The heritage, the very existence, of the Confederacy is now under attack by self-serving factions whose sole purpose is to rewrite history and discredit the South and the memory of the soldiers who fought for The Cause. As such, Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest SCV Camp 469 is determined to do our part to bring to light the truth about such issues as the flag, slavery and hate groups. Each month will feature a pertinent question with an answer based on fact, not twisted half-truths.
Question: What Was the Real Reason for the Civil War?
Answer:
States' Rights! - NOT Slavery
Walter
Williams
Jewish World Review, December
2, 1998
THE
PROBLEMS THAT LED TO THE CIVIL WAR are the same problems today ----big,
intrusive government. The reason we don't face the specter of another Civil War
is because today's Americans don't have yesteryear's spirit of liberty and
constitutional respect, and political statesmanship is in short supply.
Actually,
the war of 1861 was not a civil war. A civil war is a conflict between two or
more factions trying to take over a government. In 1861, Confederate President
Jefferson Davis was no more interested in taking over Washington than George
Washington was interested in taking over England in 1776. Like Washington, Davis
was seeking independence. Therefore, the war of 1861 should be called "The
War Between the States" or the "War for Southern Independence."
The more bitter southerner might call it the "War of Northern
Aggression."
History
books have misled today's Americans to believe the war was fought to free
slaves.
Statements from the time suggest otherwise. In
President Lincoln's first inaugural address, he said, "I have no purpose,
directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the
states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so."
During
the war, in an 1862 letter to the New York Daily Tribune editor Horace Greeley,
Lincoln said, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union,
and it is not either to save or destroy slavery." A recent article by
Baltimore's Loyola College Professor Thomas DiLorenzo titled "The Great
Centralizer," in The Independent Review (Fall 1998), cites quotation after
quotation of similar northern sentiment about slavery.
Lincoln's
intentions, as well as that of many northern politicians, were summarized by
Stephen Douglas during the presidential debates. Douglas accused Lincoln of
wanting to "impose on the nation a uniformity of local laws and
institutions and a moral homogeneity dictated by the central government"
that "place at defiance the intentions of the republic's founders."
Douglas was right, and Lincoln's vision for our nation has now been accomplished
beyond anything he could have possibly dreamed.
A
precursor for a War Between the States came in 1832, when South Carolina called
a convention to nullify tariff acts of 1828 and 1832, referred to as the
"Tariffs of Abominations." A compromise lowering the tariff was
reached, averting secession and possibly war. The North favored protective
tariffs for their manufacturing industry. The South, which exported agricultural
products to and imported manufactured goods from Europe, favored free trade and
was hurt by the tariffs. Plus, a northern-dominated
Congress enacted laws similar to Britain's Navigation Acts to protect northern
shipping interests.
Shortly
after Lincoln's election, Congress passed the highly protectionist Morrill
tariffs.
That's
when the South seceded, setting up a new government. Their constitution was
nearly identical to the US. Constitution except that it outlawed protectionist
tariffs, business handouts and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all
spending measures.
The
only good coming from the War Between the States was the abolition of slavery.
The great principle enunciated in the Declaration of Independence that "Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed" was overturned by force of arms. By destroying the states' right
to secession, Abraham Lincoln opened the door to the kind of unconstrained,
despotic, arrogant government we have today, something the framers of the
Constitution could not have possibly imagined.
States
should again challenge Washington's unconstitutional acts through nullification.
But you tell me where we can find leaders with the love, courage and respect for
our Constitution like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and John C. Calhoun.
Walter
E. Williams is an economics professor at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.
His column appears Sundays in the Daily
News.