The God of the Machine - Tranche 28
Chapter XIII, Excerpt 1 of 1
Slavery, the Fault in the Structure
Feeble governments are those which have no adequate and legitimately instrumented opposition from the regional bases and the mass veto. Utter incompetence in government is finally achieved by what is called absolute power, whether by the name of democracy or as candid despotism. The continuance of slavery made it impossible for the Bill of Rights to limit the state governments as well as the federal government. This moral defect caused an equivalent structural defect.
Unless this distinction between stipulated powers and intrinsic strength is understood, there can be no relevant discussion of the subject. Human affairs are in the realm of moral law, which is of a higher order than mechanical law. The outcome may confound measurable probabilities. The potential of a nation cannot be appraised quantitatively. It consists in abstract ideas, in axioms of human relations. If slavery had not been admitted to the Constitution on tolerance, its original design was marvelously sound.
The appearance was delusive. Suddenly the free economy began to take over a greater territory than the area which accrued to slavery. The wealth and power of free-standing states increased by geometrical progression. The truth is that the South was not a real agrarian economy; it had no economy of its own, lacking the generator for a local circuit. In resorting to war, the slave states committed the moral error of repudiating a contract after taking special advantage through it.
Slavery, the Fault in the Structure
Feeble governments are those which have no adequate and legitimately instrumented opposition from the regional bases and the mass veto. Utter incompetence in government is finally achieved by what is called absolute power, whether by the name of democracy or as candid despotism. The continuance of slavery made it impossible for the Bill of Rights to limit the state governments as well as the federal government. This moral defect caused an equivalent structural defect.
Unless this distinction between stipulated powers and intrinsic strength is understood, there can be no relevant discussion of the subject. Human affairs are in the realm of moral law, which is of a higher order than mechanical law. The outcome may confound measurable probabilities. The potential of a nation cannot be appraised quantitatively. It consists in abstract ideas, in axioms of human relations. If slavery had not been admitted to the Constitution on tolerance, its original design was marvelously sound.
The appearance was delusive. Suddenly the free economy began to take over a greater territory than the area which accrued to slavery. The wealth and power of free-standing states increased by geometrical progression. The truth is that the South was not a real agrarian economy; it had no economy of its own, lacking the generator for a local circuit. In resorting to war, the slave states committed the moral error of repudiating a contract after taking special advantage through it.
The South’s main trading partner for cotton was Great Britain which was a classed society. Self-respect was gauged by which class one was born into. Class mobility was almost non-existent. Hence, after the slaves were freed, many, or perhaps most, southerners could not convince themselves to think of the freed slaves as fellow citizens.
The Civil War ended in 1865, yet Emmitt Till 13 years of age was tortured and hung in 1955 by the Klu Klux Klan. Senators and, at least, one Supreme (Hugo Black) were members of the KKK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux...
Given the racial strife in today’s America, I wonder if we Americans will ever reach the point where we look upon each other as unique and equal citizens under the Constitution? Whether or not we can attain the truly fundamental basis of civilized human relationships viz. What is yours is yours and what is mine is mine?
Yes. And a large measure of the South's fortunes were tied to the empty space in the warehouses of British textile manufacturers. Once those warehouses filled, the price of cotton cratered. This coincided with the start of the Civil War.
"Given the racial strife in today’s America..."
Most of that is manufactured by race hustlers and Democrats. Most people are pretty eager to live and let live. It is sad, yet ironic, that the so-called "oppressed" minorities do most of the oppression themselves: we see it in their song and music lyrics, their cultures, and their continuance of grievances long dead. It reminds me of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip: opportunity is a few hundred yards away and yet the political agitators insist on manufacturing fear and hate.
There was a book written in the 1960's, I believe, by the Communist Party of the USA. It suggested that Marxists use the black citizens of America to foment a race war and revolution to help destroy America, its Constitution, and our Individual Rights.
I think this book is being used as a playbook to create BLM and Antifa funded by Soros and the Democratic Party - and it is working, sadly.
The age-old technique of the tyrant: Take credit for the achievements of others and blame others for one’s own mistakes. The quest for the unearned and the avoidance of personal responsibility for evil deeds done. Sounds like some characters a book I thrice read.
Check your history before making unfounded assumptions. These events were already in progress. Cotton had been king for forty+ years, enabling the South to grow rich off the backs of slavery. The US was almost the exclusive exporter of cotton to the world, but the consumption/demand had been exceeded by the supply and prices were starting to drop even in the late 1850's. I know its popular in today's age to blame everything on the President, but back in those days the President didn't have much power (as it should be).
I never intimated that the price of cotton had anything to do with the beginning of hostilities. I used the term "coincided." You were the one who argued that Lincoln had everything to do with [the drop in prices]. I pointed out that prices had begun to drop before the Presidential race (not to mention the fact that Lincoln wasn't even a national legislator at that point, so he couldn't have had ANY effect on national trade policies, etc.)
I know people tend to want to blame things on specific people, but it looks to me like the South was a victim of its own success.
"it's entirely possible..."
You're welcome to speculate, but let's try to back it up with some actual events. At that point (1860), what was the most powerful government in the world? Great Britain. They had the most extensive land controls in the world and the most extensive trading networks. If they felt "threatened" by the sudden cut in the cotton supply, wouldn't they have jumped in and sided with the Confederacy? Yet they didn't, despite numerous entreaties from Southern Representatives. Great Britain wouldn't even sell the South arms. The few ships they did build for the South were completed but had to be sailed to the Caribbean for outfitting with cannons. And Great Britain would only accept payment in gold. (This from the Oxford History of the United States .) Seems like very strange behavior for a bunch of "mercantilist oligarchs..."
As for the States rights question, that's a matter of Federalism. The original idea in the Constitution was to have the States act as a check on the Federal government. That power (to check federal government overreach) has been all but squashed due to Supreme Court precedents (especially those regarding the Commerce Clause and General Welfare Clause), federal government "aid" to State programs, the popular election of Senators (as opposed to State legislature appointment), and - I dare say - the funding of political candidates by national parties. In effect, Federalism has been replaced by tyranny and supremacy of the administrative State.
I don't doubt her statements, and my grasp of history is certainly no match for hers, but some additional explanation would be helpful. I do sense a bit of regional bias in this chapter. Apparently she was from Canada. I grew up and went to school in Alabama.
“In 1860, the South was still predominantly agricultural, highly dependent upon the sale of staples to a world market. By 1815, cotton was the most valuable export in the United States; by 1840, it was worth more than all other exports combined. But while the southern states produced two-thirds of the world's supply of cotton, the South had little manufacturing capability, about 29 percent of the railroad tracks, and only 13 percent of the nation's banks. The South did experiment with using slave labor in manufacturing, but for the most part it was well satisfied with its agricultural economy.”
https://www.nps.gov/articles/industry...
Can this be a prophetical description of China 2023? Xi's rule is absolute. Does the steeply declining birth rate mean the Chinese people are using the mass veto to not reproduce in protest?
I think the world is plunging toward a re-alignment whose outcome no one can accurately predict.
"Being made by force, the rebuild structure still contained a physical defect corresponding to the moral defect. The Reconstruction Act was immediate evidence; it wiped out the states as political entities."
"In political organization the specific act implies a continuing power."
"The destruction was done by the usurpation of state powers by the Federal government as by right of conquest."