Sunday, March 23, 2014

If the South Had Won Gettysburg



From: bernhard1848@gmail.com

The passage below is taken from a novel, though one based upon common sense and the historical realities of North and South.  The "Jim Crow" laws did indeed have their basis in the North: New York in the 1820s dealt with the threat of a black swing vote by raising property qualifications for black voters; and the author aptly describes a "lost cause" myth which would have developed in the postwar North to glorify its defeat, and find a convenient scapegoat.

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

www.ncwbts150.com

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

If the South Had Won Gettysburg

"Southerners were appalled, as well as perplexed, at the growing problems of discrimination and segregation in the North.  That the North would have fought for the freedom of the black man, then turn around and display animosity at him for moving into the North and expressing his newly-found freedoms, seemed hypocrisy at its worst to the average citizen of the Confederacy.

The turn of the century brought to the United States what became known as the "Jim Crow" laws, named after a traditional song and dance, ironically of the South. Contemporary Southern social analysts have blamed the animosities felt in the North against the former slaves and sons and daughters of formers slaves, on several things.

First, there was the idea in the north that the Civil War had, in essence been a "black man's war" in which hundreds of thousands of northern boys had sacrificed life and limb for the emancipation of the black man.  The immediate woes that beset the United States after the war ended in defeat for the North needed some focal point, and the poor, uneducated former slave – the stranger to Northerners – became the convenient scapegoat.

In addition, the freeing of slaves flooded the job market in the North with workers who were willing to work for "slave wages" – much less than the ex-Union soldiers, also looking for jobs at the end of the war in 1863.  Many veterans were fired from jobs and replaced with ex-slaves.  The results were riots all over the North over nearly a decade.

The Southerner's more lenient attitudes toward black people stemmed from generations of living with blacks, growing up with them, working beside them in the fields, and later, in the factories.  Most Southerners would have  admitted, even during the War between the States that they had always felt an uneasiness – a guilt, even – in seeing blacks held in servitude as slaves.

The stories of mistreatment and whippings had always been regarded in the South as ludicrous, pre-war propaganda by Abolitionists who had never seen a black man or woman.  Certainly there were instances of a cruel overseer who applied punishment a little too often, but slaves in the old South had been considered property – and expensive property, as well – and were to be treated like an item of value.  As one Southern social historian put it, you wouldn't take a sledge-hammer to your brand new, expensive horseless carriage the first time it didn't run; you would find out why it wasn't working and fix it.

Southerners saw black men and women grow up, fall in love, marry, give birth, laugh, cry, and mourn the deaths of family members. There was something wrong here, many felt.  These black people were not really property, like a plow or a horseless carriage.  Under the skin, though many a Southerner, we are a very much alike.

It had to be a terrible moral burden, a society-wide, sublimated guilt about slavery that, once the war was over and the name-calling by Abolitionists had ended, could finally be seen in its true light, and was dealt with swiftly by the hurried measures to free the blacks from bondage.  To the average Southerner, blacks were not only property, but people too.  To the Northerners, blacks were first a symbol, then a threat."

If the South Had Won Gettysburg, Mark Nesbitt, Thomas Publications, 1980, pp. 88-89)