countries, or this case the States? In the Bigger Picture of History, a million dead from the American Civil War is nothing compared to many wars that had been going on in Europe and Africa for the past thousand years and also the foreseeable future.

America was a very young country back then and a hundred years old is nothing compared to those in Europe, Asia or Africa. Furthermore, resources like food and water were far more important back then than it is Today in the land of plenty, e.g. our current ability to preserve foods for long periods of time, refrigeration, running water, bottled water, high tech farming, etc.
Back lived from harvest to harvest
Back then during the Civil War, you lived from harvest to harvest....There were no supermarkets, Sam's Clubs, MRE's, 911, electricity, Tupperware, refrigerators, ziplock bags, etc.

While the North had Manufacturing, the South had a far greater control of the North American Eastern coastline and also the bottom portion of the Mississippi River. The South also had warmer climates and hence the ability to grow crops almost year round. This is an extremely important point as back then as they lived from Harvest to Harvest.

If the South were allowed to secede and if there were a long Winter, there could easily be famine in the North and the North would pay massive prices for goods to be shipped up North. You could see chaos, rioting and mass migration like you see in Venezuela, Cuba, and Syria if food were in short supply.

Accordingly, a study of History back 200 years ago can leave out the importance of food and water that we take for granted in Today's Land of Plenty.
Back lived from harvest to harvest
Besides the debated reasons about (a) Slavery and (b) Preserving the Union, some will say the Civil War was about money (or from one point of view, tariffs). The Federal Government was funded with Tariffs on imported goods that the South would need as the South was not industrialized.

However, from the North's Side, they could never, even to this day, allow the South to succeed for two (2) reasons below.
Reason #1 - Coastling
Reason #1 - The South had an enormous coastline on the East coast and South coast that connected to Europe and South America.

Reason #2 - New Orleans
Reason #2 - The South had New Orleans, the port at the mouth of the Mississippi River, which controls 40% of the rivers in Today America and probably 80% of the rivers in America around 1860's.

Reason 1 + 2: Coastline + New Orleans
FACTS: During the Civil War, food was near impossible to grow during the winter since soldiers were dying of scurvy, i.e. the lack of Vitamin C....e.g. potatoes and onions and citrus fruits.
Armys could not move and roads were impassible and so on. Armies basically encamped during the winter.

As you can see from the above map, Reason #1 + #2, the North can never allow the South to secede even with the high cost of lives in the Civil War. The reason being the same cost of lives on the South could have easily been inflicted upon the Union North in a short amount of time just from a loss of critical infrastructure.

Or put another way, the same death tolls of

(a) 25% of the White military males of the Confederacy who died during the Civil War to


(b) 25% of the Slaves who died of Starvation immediately afterwards from a completely decimated agricultural industry and transportation system
could have easily been done, indirectly or directly, against the Union North in short order as the South would have control of most of the coastlines, waterways, and infrastructure in Young America.

Quill Footer

Copyright © Founding Fathers