Civil War Caused by Protectionism
From: bernhard1848@att.net
The Walker Tariff of 1846 pleased the low-tariff supporters in the South as
it promised a departure from the high protectionist tariffs pressed for by New
England; by 1857 the tariff was lowered again to the chagrin of New
England. With most conservative Southern congressmen gone in late
February, 1861, the Republican (in reality high-tariff Whig) dominated Congress
passed the protectionist Morrill Tariff. The war ended with some import
duties as high as 100 percent and the general average being 47 percent – about
double the average in 1857. Thus, trade barriers and protectionism were a prime
motivation of Northern war upon the South.
Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman
North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission
www.ncwbts150.com
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"
North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission
www.ncwbts150.com
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"
Civil War Caused by Protectionism:
“One worldism is not an impossible ideal; but, it is not attainable through
the medium of political power. On the contrary, the organization of the
world into a single society – which is what the one-worlders really want – can
be accomplished only if people can rid themselves of the fetish of
authoritarianism. It is not necessary to plan or build a world society; it
is only necessary to remove the obstructions to its growth, all of which are
political and all of which stem from a belief in authoritarianism.
In the beginning, before Americans had been completely converted to this
political paganism, it was stipulated that their marketplace should be as large
as the country; the erection of trade barriers between the component
commonwealths was prohibited. As the frontiers of the country were extended the
marketplace grew apace and, in time, goods, men and ideas moved without
hindrance from the Atlantic to the Pacific, from Mexico to Canada.
Therefore, an American society grew up. It was not planned; it grew.
Several times the little separate political establishments set up blocks to
trade at their respective borders, causing friction, but on the whole their
efforts were frustrated by the spirit of free trade. (it might be well to
mention, in passing, that the prime cause of the Civil War was protectionism,
which is a dogma of authoritarianism.)
Let us look at a contrary example. Europe, which, outside of Russia,
compares in size to the United States, is cross-checked with trade barriers, and
Europe has been a battlefield for centuries. Political particularism has
prevented the flowering of a European society. It is impossible for such a
thing to get going in an area darkened by passports and customs regulations.
Time and again the doctors of political science have prescribed some sort
of political union for the ills of Europe, on the assumption that such a union
will be followed by a customs union. Quite the contrary; the borders between
countries lose all meaning if the peoples can “do business” with one another,
which is another way of saying, if the states get out of the way of
society.
No political union can set up a society in Europe; that can only come from
uninhibited “haggling and haggling” in a common marketplace.”
(Fugitive Essays, Selected Writings of Frank Chodorov, Charles Hamilton,
editor, Liberty Press, 1980, excerpts pp. 125-127)
