HEAD ICE
18th July 2010, 22:16
I have spent most of my day today reading the archives of a newspaper called the Southern Confederacy, a newspaper that was popular here in Georgia during the Civil War.
I was reading it, and I stumbled onto something amazing:
Are We Whipped? Shall We Give Up?
These questions are not propounded to the brave and patriotic men of Bragg's army, nor to the oft tried veterans of the Army of the Potomac, nor to the invincible heroes under Price, nor any of the noble men who have taken up their muskets and are facing the foe. These brave soldiers cannot be whipped on the battle field. . . . These men are not whipped. They cannot be conquered. But how is it at home? . . .
. . . We allude to that clause exempting an owner or overseer on plantations containing a certain number of negroes. This has been construed by some into an exemption of the rich, while the poor are conscribed, because they don't own negroes.--This objection is made without due consideration, we are sure. We can't put the negroes into the ranks. By their staying at home and working, to make something to eat we are able to put the greater number of fighting men into the field. Through their labor bread and meat are made at home, to feed our poor women and children, while the white men go into the army. But if all the men were taken away and the negroes left alone, they would soon become idle and insolent, and possibly much worse than this. A sufficient number of men must be left at home to look after this "element of our strength."--It is not only a wise provision of the law but it is indispensable. In this as in all other cases there will be abuses; of this we are well aware; but the principle is correct.
There is however another important consideration which the poor man disposed to complain at this provision of the exemption law should bear in mind. It is slavery that makes the poor man respectable. It gives the poor an elevated position in society that they would not otherwise have.
But for slavery here, the poor would occupy the position in society that the slaves do--as the poor in the North and in Europe do--a position far worse in its effects every way upon the white man, than that slavery upon the negro--really more degrading and unmanning. It is very often the case among us that the sons and daughters of poor, hard working, honest parents take the highest honors at our schools and colleges, and fill the highest social and official positions in society and government. If it were not for slavery this would not be the case one time in ten thousand. Slavery gives them a position--a start--that would take them generations to work out, if our social system were different.--Slavery is of far more benefit and is a greater blessing to the poor who own no slaves, than the rich who do. Slavery is the poor man's chiefest political blessing in the South, and he should cherish it and do every thing in his power to strengthen it and make it profitable and perpetual. There is--there must be--a menial class in all countries; and in every civilized country on the globe, besides the Confederate States, the poor are the inferiors and menials of the rich. Let every poor man thank God that slavery exists among us; let him defend the institution and fight and die for it the same as he would for his own liberty and the dearest birthright of freemen, even though neither he nor his children after him ever own a single slave; for without slavery among us, the poor of the South would now be in the condition they are in the North, and before many years roll round, they would be in the condition of hopeless servitude that the peasantry of Europe are. Every poor man has a deep vital and lasting paramount interest in the maintenance of slavery and should cheerfully do and bear any thing necessary to preserve it intact. But we will return to our subject.
To sum up then: If we are defeated, it will be by the people at home, and not from any lack of patriotism or fighting qualities of the brave men who have gone to the field of strife to repel the vile invaders of our soil, our homes, our peace and comfort; and we again most earnestly urge, as we have many times before in these columns, that every man do his whole duty, and shirk no public responsibility that he can perform. Let enough men be left at home to control the slaves, and carry on useful and necessary mechanic arts and professions, who are doing their duty in good faith; but let the enrolling officer be vigilant in hunting up all cowardly skulking men who are able-bodied and able to leave home, but who are dodging and hunting easy places to keep out of the ranks.--Then when this is faithfully performed, let there be no more abuse of men who ought to be and are at home doing their duty; but let the odium fall with stinging effect upon the skulkers, shirkers, and home-staying grumblers, who neither make shoes, hoe corn, nor oversee negroes, nor attempt to do anything, save only to evade the performance of their plain duty. This is an amazing piece. The implication from this indicates resentment from poor laborers objecting to conscription to fight to defend the southern slave owning class. The writer defends slavery in a very sly and vile way - yes, you poor are treated like trash by us aristocrats, but at least you guys are on a higher social strata than slaves. Hence, you should defend us so you don't become the lowest on the societal totem pole.
None of this is at all surprising if you subject the Civil War to a materialist critique, but it is still an interesting insight into the class politics they acknowledged back then that we consider obvious now.
I was reading it, and I stumbled onto something amazing:
Are We Whipped? Shall We Give Up?
These questions are not propounded to the brave and patriotic men of Bragg's army, nor to the oft tried veterans of the Army of the Potomac, nor to the invincible heroes under Price, nor any of the noble men who have taken up their muskets and are facing the foe. These brave soldiers cannot be whipped on the battle field. . . . These men are not whipped. They cannot be conquered. But how is it at home? . . .
. . . We allude to that clause exempting an owner or overseer on plantations containing a certain number of negroes. This has been construed by some into an exemption of the rich, while the poor are conscribed, because they don't own negroes.--This objection is made without due consideration, we are sure. We can't put the negroes into the ranks. By their staying at home and working, to make something to eat we are able to put the greater number of fighting men into the field. Through their labor bread and meat are made at home, to feed our poor women and children, while the white men go into the army. But if all the men were taken away and the negroes left alone, they would soon become idle and insolent, and possibly much worse than this. A sufficient number of men must be left at home to look after this "element of our strength."--It is not only a wise provision of the law but it is indispensable. In this as in all other cases there will be abuses; of this we are well aware; but the principle is correct.
There is however another important consideration which the poor man disposed to complain at this provision of the exemption law should bear in mind. It is slavery that makes the poor man respectable. It gives the poor an elevated position in society that they would not otherwise have.
But for slavery here, the poor would occupy the position in society that the slaves do--as the poor in the North and in Europe do--a position far worse in its effects every way upon the white man, than that slavery upon the negro--really more degrading and unmanning. It is very often the case among us that the sons and daughters of poor, hard working, honest parents take the highest honors at our schools and colleges, and fill the highest social and official positions in society and government. If it were not for slavery this would not be the case one time in ten thousand. Slavery gives them a position--a start--that would take them generations to work out, if our social system were different.--Slavery is of far more benefit and is a greater blessing to the poor who own no slaves, than the rich who do. Slavery is the poor man's chiefest political blessing in the South, and he should cherish it and do every thing in his power to strengthen it and make it profitable and perpetual. There is--there must be--a menial class in all countries; and in every civilized country on the globe, besides the Confederate States, the poor are the inferiors and menials of the rich. Let every poor man thank God that slavery exists among us; let him defend the institution and fight and die for it the same as he would for his own liberty and the dearest birthright of freemen, even though neither he nor his children after him ever own a single slave; for without slavery among us, the poor of the South would now be in the condition they are in the North, and before many years roll round, they would be in the condition of hopeless servitude that the peasantry of Europe are. Every poor man has a deep vital and lasting paramount interest in the maintenance of slavery and should cheerfully do and bear any thing necessary to preserve it intact. But we will return to our subject.
To sum up then: If we are defeated, it will be by the people at home, and not from any lack of patriotism or fighting qualities of the brave men who have gone to the field of strife to repel the vile invaders of our soil, our homes, our peace and comfort; and we again most earnestly urge, as we have many times before in these columns, that every man do his whole duty, and shirk no public responsibility that he can perform. Let enough men be left at home to control the slaves, and carry on useful and necessary mechanic arts and professions, who are doing their duty in good faith; but let the enrolling officer be vigilant in hunting up all cowardly skulking men who are able-bodied and able to leave home, but who are dodging and hunting easy places to keep out of the ranks.--Then when this is faithfully performed, let there be no more abuse of men who ought to be and are at home doing their duty; but let the odium fall with stinging effect upon the skulkers, shirkers, and home-staying grumblers, who neither make shoes, hoe corn, nor oversee negroes, nor attempt to do anything, save only to evade the performance of their plain duty. This is an amazing piece. The implication from this indicates resentment from poor laborers objecting to conscription to fight to defend the southern slave owning class. The writer defends slavery in a very sly and vile way - yes, you poor are treated like trash by us aristocrats, but at least you guys are on a higher social strata than slaves. Hence, you should defend us so you don't become the lowest on the societal totem pole.
None of this is at all surprising if you subject the Civil War to a materialist critique, but it is still an interesting insight into the class politics they acknowledged back then that we consider obvious now.