Slavery & The Civil War: Why the GOP is Not the Party of Racism

You know how we’re taught in school that the evil Confederacy seceded from the Union and the Christ-like Lincoln swooped in with the northern army and saved the day, freeing the slaves in the process? Well, let’s take a look at that.

In school, they make sure to teach you that the Civil War was not about slavery. I don’t know why they don’t try to use that the way they use everything else, but that’s how it is. They’re right. It was not about slavery. Emancipation was a by-product; a tool used by the North to help win the war. The war was about the federal government exercising powers it had no business exercising (and some that it did have business exercising) and the South saying “Enough of this! We’re out!” Now here’s something they won’t teach you in school. It was legal. The South seceding from the Union (at least those states that were original ratifiers of the Constitution) was completely legal. These states agreed to ratify the Constitution on a number of conditions. One of them was that, if they didn’t like the country this created, they could leave. Which is exactly what they did in the late 1800s. But Lincoln was all “No, we can’t have this.” and started the Civil War. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to demonize Lincoln. He was one of the best Presidents we’ve ever had. I think freeing the slaves was great and I like most of the other things he did; and I understand the reasoning behind trying to keep the South in the Union, but I think he was wrong to enter into the Civil War.

The biggest argument for invading the South was that the Union had to be united; otherwise, foreigners might attack us or democracy might fail. In making this argument, people often give the impression that, had the South seceded successfully, the United States would’ve fallen apart and died. Near as I can tell, that’s not true. We simply would’ve been two countries (not sure how Texas fits into all this). Now, there would’ve been border disputes and such, but ultimately, we’d just be a little more like other continents and you’d need a passport to cross the Potomac. Actually, if Maryland had been allowed to secede, like it wanted to, you wouldn’t.

Basically, what I’m saying is that what Lincoln did when he invaded the South was illegal. The Confederacy was legitimate and should’ve been allowed to remain autonomous.

Now, I don’t know if I’ve yet said it on this blog, but abortion is the number-one issue for me. I agree with the conservative stance on pretty much every issue anyway, but if conservatives (all else being equal) were suddenly pro-choice and liberals were pro-life, I’d be voting for liberal candidates. I’d do so reluctantly, knowing that their economic policy was horrible and that Global Warming is a hoax and all, but I’d do it because millions of babies’ lives are more important to me than how expensive my gas is or whether I’ll be able to afford a house when I’m older.

But back in the Civil War era, abortion wasn’t an issue. I’m sure some ladies had some weird methods of becoming “un-pregnant” but, by and large, it was nonexistent. So, my number one issue back then would have been slavery. Now, unlike abortion, slavery doesn’t kill millions of people (at least not directly), so I might not have been quite so infuriated at its existence, but that would have been my vote-deciding issue. Until the Civil War. Knowing what was coming, I’d probably have voted with the South because, as bad as slavery was, the death and destruction of the Civil War was even worse. And let’s face it, slavery would eventually have dissappeared anyway. Why do you think it was nearly gone in the North? It’s not because Northerners were (for the most part) morally superior or great humanitarians. It’s because slavery wasn’t necessary, because technology made it so. Eventually, technology would’ve replaced slavery in the South.

Something like 620,000 Americans died in the Civil War. To put that in perspective, there were about 32 million Americans (slaves and free) in the country back then. There’s about ten times that now. So, if the Civil War had occurred today, the death equivalent would have been 6.2 million Americans. Also, roughly 645,000 slaves were brough to the US from Africa before slavery was outlawed. Let’s say there was some sort of race-specific plague that wiped them out. The death toll of every African American slave ever brought to the US would have been barely more than the death toll of the Civil War. That’s why invasion of the South would’ve been my vote-deciding issue.

So the basic idea is this: Prior to the Civil War, I would have voted for anyone trying to abolish (legally) slavery. Just before the Civil War and during the Civil War, I would have voted for anyone trying to end the Civil War or prevent it’s start. After the Civil War, it would be split between addressing racism and getting back rights (voting and such) for the seccessionists. Nowadays, abortion is the deciding factor for me.

And let me describe exactly how I would’ve been anti-slavery. I would have had nothing to do with the Underground Railroad, because that would be breaking the law. As a Christian, I do what my Bible tells me. It tells me to obey the law unless that causes me to sin. And while slavery is looked down upon; it is not necessarily sinful. Now, that’s debatable because US slavery and early A.D. slavery in Israel are different. Back then, slaves were either prisoners of war (and I doubt there were many of those, since Israel wasn’t exactly kicking butt at the time) or they sold themselves into slavery. So, I am unsure what the right course of action back then would be. What my “code” would probably be is I would not help the Underground Railroad law-breaking types, but I certainly wouldn’t be turning them in if I found them, either. I would not help a slave escape to the North, but I wouldn’t help the law send him back, either (even if that meant going to prison due to that stupid deputy-making law thingy). I would concentrate my efforts on getting slavery outlawed (which, itself, would have been perfectly legal, as the Constitution explicitly allows this 20 or so years after ratification). And I certainly would have been eye-to-eye with the Lincoln-like anti-expansion of slavery folks.

Oh, and let me clarify that “slavery is not necessarily sinful” comment a bit more. While slavery is not necessarily sinful, the slave trade is; that is, the buying and selling of humans. And I might have been willing to break the law to fight against that.

Oh, and one last simple comment about the Civil War. Northerners, face the facts, the South kicked the North’s butt. Big time. Larger population and greater resources (and possibly the E.P.) were the only reasons the North won the war. Southerners were better fighters, were the home team, were practically all volunteers (though the North certainly had their share of those), were fighting for their own freedom (just look at what happened to them after the Civil War), had the Constitution on their side, and ultimately lost roughly 100,000 fewer people than the North. The moral of the story is: Don’t mess with rednecks!