Quote:

---

The Antebellum Period can be looked back on with sentimental nostalgia in the US South, as an idealized agrarian and chivalric society, with the moral issues of slavery generally being glossed over. This is due in part to widespread destruction caused during the war by both armies and a lingering resentment of the occupation of the region by Union forces after the Confederacy was defeated. As a result the architecture and fashion of the period were better documented in this region of the United States than in other parts of the country and can be heavily romanticized.

Quote:

---

There was a land of Cavaliers and Cotton Fields called the Old South. Here in this pretty world, Gallantry took its last bow. Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their Ladies Fair, of Master and of Slave. Look for it only in books, for it is no more than a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind...

From the opening of the film Gone With the Wind

---

“Old South” is a way of describing the former lifestyle in the Southern United States. The term originally came into use after the American Civil War to describe the antebellum period. Many southern whites used it with nostalgia to represent the memories ofa time of prosperity, social order, and "gracious living". Most blacks saw it as being a reference to the past times of slavery and the plantation economy in which they were chattel property. A desire to return to the order of the "Old South" was a justification for ongoing racial segregation and the continuance of the Jim Crow system.

In this romanticized view, the process of the Industrial Revolution is mythically substituted for by the widespread destruction of Sherman's March to the Sea and by the military occupation of the defeated Confederacy by Union forces during the period termed Reconstruction ( 1865 - 1877). While the South was largely ruined after the Civil War, this had as much or more to do with the failed domestic polices of the Confederacy, notably its impressment of food supplies, and thousands of uprooted civilians, than it did with the scorched earth policy of Sherman. Sherman's March was exclusively limited to Georgia and South Carolina and scorched earth policies were not implemented in Florida, Tennessee, or the Trans-Mississippi states.

More than any other single American artifact, the novel and movie Gone With the Wind have permanently fixed a slanted popularized image of pre-Civil War American history and are good examples of the romanticized view. In the romanticized view, the Antebellum Period is often looked back on with sentimental nostalgia by some whites in the U.S. South, as an idealized pre-industrial highly-structured genteel and stable agrarian society, in contrast to the anxiety and struggle of modern life. The issue of slavery is largely ignored. For example, a romanticized view of the Antebellum South would claim that the Civil War was fought over states' rights rather than slavery, when in actuality the war was fought predominantly over a state's right to allow slavery. Because of slavery and many other human rights abuses, most African Americans find the romanticization of this era to be offensive, and often see a coded approving reference to the racism of the period in the term "Old South".

Once those with personal memories of the antebellum South were largely deceased, the term continued to be used. It was used even as a marketing term, where products were advertised as having "genuine Old South goodness" and the like. However, fraternal and political organizations often used the term to show that they were supporters of white supremacy and segregation, but in a less blantant way.

Certain groups now wish to rescue the term from racist connotations by stating that they desire only to celebrate only the things about the Old South which were good, such as its chivary, and not every aspect of Southern culture, particularly not the racist aspects. An important and sizeable group of this sort is the Sons of Confederate Veterans, who insist that their group is about "Heritage Not Hate" and make a point of honoring the memories of those blacks who served with the Confederate armed forces and their descendants.

---

Quote:

---

If any of you don't have a problem with someone flying the flag of the confederacy, a bunch of traitorous, anti-American rebel scum who attacked the U.S. and waged war on American soil and sought to violently overthrow the legitimate government

---

Quote:

---

The second reason behind it was to weaken the south. Thanks to its thriving slave-oriented economy, the south was considerably wealthier than the north at the time. The north wouldn't stand a chance against its richer southern enemy if it didn't. The final reason for Lincoln's action was a strategic maneuver. He knew the south wouldn't comply and therefore he'd have a due cause for war- as well as attracting a greater following in sweeping down on the south.

---

Quote:

---

In his book The South Under Siege 1830-2000 author Frank Conner noted that Northern manufacturers wanted to overprice their goods “…in the firm knowledge that the competing low-priced British goods--with the tariffs added--would then be more expensive than theirs…Second, the Southerners bought most of the manufactured goods imported from Britain, largely because they sold most of their cotton to Britain; thus--by paying the tariff--the Southerners paid most of the costs of running the US government…and all of the Southern states were paying about 85% of the cost of running the federal government. By increasing the tariff rates, the North could force the South to pay most of the costs of the US government’s industrialization program--a program which would benefit the North tremendously, and the South not at all.”

The Northern view of the country, with Unitarian and socialist influence, was that the central government in Washington should be increasingly more powerful while the states should be satisfied to become mere vassals to the collectivist leviathan. This didn’t set well with most Southerners, who held to a strict constructionist view of the Constitution--meaning that the Federal government should deal only with those areas delegated (not surrendered) to it and should stay out of everything else. Such an anachronistic position simply had to be dealt with because the South was holding up the “progress” (which they had paid for) of the rest of the country.

Pastor Wilkins has also noted that: “The more radical element (in the North) were desirous of removing the one barrier to the progressive consolidation of power with the central State authority. The destruction of the South would give them the liberty they needed to establish this change in the structure and philosophy of the national government

The Northern view of the country, with Unitarian and socialist influence, was that the central government in Washington should be increasingly more powerful while the states should be satisfied to become mere vassals to the collectivist leviathan. This didn’t set well with most Southerners, who held to a strict constructionist view of the Constitution--meaning that the Federal government should deal only with those areas delegated (not surrendered) to it and should stay out of everything else. Such an anachronistic position simply had to be dealt with because the South was holding up the “progress” (which they had paid for) of the rest of the country.

Pastor Wilkins has also noted that: “The more radical element (in the North) were desirous of removing the one barrier to the progressive consolidation of power with the central State authority. The destruction of the South would give them the liberty they needed to establish this change in the structure and philosophy of the national government.”

---

Quote:

---

It depends on which perspective you examine. While slavery is the most obvious issue, it is more of a fundamental difference that developed between North and South. More than just different views of slavery, the two regions were economically different and politically different. Even population density was different. If you're Lincoln the reason for the Civil war is to keep the Union together. If you're a Southern Democrat, the reason for the war is because you think you have lost your political power since Lincoln is elected without any Southern support (not even being on the ballot in 10 states). If you're an abolitionist, the war is a means to eliminate slavery. If you're a Copperhead/Butternut/Peace Democrat, the war is simply a political maneuver by Lincoln to grab up as much power as possible. While there are a number of different perspectives, historians agree overall that the leading cause was the sectional tension between North/West and South as they developed independently from each other.

---

Quote:

---

The Constitution could be interpreted in opposite ways. In its clause giving Congress all powers "necessary and proper" for carrying the specified powers into effect, Alexander Hamilton as secretary of the treasury found ample authorization for his financial program, including a national bank. In the Tenth Amendment, however, Thomas Jefferson as secretary of state discovered a bar to congressional legislation of that kind: no power to establish a bank having been delegated to Congress, that power must have been reserved to the states. As president, George Washington sided with Hamilton and signed the bills that Congress passed to enact Hamilton's plan. Eventually Jefferson withdrew from the Washington administration and, with Madison, organized an opposition to it. Thus, in the 1790s, originated the two parties, Federalist and Republican, the one willing to exploit the "implied powers" of the Constitution, the other demanding a "strict construction" of the document.

The Republicans, already convinced that much of the Federalist legislation was unconstitutional, were further outraged when, in 1798, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Sedition Act--providing for the fining and imprisoning of those who uttered anything "false, scandalous, and malicious" against the government, the Congress, or the president--seemed flagrantly to violate the First Amendment, which stated that Congress should pass no law abridging freedom of speech or of the press.

---

Quote:

---

Politically, Henry Clay was a Jeffersonian Democrat. An advocate of a protective tariff to aid the nation's young industries, he also supported making internal improvements at national expense and establishing a national bank. He was a border-state politician who owned slaves but favored gradual emancipation and stipulated in his will that his slaves be freed.

The sectionalism that divided the United States before the Civil War concerned more than just slavery, states' rights, and protective tariffs. Opinions differed on either side of the geographical split between the North and the South over the disposition of land owned by the federal government. In the decade before the war, three land-grant measures that had strong Northern support were defeated by Southern politicians.

A homestead act would have made free western land available to unemployed working men and given them a chance to be independent landowners and farmers. Laborers who did not move west to take advantage of the free land would also benefit because with less competition for jobs, they could demand higher wages. Southern politicians, fearing the West would be filled with non-slaveholders from the more populous North, voted against the measure.

The transcontinental railroad act was another land-grant measure that was repeatedly defeated by Southern politicians. The project would have enabled the country to tap the vast wealth of the West.

Southerners also blocked a land-grant college act, which would have provided government-owned land to states for the establishment of agricultural and mechanical schools. Again Southern politicians believed Northerners would derive more benefit from the schools than would Southerners.

The first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, were adopted as a single unit two years after ratification of the Constitution. Dissatisfaction with guarantees of freedom listed in the Constitution led the founding fathers to enumerate personal rights as well as limitations on the federal government in these first 10 amendments.

The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This amendment was the basis of the doctrine of states' rights that became the ante-bellum rallying cry of the Southern states, which sought to restrict the ever-growing powers of the federal government. The principle of states' rights and state sovereignty eventually led the Southern states to secede from the central government that they believed had failed to honor the covenant that had originally bound the states together.

The nullification crisis of the 1830s was a dispute over Northern-inspired tariffs that benefited Northern interests and were detrimental to Southern interests. The legal basis for the Southern call for nullification of the tariff laws was firmly rooted in states'-rights principles.

Southerners viewed the Constitution as a contractual agreement that was invalidated because its conditions had been breached. The Confederacy that was subsequently formed by the seceded states was patterned on the doctrine of states' rights. That doctrine, ironically, played a large role in the destruction of the country that it had caused to be created.

The doctrine of state's rights, the legality of secession, and the institution of black slavery had been issues of debate in the United States for decades before the election of Abraham Lincoln brought on the secession of the Southern states. Time after time the South had forced political compromises by threatening to dissolve the union, but by 1860 many Northern politicians had come to view the threat as a bluff and were sick of compromising when it came to slavery. Southerners were thoroughly indoctrinated in the issues, and their education emphasized the inviolability of the Constitution and honored such state's-rights leaders as Thomas Jefferson and John C. Calhoun.

"The tug has to come and better now, than any time hereafter," wrote President-elect Lincoln in response to the movements among Southerners toward making good their threat to remove themselves from the United States if he were elected. On November 10, 1860, four days after the election, the legislature in South Carolina, the undisputed leading agitator for secession, they seceded.

Black African slavery had existed in the North American English colonies for 168 years before the U.S. Constitution was drafted in 1787. It had existed all across colonial America, but by 1804 most Northern states, finding that slavery was not profitable for them, had effectively abolished the institution. In the South, however, especially after the 1793 invention of the cotton gin, the institution grew, becoming an inextricable part of the economy and way of life.

Whether slavery was to be permitted and continued under the new Constitution was a matter of conflict between the North and South, with several Southern states refusing to join the Union if slavery were disallowed. Thus the continuance of slavery was clearly sanctioned in the U.S. Constitution, although the words slave and slavery are not found anywhere in the document.

---