any American history buffs?

[mddubya]

The War of Northern Aggression will always be a sore subject. If you read the history books, it was actually over unfair taxation instead of slavery.

But I'm more of an recent history buff. The War of Northern Aggression, WWI. WWII. A excellent book on WWII is, "Run Silent, Run Deep", about submarines during WWII.

 

[bryguy]

I am Southern by birth, and have lived in the South my whole life. As to the Civil war, just try to follow me here, had the South been successful, what would the world look like today? Who would have stopped the Germans and the Japanese in WW II? How about the Soviet block during the cold war? My point is, Lincoln, though you may not like him( and I am not a big fan of him, but for different reasons) by his actions, in the long run shaped the world in a way he could not imagine, nor could anyone from that time. For a little different perspective(very pro southern) about the 'Civil' War(nothing civil about it), I would suggest "The South Was Right" Remember, this is a very very pro Southern book, but it is kinda interesting to see the thought proccess involved in the conclussions that are reached. Not the most accurate book fact wise, but it is different. I really am more into the events that lead up to the Revolution, nad the dabate that raged over how to obtain independence. Claire, you have it right. Interesting to me that the founding fathers had a vision for the way the country was too function, and that there should never be career politicians(and that is what existed in England at the time) and they also understood how power corrupts good men.

 

[mddubya]

There was a movie on IFC recently called "CSA". It covered just that Bry, what would have happened had the south won. It was done rather tongue in cheek naturally, but it had America attacking Japan in a preemptive strike.

 

[bryguy]

There was a movie on IFC recently called "CSA". It covered just that Bry, what would have happened had the south won. It was done rather tongue in cheek naturally, but it had America attacking Japan in a preemptive strike.

Might have to google that up and take a look at it.

 

[zaphod]

The War of Northern Aggression will always be a sore subject. If you read the history books, it was actually over unfair taxation instead of slavery.

But I'm more of an recent history buff. The War of Northern Aggression, WWI. WWII. A excellent book on WWII is, "Run Silent, Run Deep", about submarines during WWII.

Taxes being a issue could certainly be argued with ease. As soon as the Southern States followed South Carolina's succession lead as number off spending bills stonewalled by the Southern Block were passed. Including the funds to complete the trans continental railroad, the Land grant University system, and the precursor to the modern public education system K-12.

The Land Grant bill I am reminded of each time I visit the University of Wisconsin Madison campus. There is a statue of Lincoln set on Bascom Hill in front of the Old Administration building ,Bascom Hall, which over looks the 1st buildings of campus. He appears to be looking not only upon those buildings but also down State Street which terminates with a marvelous view of the State Capitol. Very appropriate.

 

[zaphod]

When studying a period of history I find it useful to approach the era from two angles. The "big thought angle" such as the John Adams book is one. Then for the second I seek out a narrative descriptive of the preceptions of the common man. The Big picture angle is great but if taken alone creates a mythical nature about it. (Claire from Clare's post)

We are currently, as you read this, are creating history. Our reaction to the big ideas and big events are just as important as those ideas and events themselves.

History evaluation is very easy if you look through the 20/20 hindsight lens. The Fog of current events and our reaction to the fog is what shapes the history. Therefore I like to adventure down both roads.

 

[mddubya]

When studying a period of history I find it useful to approach the era from two angles. The "big thought angle" such as the John Adams book is one. Then for the second I seek out a narrative descriptive of the preceptions of the common man. The Big picture angle is great but if taken alone creates a mythical nature about it. (Claire from Clare's post)

We are currently, as you read this, are creating history. Our reaction to the big ideas and big events are just as important as those ideas and events themselves.

History evaluation is very easy if you look through the 20/20 hindsight lens. The Fog of current events and our reaction to the fog is what shapes the history. Therefore I like to adventure down both roads.

Exactly Zaph, I was born and raised in the south. I've spent my entire life here. Am I proud of my southern heritage? Yes, but for the reasons we are known for our hospitality and kindness, not by any means because at one point in time slavery was rampant in the south. Do I think that in time slavery would have ended in the south, regardless? Yes. I'd like to think that at some time common decency and human nature would have taken over.

But looking at it from a southern perspective, the souths economy was based pretty much solely on cotton. It took slavery to make cotton profitable in the time before mechanization. And if you read more than the history books that are issued in school, the north was imposing taxes on the south on the exportation of cotton. Taxes and tariffs. The south could get almost double what the northern industries were willing to pay for cotton if they sold it to England and other overseas countries. But because of the tariffs that were imposed, it wasn't profitable. So actually, the Civil War was started for the exact same reason the Revolutionary War was, unfair taxation, without proper representation.

 

[TheWOAT]

When I read, "War of Northern Aggression," I think of the US invasion of Mexico... I wish I knew more US history, or had the History channel.

 

[ClairefromClare]

When studying a period of history I find it useful to approach the era from two angles. The "big thought angle" such as the John Adams book is one. Then for the second I seek out a narrative descriptive of the preceptions of the common man. The Big picture angle is great but if taken alone creates a mythical nature about it. (Claire from Clare's post)

We are currently, as you read this, are creating history. Our reaction to the big ideas and big events are just as important as those ideas and events themselves.

History evaluation is very easy if you look through the 20/20 hindsight lens. The Fog of current events and our reaction to the fog is what shapes the history. Therefore I like to adventure down both roads.

The key is to keep both perspectives. I love social history, which is sort of a variation on your common man thing. With kids in school, I see so much emphasis on people at the margins that they almost don't see the big picture. The western expansion was more than about Sacajawea, for example. And on and done.

But looking at it from a southern perspective, the souths economy was based pretty much solely on cotton. It took slavery to make cotton profitable in the time before mechanization. And if you read more than the history books that are issued in school, the north was imposing taxes on the south on the exportation of cotton. Taxes and tariffs. The south could get almost double what the northern industries were willing to pay for cotton if they sold it to England and other overseas countries. But because of the tariffs that were imposed, it wasn't profitable. So actually, the Civil War was started for the exact same reason the Revolutionary War was, unfair taxation, without proper representation.

A few years back, I read a bio of Frederick Olmstead--the founder of American landscape architecture. He was opposed to slavery but took the position that the south could raise cotton more efficiently and with more profit if it had a paid labor force. Apparently he traveled all over the south, lecturing to that effect, with absolutely zero result.

I'm such a math nerd--I want to see the hard numbers. Certainly an engaged, motivated work force is going to do a better job than forced labor. But I wonder if you can prove it out?

I also always loved JFK's description of Washington D.C., where I lived for a number of years: it combines southern efficiency with northern charm.

 

[zaphod]

The key is to keep both perspectives. I love social history, which is sort of a variation on your common man thing. With kids in school, I see so much emphasis on people at the margins that they almost don't see the big picture. The western expansion was more than about Sacajawea, for example. And on and done

Claire and others ---With this thought in mind as an historian how would you explain to your children's children the recession/depression we are currently in the midst of. Main point of emphasis. What points of view?

For me its something along the lines of old national institutions collide with a new international mode of business. Adjustments made under duress. India and China at cross roads for their place on world economic/political stage--Europe Union model stress tested --United States government reshapes its long held policies of control of publicly held companies in an attempt to create transparency.

For the "real person picture" I would present the stories of a steel worker in China vs US. The same contrast between a Tech mid level engineer in India and a mid level Wall Streeter in US. Finally a average farmer (respective for each country) in China, India, Brazil, US, EU.

what say you????

 

[DouginGA]

Exactly Zaph, I was born and raised in the south. I've spent my entire life here. Am I proud of my southern heritage? Yes, but for the reasons we are known for our hospitality and kindness, not by any means because at one point in time slavery was rampant in the south. Do I think that in time slavery would have ended in the south, regardless? Yes. I'd like to think that at some time common decency and human nature would have taken over.

But looking at it from a southern perspective, the souths economy was based pretty much solely on cotton. It took slavery to make cotton profitable in the time before mechanization. And if you read more than the history books that are issued in school, the north was imposing taxes on the south on the exportation of cotton. Taxes and tariffs. The south could get almost double what the northern industries were willing to pay for cotton if they sold it to England and other overseas countries. But because of the tariffs that were imposed, it wasn't profitable. So actually, the Civil War was started for the exact same reason the Revolutionary War was, unfair taxation, without proper representation.

good points there mddubya. If the north was so opposed to slavery as to fight a war, then why were 5 union states still allowing slavery until after the war.
like most wars, it was about money. If I remember right, the south was about a third of the population, but provided about 2/3rds of the country income.

 

[zaphod]

good points there mddubya. If the north was so opposed to slavery as to fight a war, then why were 5 union states still allowing slavery until after the war.
like most wars, it was about money. If I remember right, the south was about a third of the population, but provided about 2/3rds of the country income.

If we were creatures insistent upon morals (slavery one of the morals) communism would be very comfortable clothing. $ was the driving factor.

If we look at President Lincoln's writing he was willing to compromise within the issue of slavery. His primary goal was the preservation of the Union which had a pre-existing great chasm in it. State's right vs Federalism. Agrarian vs industrial. By the time Buchanan resigns the previously dominate Whig party is in utter disarray, the Democrat party split into a South and North factions, the the Republican party just gaining traction. As a result of the fractured opposition the Republican Party surprisingly acquires the executive branch.

South Carolina becomes extremely disturbed as it perceives the Republican Party as an extreme threat because of it's association with the Abolitionist movement strengthened by a strong Religious revival in the North. Explosive politics. The fire is fanned with the recent innovation of the telegraph. That meant hot political rhetoric could easily be spread in an environment which was used to the cooling effects of time. The stars align and the "rest is history".

 

[bryguy]

I think that you could very well go with your model, but you could also tell the 'fact' side of it as well. That is one of the issues I have with so much that is being taugth in all aspect of the education system now, to much interpretation and not enough fact. The facts are what they are, and should form the foundation from which everything else results.

 

[zaphod]

I think that you could very well go with your model, but you could also tell the 'fact' side of it as well. That is one of the issues I have with so much that is being taugth in all aspect of the education system now, to much interpretation and not enough fact. The facts are what they are, and should form the foundation from which everything else results.

Most enthusiastic agreement.


An excellent quote as when considering historical events---You may have your own opinions but not your own FACTS. My previous post is certainly not referenced. Could be but my time is limited. When forming my opinions such as the generation of the Civil War I certainly research to gather info before opinion formed.

The causes of the Civil War are not clear cut. Depends on your points of emphasis. Douglas Fredrick's or John Brown's perspective would certainly point to slavery. As would a enthusiastic Abolitionist. I am talking about taxes therefore money as the general masses. Then as it is now the colective vote on the effects of a policy ones own backyard. Their bank accounts included. Common people doing common things may create uncommon results.

 

[ClairefromClare]

Claire and others ---With this thought in mind as an historian how would you explain to your children's children the recession/depression we are currently in the midst of. Main point of emphasis. What points of view?

For me its something along the lines of old national institutions collide with a new international mode of business. Adjustments made under duress. India and China at cross roads for their place on world economic/political stage--Europe Union model stress tested --United States government reshapes its long held policies of control of publicly held companies in an attempt to create transparency.

For the "real person picture" I would present the stories of a steel worker in China vs US. The same contrast between a Tech mid level engineer in India and a mid level Wall Streeter in US. Finally a average farmer (respective for each country) in China, India, Brazil, US, EU.

what say you????

I don't have an answer for you Zaph--I'd like to think because, given that we're still in it, I don't have the distance to summarize/categorize it yet.

My kids are young enough that that will come. For now, they just watch their father fret and me insist on being an optimist. The usual family schizophrenia.