My Take on the Lost Cause

This Is FQB
"I recently read Kennedy's, no not JFK's, book, The South Was Right! The should have printed it on the inside of a trash can, because it was total garbage!"

This is just a little something I wrote up to respond to a comment on the discussion pages of alternathistory.com. For the full context of the post and subsequent responses see the Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900 section. The threat is entitled Unconstitutional Abe!

Sorry, but Lincoln did what he had to do. Despite the Neo-Confederate ranting of such masterpieces as "The South Was Right" (Kennedy & Kennedy, 1994) and "The Politically Correct Guide to American History" (Woods, 2004) the South was in the wrong (from both the viewpoint of today and the 1860s).

It is very difficult for use to understand what the nation was going through at that time. It is unlike the unconstitutional actions of today’s war on terror in that the US was faced by a large scale internal revolt. The only way to preserve the Union was for Lincoln to take measures that were seen by Southern apologists as over harsh, but already had precedent in American history (See the Whiskey Rebellion). Lincoln's reactions were actually mild in comparison to those taken by other nations in similar situations even today. There were very few if any executions (leaving out reprisals for the various Indian uprisings of Minnesota as the US-Indian conflict was a totally separate affair from the ACW), the press, despite closure of pro-south newspapers, remained free (so much so that much of Lee's intel on Northern troop movements was gleaned from reading Northern newspapers), and the suspension of habeas corpus and declaration of marshal law are both valid tools used by the executive to quell insurrection.

The South's reaction to Lincoln's election was based on the wish to maintain slavery and its bigoted ideology of racial superiority. If the real reason for secession had been the maintenance of states rights than why did the South force northern states to adhere to the fugitive slave law (see fugitive slave laws; 1850 statute on wikipedia)? Why did the South force territories to accept slavery despite overwhelming popular votes against the institution (Kansas 1856)? Why did southern politicians try to prevent northerns from using the mail to send abolitionists reading material? Why did all of the documents of secession drawn up by Southern states cite northern attempts at curtailing slavery as the primary reason for leaving the Union? Why did the Confederacy adopt nearly all of the same measures as the North used (draft, income tax, suspension of habeas corpus) when fighting the Civil War? Why did the Southern states use military force against its once citizens when they expressed their wish to remain in the Union (eastern Tennessee, western North Carolina, western Texas)? Why did southerns applaud the vicious attack by S.C. Sen. Preston Brooks on Mass. Sen. Charles Sumner (May 22, 1856)?

The Civil War also was not a war about economic differences. The Nullification Crisis of 1832 proved that by showing how economic differences between the two sections of the nation were often solved by compromise. If it had been an economic tariff dispute the South could have waited until Lincoln was made president and then blustered until a compromise was reached. As it was the Norths move towards industrialization coupled with the opening of competing cotton areas in Egypt and India was increasing North-South trade and making foreign markets less lucrative.

Thus, you have to ask yourself...Was Lincoln justified in using constitutionally questionable methods to preserve the Union and preventing the establishment of a southern slavocracy? There were no Federally mandated mass executions, no mass disappearances of political opponents and no gulag like prisoner camps. Yes, on the local level there were numerous "little" (and I hate to use this word because if you are the victim of such atrocity it is in no way "little") atrocities, but Lincoln hated this and worked to lessen their occurrence.

Neither Lincoln nor the Abolitionists were the evil ones of the Civil War. It was the aristocratic slave owners that brought about the death of almost a million Americans. They spread a gospel of prejudice towards blacks and a message of hate and fear towards the Northerns who opposed them. They dragged the poor white majority of the South into a war that would ensure that they remained that way if the CSA had won, and led them to death and economic ruin when they lost. After the war they fought black equality and when Lincoln's foolish Republican predecessors gave these same people back the reigns of power they reestablished their ideology of hate (yes, I know it spread North, but I never said Northerns were immune from stupidity and bigotry.). Even today many people, including quite a few on these boards, buy into their "Lost Cause" and "the North was just as bad" propaganda.

I fully understand that the Northern government did (and still does) many horrible things, but I know that any world with a surviving CSA would be far more miserable place than our world, and I thank Lincoln for ensuring that alternate world never occurred.