Replies

You got some things sorta right and others just outright wrong.

An article by John Kuhn at the Charleston Mercury gives a much clearer and more accurate analysis of the events you speak of.

How did the Tariff of Abominations so severely divide the country? By 1828, the North had become more and more industrialized. In other words, it largely left its agricultural roots and became a great producer of products and goods. On the other hand, the South maintained its agrarian roots, growing much of the nation’s food as well as exporting a tremendous amount of agricultural products to Europe. As the North grew in factories and production, more people moved to the North. Meanwhile, the voting base in the South did not grow. When the North picked up increasingly more votes in Congress due to the population growth, it was in a position to assert its will. Unfortunately, it started to wield its power unjustly. The greatest manifestation of this was the Tariff of 1828.

Many European goods were still much less expensive than the same goods from the North. In 1828, Congress (against the will of the Southern minority) imposed a tax on many European goods so that those goods would now be more expensive and U.S. citizens would then have to purchase the more expensive goods from the North. This meant Europe sold much less of their products to the U.S. and had much less money to purchase agricultural products from the South. Worse yet, Southerners also had to pay more for the goods they needed to farm and to live, so their cost of agricultural production went up.

This artificially drove up the cost of Southern agricultural products. Because Europe was the number one market for Southern agricultural goods, the South suddenly lost its market for its products. Therefore, the new tariffs made the North artificially wealthy and financially damaged the South — NOT EXACTLY EQUAL TREATMENT UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION (emphasis added. No nationalist would remain a nationalist if he were on the losing end of this equation.

JCalhoun’s reaction to the Tariff of Abominations was immediate. He became an Anti-Federalist and wrote the South Carolina Exposition and Protest. In this protest, Calhoun stated that if the Tariff of 1828 was not repealed, SC would secede. He also introduced his Doctrine of Nullification, the basis of which came from the states’ rights arguments of famous Anti-Federalists James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. Calhoun argued that the several states were not bound to stay under the Federal government if their rights were trampled under the U.S. Constitution. In other words, a state always had the right to nullify any act of Congress that violated the U.S. Constitution, and if Congress did not thereafter repeal said act, then the state had the right to secede.

Rather than abolish the unjust tariffs, Congress proceeded to slightly mitigate the tariffs with new tariffs in 1832. At that point, the South Carolina Legislature acted upon Calhoun’s protest and passed the Ordinance of Nullification, stating that the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were null and void within the state of SC. Unbelievably, Congress also passed the Force Bill, which authorized the president to organize troops against SC if she did not enforce the tariffs. The War of Northern Aggression was only averted at that point by Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky, who offered a new compromise that would lessen the tariffs on SC.

However, the inherent problem remained that Congress had no problem continuing to pass legislation that benefited the Northern states at the expense of the Southern states simply because they had the votes and the power to do so. This smoldering inequality eventually led to the state of SC acting on December 20, 1860, to secede from the Union. Shortly thereafter, ten more Southern states seceded and created a new country, the Confederate States of America. This would not have happened if Congress did not abuse its power by treating its states and citizens unequally.

Because of all of this, John C. Calhoun is widely recognized as the Father of Secession. He established that the Southern states should not be subjected to continued unequal treatment under the U.S. Constitution. When unequal treatment continued unabated, on December 20, 1860, SC became the first state to secede from an oppressive Union. Therefore, may the 150th anniversary of this date be recognized as one of the fundamental milestones on the arduous path to true equality in the U.S.

Pretty much blows the “equal tariffs” nonsense out of the water. While individuals may have paid the tariff equally on the goods they purchased, the IMPACT of the tariffs upon the respective economies was profoundly unfair and unequal.

Now, let’s fast forward to today while remembering “Unbelievably, Congress also passed the Force Bill, which authorized the president to organize troops against SC if she did not enforce the tariffs.” If this concept does not seem to be disturbingly similar to the power grab Obama is engaged in today then you aren’t paying attention. Those who defend Lincoln’s tyrannical actions are, by extension, tacitly supporting Obama’s dream of becoming dictator.

Whine all you want, but THAT is the simply truth. And it is why we Southerners continue to “fight.” It has nothing to do with the WBTS and everything to do with federalism vs. state’s rights. Lincoln gave us Wilson who gave us FDR who gave us Obama. Southerners got it then and get it today. Lincoln apologists are still stone cold stupid, in denial, or liberal minions to Obama.

By 1828, the North had become more and more industrialized. In other words, it largely left its agricultural roots and became a great producer of products and goods. On the other hand, the South maintained its agrarian roots, growing much of the nation’s food as well as exporting a tremendous amount of agricultural products to Europe.

Not so much. There were still a lot of farms in the North that supplied the factory towns with food. Even down into my parents' time that was true. That was in the East. In the antebellum period agriculture was still on top and growing in what we now call the Middle West.

The South could have followed that model as well -- factories and workshops plus farms. Instead, important areas of the South threw themselves into cotton production. It was easy money. Especially if you had slaves to do the real work. Industry didn't develop very much, but the South wasn't really the nation's bread basket either.

The assumption was that different regions would develop both agriculture and manufactures. In George Washington's day that was a sound assumption. Industry was just getting started in different regions of the country. Decades later, it wouldn't be, in part because of the cotton boom, in part because of the general decay of the Tidewater region, in part because cold weather and poor soil in the Northeast encouraged industrialization.

The important thing, though, is that the Southern states mostly got their way on tariffs right down to 1861. Once the Democrats got solidly behind low tariffs and acquired a following in all states they could generally keep tariffs from rising too high. From 1829 to 1859 they controlled the Senate and the House for all but 6 years, the presidency for all but 8 years. So long as the Democrats remained united and in Congress tariffs weren't going to go very high.

Lincoln gave us Wilson who gave us FDR who gave us Obama.

Best to check again on who gave us Wilson and FDR ...

Heck, my family voted for Roosevelt too, at least the first two times, but at 97% or 98% you guys do have a lot to answer for.