WEBVTT NOTE Secession and War 1 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.000 Last time I tried to suggest to you, perhaps not as directly as I might have, 2 00:00:06.000 --> 00:00:13.000 that the phenomenon of secession in general, as opposed to the Southern secession in particular, 3 00:00:13.000 --> 00:00:17.500 which we'll talk about more today, can in fact be a very progressive force, 4 00:00:17.500 --> 00:00:22.000 rather than a reactionary one, as it's sometimes portrayed. 5 00:00:22.000 --> 00:00:28.500 Oftentimes, even today, the phenomenon of secession is portrayed as something backward, 6 00:00:28.500 --> 00:00:32.500 Something that runs against the grain of the forward direction of history. 7 00:00:32.500 --> 00:00:37.500 And I try to suggest last time that, in fact, there's much to be said for secession. 8 00:00:37.500 --> 00:00:45.500 That, in fact, in many cases, it is the civilized way in which differing peoples learn to live with their differences. 9 00:00:45.500 --> 00:00:48.500 They simply part in peace. 10 00:00:48.500 --> 00:00:52.500 Well, this week it will be a little bit of a continuation of last week. 11 00:00:52.500 --> 00:01:00.500 and it will consist primarily of raising some, we might call, forbidden questions. 12 00:01:00.500 --> 00:01:08.500 I specialize in that. Asking questions that I'm told are closed and never to be raised again, 13 00:01:08.500 --> 00:01:14.500 those are the ones that interest me the most. So I want to raise a few of them and then we can discuss things later. 14 00:01:14.500 --> 00:01:21.500 Now, again, because we're doing this in tandem with the book, there's no real need for me to go through everything that's in the book. 15 00:01:21.500 --> 00:01:23.200 You can look at that for yourself. 16 00:01:23.200 --> 00:01:27.500 Unfortunately, my chapter on the Civil War was cut in half by the publisher, 17 00:01:27.500 --> 00:01:29.100 as was much of the book. 18 00:01:29.100 --> 00:01:33.500 It was just cut and sliced because they wanted to make it nice and short and accessible. 19 00:01:33.500 --> 00:01:37.200 And so one of the most common criticisms that the book got was, 20 00:01:37.200 --> 00:01:39.800 this book is too short. It doesn't have enough details. 21 00:01:39.800 --> 00:01:43.300 Yeah, I agree. I couldn't agree more. You're absolutely right. 22 00:01:43.300 --> 00:01:46.400 Well, in any event, what I want to do is pick up from last time 23 00:01:46.400 --> 00:01:50.800 and then draw us into this Southern issue 24 00:01:50.800 --> 00:01:56.800 by continuing on with a few additional considerations on the phenomenon of secession 25 00:01:56.800 --> 00:02:02.300 and begin with an argument that was used actually by Jefferson Davis, 26 00:02:02.300 --> 00:02:05.800 who was, of course, the president of the Confederate States of America, 27 00:02:05.800 --> 00:02:11.800 the eleven contiguous southern states that ultimately seceded. 28 00:02:11.800 --> 00:02:18.800 And Jefferson Davis, who was anxious to defend his conduct in that of the South after the war was over, 29 00:02:18.800 --> 00:02:25.600 wrote a lengthy defense, as did Vice President Alexander Stevens, 30 00:02:25.600 --> 00:02:30.560 and one of the arguments that Davis made on behalf of the right of secession in general 31 00:02:30.560 --> 00:02:33.200 involves the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. 32 00:02:33.200 --> 00:02:36.200 Now, this is not an argument that is universally accepted by any means. 33 00:02:36.200 --> 00:02:40.200 Obviously, Lincoln didn't accept it, or there wouldn't have been a war. 34 00:02:40.200 --> 00:02:44.100 But, nevertheless, it is worth thinking about. It is food for thought. 35 00:02:44.100 --> 00:02:46.320 The Tenth Amendment, as you may recall, 36 00:02:46.320 --> 00:02:53.820 says that all powers that the states did not delegate to the Federal Government are reserved to the states or the people. 37 00:02:53.820 --> 00:02:57.220 Now, the relationship between that and secession is pretty much as follows. 38 00:02:57.220 --> 00:03:04.820 The states, nowhere in the Constitution, delegated to the Federal Government a power to suppress secession. 39 00:03:04.820 --> 00:03:09.020 Now, there is a power in the Constitution to suppress insurrections, 40 00:03:09.020 --> 00:03:13.020 but an insurrection is something rather different from an act of secession. 41 00:03:13.020 --> 00:03:19.020 and insurrection is a kind of an uprising in which typically the governor of the state would request federal assistance. 42 00:03:19.020 --> 00:03:23.020 No southern governor called for federal assistance in this case. 43 00:03:23.020 --> 00:03:28.020 But the point is that the states never delegated to the federal government any power to suppress secession 44 00:03:28.020 --> 00:03:32.020 and there's nothing in the Constitution that expressly forbids it to the states. 45 00:03:32.020 --> 00:03:38.020 So if the states have not delegated a power and the exercise of that power is not prohibited to them, 46 00:03:38.020 --> 00:03:41.020 then it remains a reserved right under the 10th Amendment. 47 00:03:41.020 --> 00:03:53.020 So, in effect, a real shorthand way of thinking about the 10th Amendment is that if something is not mentioned in the Constitution, then we presume that that power rests with the states. 48 00:03:53.020 --> 00:03:57.020 Well, secession is not mentioned in the Constitution, then that power rests with the states. 49 00:03:57.020 --> 00:04:07.020 In fact, sometimes it's been suggested that the fact that the Constitution does not mention secession is a point against the Southern position, 50 00:04:07.020 --> 00:04:10.520 But what I'm suggesting is that, from the Southern point of view, that's a point in favor. 51 00:04:10.520 --> 00:04:16.520 It's precisely because it's not mentioned in the Constitution that it's assumed to be a power of the states. 52 00:04:16.520 --> 00:04:22.520 In fact, it's perhaps revealing that the Confederate Constitution of 1861, 53 00:04:22.520 --> 00:04:26.520 that was very similar to the U.S. Constitution and modeled on it, obviously, 54 00:04:26.520 --> 00:04:32.520 almost identical with a few small but nevertheless important exceptions, 55 00:04:32.520 --> 00:04:38.520 It is significant that in there there is no mention of a right of secession. 56 00:04:38.520 --> 00:04:44.520 And that's not necessarily because the Confederacy was opposed to states seceding from it, 57 00:04:44.520 --> 00:04:47.520 but rather because of simple consistency. 58 00:04:47.520 --> 00:04:52.520 If the southern states had said that there's no need for an express allowance of secession 59 00:04:52.520 --> 00:04:56.520 in the governing document in order to make it legitimate, 60 00:04:56.520 --> 00:04:59.520 then they wouldn't have to put one in their own document. 61 00:04:59.520 --> 00:05:04.520 If they had, then they would be implicitly admitting they'd been wrong in the first place. 62 00:05:04.520 --> 00:05:10.520 So there's the argument from the Tenth Amendment that was offered by Davis and then has been picked up by others. 63 00:05:10.520 --> 00:05:17.520 There are other arguments I might mention. One of them is drawn from the reading that I signed for last time. 64 00:05:17.520 --> 00:05:23.520 And that's the argument that there were at least several attempts around the time of the Southern Secession 65 00:05:23.520 --> 00:05:28.520 to amend the Constitution in order to clarify its position on secession. 66 00:05:28.520 --> 00:05:35.520 Again, the document is silent on the question, so there was an attempt to clarify what is the constitutional position. 67 00:05:35.520 --> 00:05:38.520 And for instance, just to give one of those several examples, 68 00:05:38.520 --> 00:05:46.520 Representative Thomas Florence of Pennsylvania introduced in January 1861 a proposed amendment to the Constitution 69 00:05:46.520 --> 00:05:57.520 that provided that, quote, no state or the people thereof shall retire from this union without the consent of three fourths of all the states, unquote. 70 00:05:57.520 --> 00:06:10.520 Well, the importance of this example and others that were like it is that if it was clear to everybody that secession was simply prohibited, 71 00:06:10.520 --> 00:06:14.520 then it doesn't seem that there would be any need to clarify the document. 72 00:06:14.520 --> 00:06:19.520 I mean, if secession is prohibited, then why would you amend the Constitution to say, 73 00:06:19.520 --> 00:06:22.520 nobody can secede without the consent of three-fourths of the states? 74 00:06:22.520 --> 00:06:25.520 If everybody just knows, nobody can secede. 75 00:06:25.520 --> 00:06:33.520 And it is relevant that John Marshall, who was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835, 76 00:06:33.520 --> 00:06:39.520 had said, in the famous case of Gibbons versus Ogden, that limitations of a power 77 00:06:39.520 --> 00:06:43.520 furnish a strong argument in favor of the existence of that power. 78 00:06:43.520 --> 00:06:49.520 So that is to say, when we see the power of secession being limited in these proposed constitutional amendments, 79 00:06:49.520 --> 00:06:54.520 according to Marshall's reasoning, although I'm sure he himself didn't favor secession, 80 00:06:54.520 --> 00:07:03.520 The very fact that there was an attempt to limit the power of secession strongly implied the existence of that power in the first place. 81 00:07:03.520 --> 00:07:09.520 Another argument that is raised in the article that you read is this one. 82 00:07:09.520 --> 00:07:12.520 I'm not as persuaded by this one as I am by some of the others. 83 00:07:12.520 --> 00:07:18.520 The argument is this, the war ends and I'm going to give away the punch line and the northern states win. 84 00:07:18.520 --> 00:07:31.520 But when the war is over, the Southern states as one of the conditions for their, I guess we might say, readmission to the Union, although even that language is problematic because in Lincoln's perspective, they never seceded in the first place. 85 00:07:31.520 --> 00:07:35.520 He would never say readmission, but for convenience we'll say readmission. 86 00:07:35.520 --> 00:07:40.520 One of the requirements was they had to relinquish the right of secession. 87 00:07:40.520 --> 00:07:44.520 The Southern states had to expressly relinquish that right. 88 00:07:44.520 --> 00:07:54.520 And the professor whose article you read raises the point how could the southern states be required to relinquish something unless they had it in the first place? 89 00:07:54.520 --> 00:08:00.520 Again, the fact that they are being required to give it up strongly implies they must have possessed it in the first place. 90 00:08:00.520 --> 00:08:13.520 Now, the reason I'm not persuaded by that, although I think it's at least worth considering, is that probably what was happening is that the U.S. government just simply wanted to dot every I and cross every T 91 00:08:13.520 --> 00:08:16.920 and make absolutely certain that everybody understood what was going on. 92 00:08:16.920 --> 00:08:20.820 I don't think they were necessarily conceding that there had been a right of secession. 93 00:08:20.820 --> 00:08:25.220 I think they just simply wanted to make absolutely clear that there sure isn't one now, 94 00:08:25.220 --> 00:08:30.220 at least for the states that are returning. 95 00:08:30.220 --> 00:08:35.720 Now, we also have the fact that there are a great many illustrious figures from American history 96 00:08:35.720 --> 00:08:41.220 who are on record as being in favor of a legal right of secession. 97 00:08:41.220 --> 00:08:50.220 And I cite at least several of them in the book, and one of them is William Rall, who's got a book called A View of the Constitution from 1825. 98 00:08:50.220 --> 00:09:02.220 Now, it's not any big deal that William Rall wrote a book in 1825 in which he argued, among other things, that as a last resort measure, the states did possess a right of secession. 99 00:09:02.220 --> 00:09:08.220 That's not that significant, because, you know, any bozo can get a book published. 100 00:09:08.220 --> 00:09:11.220 and the fact that he publishes one is not significant. 101 00:09:11.220 --> 00:09:15.220 What's significant is who the guy is and who was reading his book. 102 00:09:15.220 --> 00:09:21.220 Rall was not known for being a supporter of the rights of the states. 103 00:09:21.220 --> 00:09:24.220 He was a so-called capital F Federalist. 104 00:09:24.220 --> 00:09:27.220 He was a supporter of a strong central government. 105 00:09:27.220 --> 00:09:30.220 So you would not expect him to favor a right of secession, 106 00:09:30.220 --> 00:09:34.220 but yet he concedes in his book that in fact one exists. 107 00:09:34.220 --> 00:09:37.220 But secondly, it seems to be the case anyway, 108 00:09:37.220 --> 00:09:43.220 This seems to be the case anyway, although this is somewhat disputed, but it seems to be the case that from 1825 until 1840, 109 00:09:43.220 --> 00:09:50.220 Rawls' book A View of the Constitution was the constitutional law textbook that was used at West Point, 110 00:09:50.220 --> 00:09:54.220 which was the most influential military academy in the U.S. 111 00:09:54.220 --> 00:10:02.220 So it is perhaps not without significance that those men were reading a book that allows for the right of secession. 112 00:10:02.220 --> 00:10:06.220 There are still others. There's Thomas Jefferson. I love driving people crazy with this. 113 00:10:06.220 --> 00:10:08.660 There's one particular person, I won't mention his name, 114 00:10:08.660 --> 00:10:12.820 who's constantly disputing with me the idea that Jefferson favored secession. 115 00:10:12.820 --> 00:10:16.460 He said it repeatedly, throughout his career, he said it repeatedly, 116 00:10:16.460 --> 00:10:20.180 that although he didn't necessarily favor it at any given time, 117 00:10:20.180 --> 00:10:24.900 he did believe that as a last resort, again, it could be done. 118 00:10:24.900 --> 00:10:30.660 He said in one of his inaugural addresses that the time for separation has not yet come. 119 00:10:30.660 --> 00:10:33.860 He doesn't say that there is no such thing as separation. 120 00:10:33.860 --> 00:10:38.740 But he also said that if, you know, if it should turn out that for matters of practicality 121 00:10:38.740 --> 00:10:44.220 or whatever reason that it's better that we be two or three confederacies, then, you know, 122 00:10:44.220 --> 00:10:45.220 let it be so. 123 00:10:45.220 --> 00:10:49.060 There's no point in making an idol out of the Union and waving incense before it. 124 00:10:49.060 --> 00:10:50.820 The Union is just a practical arrangement. 125 00:10:50.820 --> 00:10:52.900 It's not a god. 126 00:10:52.900 --> 00:10:54.780 We have William Lloyd Garrison. 127 00:10:54.780 --> 00:11:00.620 Now, Garrison, remember, I mentioned, let's say, two weeks ago, was the best-known abolitionist 128 00:11:00.620 --> 00:11:02.700 in America, probably. 129 00:11:02.700 --> 00:11:08.340 And I cited him as a mainstream abolitionist in the sense that he was somebody who, he 130 00:11:08.340 --> 00:11:13.780 was against, he was dead set against the U.S. Constitution. And when I say he's a mainstream 131 00:11:13.780 --> 00:11:18.340 abolitionist, what I mean is that among abolitionists, they were all, abolitionists per se are kind 132 00:11:18.340 --> 00:11:24.740 of extreme, but among them he was in the mainstream in believing that the Constitution was very 133 00:11:24.740 --> 00:11:30.860 much to be criticized because it supported slavery. And I suggested when I gave the example 134 00:11:30.860 --> 00:11:35.420 of Life, Alexander Spooner, who argued that the Constitution did not support slavery. 135 00:11:35.420 --> 00:11:38.620 There is actually an argument to be made along those lines. 136 00:11:38.620 --> 00:11:43.540 The point I want to make here is that Garrison, in fact, had long called for the secession 137 00:11:43.540 --> 00:11:45.700 of the northern states from the Union. 138 00:11:45.700 --> 00:11:49.420 In fact, his slogan was, no union with slaveholders. 139 00:11:49.420 --> 00:11:58.100 And he required that members of the American Anti-Slavery Society, in fact, take a pledge 140 00:11:58.100 --> 00:12:01.500 that they would work toward the dissolution of the American Union. 141 00:12:01.500 --> 00:12:09.100 Now this is very radical stuff, but Garrison's position was motivated by two factors. 142 00:12:09.100 --> 00:12:12.500 The first was that Garrison was a moral purist. 143 00:12:12.500 --> 00:12:19.240 He believed that he and all of the North were tainted with the sin of slavery by virtue 144 00:12:19.240 --> 00:12:24.260 of their association with the southern states and the fact that they had to go along with 145 00:12:24.260 --> 00:12:27.560 the fugitive slave clause. 146 00:12:27.560 --> 00:12:35.560 And he didn't want to be tainted in that way. Let these sinners go in their own way. Let them go and we're going to have our own country. 147 00:12:35.560 --> 00:12:41.560 But secondly, it was a more practical reason, not just idealism, but practicality motivated Garrison. 148 00:12:41.560 --> 00:12:47.560 His view was that if you have the northern states leave the Union, then they are no longer part of the United States, 149 00:12:47.560 --> 00:12:53.560 and therefore not obligated to return runaway slaves, because they're not under the same Constitution any longer. 150 00:12:53.560 --> 00:12:57.360 So slaves could run away up north and there'd be no obligation to return them. 151 00:12:57.360 --> 00:13:02.460 And he believed that this would make the institution of slavery prohibitively expensive, 152 00:13:02.460 --> 00:13:05.860 particularly in the upper south, because the slaves would just run away. 153 00:13:05.860 --> 00:13:10.560 It would basically be all but impossible to get them back. 154 00:13:10.560 --> 00:13:17.060 And that, in turn, would put pressure on slavery in the ever lower south, down to the deep south. 155 00:13:17.060 --> 00:13:21.060 And he believed that the whole institution would ultimately collapse. 156 00:13:21.060 --> 00:13:39.060 And I cite at the end of the Civil War chapter that in fact something sort of like this is exactly what happened in Brazil where there was a part of the country where slavery had been abolished and there was no legal recognition of the institution, so the slaves fled there, nobody could get them and the institution collapsed peacefully. 157 00:13:39.060 --> 00:13:47.060 So a peaceful resolution of the slave question, Garrison believed, could be brought about through secession. Interesting. 158 00:13:47.060 --> 00:13:53.060 It's worth noting, by the way, that a lot of the most conservative Southerners, planters who felt like they had a lot to lose, 159 00:13:53.060 --> 00:14:01.060 tended to be the least supporting, least in favor of secession, precisely for this reason. It was going into the unknown. 160 00:14:01.060 --> 00:14:07.060 Who knows what could happen to slavery in these new circumstances or in the turbulence that could follow secession. 161 00:14:07.060 --> 00:14:14.060 At least in 1860, at least they had the Supreme Court on their side, they had the Dred Scott decision, they had a lot of things going for them. 162 00:14:14.060 --> 00:14:19.060 The prospect of secession was really unclear what it would lead to. 163 00:14:19.060 --> 00:14:29.060 We also have Alexis de Tocqueville, who is significant because he is far and away the most perceptive foreign observer of the United States ever. 164 00:14:29.060 --> 00:14:35.060 His book, Democracy in America, which came out in the 1830s, has pretty much, as far as I know, has never been out of print. 165 00:14:35.060 --> 00:14:42.060 And that's pretty good. I mean, given that most books, you look in the remainder bin three years down the road, 166 00:14:42.060 --> 00:15:11.060 The Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the states, and these, in uniting together, have not forfeited their sovereignty, nor have they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people. 167 00:15:11.060 --> 00:15:18.060 If one of the states chose to withdraw its name from the contract, it would be difficult to disprove its right of doing so. 168 00:15:18.060 --> 00:15:23.060 And in fact, so influential was Tocqueville that the great British classical liberal Richard Cobden, 169 00:15:23.060 --> 00:15:28.060 who was a great libertarian who had helped to work against the Corn Laws in England, 170 00:15:28.060 --> 00:15:33.060 which had made food artificially expensive for the average man and so on and so forth, 171 00:15:33.060 --> 00:15:41.060 and so forth, Cobb had immediately accepted Tocqueville's analysis and said that this does seem to be the correct position. 172 00:15:41.060 --> 00:15:52.060 And then you could cite still others. You could cite President John Quincy Adams and still others in favor of the idea of there being a right of secession. 173 00:15:52.060 --> 00:16:00.060 It's also interesting to note how many northern newspapers supported the southern secession in 1861, early 1861. 174 00:16:00.060 --> 00:16:21.060 You see newspapers in New York, Massachusetts, Maine, all over the place, Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, writing articles and editorials saying that, in effect, if it was legitimate for the 13 colonies to separate from Britain, then it's at least as legitimate for the southern states to secede from the United States. 175 00:16:21.060 --> 00:16:28.060 This is the principle on which the country was founded. If it was in fact founded on principles, surely this is one of them. 176 00:16:28.060 --> 00:16:33.060 And you see this quite frequently. You don't see it in every Northern paper, but it's quite surprising. 177 00:16:33.060 --> 00:16:40.060 If you've been led to believe that secession is just some strange doctrine that the Southerners dreamed up one day, it would seem surprising. 178 00:16:40.060 --> 00:16:47.060 But in fact, secession had been, if not quite on the table all the time as a mainstream subject of political discussion, 179 00:16:47.060 --> 00:16:52.060 it was at the same time not altogether absent from political deliberations in America. 180 00:16:52.060 --> 00:16:57.060 In fact, throughout the 19th century, you would periodically hear the topic of secession raised. 181 00:16:57.060 --> 00:17:14.060 I mentioned in one of our discussion sessions a few weeks ago that, in fact, in just a matter of about 11 years, the New England states, or some parts of them at least, threatened to secede at least three times in just a matter of 11 years. 182 00:17:14.060 --> 00:17:21.300 It's a matter of 11 years. In 1804, 1803 and 1804, you see movements in that direction in New England 183 00:17:21.300 --> 00:17:26.100 because they were against the Louisiana Purchase, which among other things they believe is going to dilute 184 00:17:26.100 --> 00:17:32.000 the influence of New England in the Union. They went to great lengths to try to bring about the secession of New England 185 00:17:32.000 --> 00:17:36.460 and bring about the secession of New York. And it was under those circumstances, by the way, 186 00:17:36.460 --> 00:17:42.160 that Aaron Burr had his famous duel with Alexander Hamilton, because the plan was, 187 00:17:42.160 --> 00:17:52.160 Aaron Burr was the Vice President at the time, Thomas Jefferson couldn't stand him, so Burr decided he would try some other chapter of his political life, try to become Governor of New York. 188 00:17:52.160 --> 00:18:02.160 And the thinking was that maybe Burr would support secession. The New England Federalists hoped that we get Burr elected Governor of New York and he'll secede along with New England. 189 00:18:02.160 --> 00:18:10.160 And when Burr lost the election, he bitterly blamed Alexander Hamilton, who had been bad-mouthing him through the whole election. 190 00:18:10.160 --> 00:18:17.160 and he wound up, as you know, shooting Hamilton who then died after hours of terrible agony. 191 00:18:17.160 --> 00:18:21.160 That was all, in effect, indirectly related to the New England Secession Plan at that time. 192 00:18:21.160 --> 00:18:27.160 In 1808 and 19, we see, at least in Massachusetts, some talk of secession 193 00:18:27.160 --> 00:18:35.160 because Thomas Jefferson has imposed an embargo such that no shipping is allowed to leave the United States for foreign ports 194 00:18:35.160 --> 00:18:42.160 and of course that devastates the maritime economy of New England and so they threaten secession again. 195 00:18:42.160 --> 00:18:51.160 Finally, at the end of the War of 1812, we have the Hartford Convention at which secession is threatened again, at least implicitly. 196 00:18:51.160 --> 00:18:57.160 New England states are dead set against the war and they began making demands of the federal government 197 00:18:57.160 --> 00:19:01.160 that New England's interests need to be better protected in this union. 198 00:19:01.160 --> 00:19:09.160 For one thing, we need to require that there be a two-thirds majority when there is a declaration of war forthcoming from Congress. 199 00:19:09.160 --> 00:19:14.160 See, today you don't have to worry about that. There are no declarations of war anymore, but in those days they had them. 200 00:19:14.160 --> 00:19:20.160 And so the requirement that the New Englanders wanted was that from now on we should require two-thirds majority 201 00:19:20.160 --> 00:19:25.160 to make sure that the country really is behind a war before we get involved in it. 202 00:19:25.160 --> 00:19:33.160 or they wanted to require that no president could serve two consecutive terms 203 00:19:33.160 --> 00:19:37.160 or no president in two consecutive terms could be from the same state. 204 00:19:37.160 --> 00:19:42.160 Now this is all directed at Virginia because if you know the history of the presidents, 205 00:19:42.160 --> 00:19:45.160 Jefferson is from Virginia and he was president for two terms 206 00:19:45.160 --> 00:19:48.160 and then Madison is from Virginia and was president for two terms 207 00:19:48.160 --> 00:19:51.160 by the time of the Hartford Convention in 1814. 208 00:19:51.160 --> 00:19:55.160 How little did they know that then it would be James Monroe for two terms, also from Virginia. 209 00:19:55.160 --> 00:19:58.160 It would be very difficult to stop this, but that's what they tried to do, 210 00:19:58.160 --> 00:20:00.160 is that we're sick and tired of these Virginian presidents, 211 00:20:00.160 --> 00:20:03.160 they don't know anything about New England interests, 212 00:20:03.160 --> 00:20:08.160 and so we need to amend the Constitution in these and other ways. 213 00:20:08.160 --> 00:20:13.160 And the strong implication was that if these amendments do not in fact pass, 214 00:20:13.160 --> 00:20:16.160 then we need to consider secession, because they said then we will meet again, 215 00:20:16.160 --> 00:20:19.160 this time in Boston next year, and see what our options are. 216 00:20:19.160 --> 00:20:24.160 and what those options are. And everyone understood that to mean that it was an implied threat of secession. 217 00:20:24.160 --> 00:20:28.160 Well, in fact, the war ended right around the same time as the Harvard Convention. 218 00:20:28.160 --> 00:20:33.160 In fact, as New Englanders were heading down to Washington with their list of demands 219 00:20:33.160 --> 00:20:37.160 and proposed constitutional amendments, they got word that the peace treaty, 220 00:20:37.160 --> 00:20:40.160 the Treaty of Ghent had been signed and the war was over. 221 00:20:40.160 --> 00:20:45.160 And now, all of a sudden, attention began to shift to them in the rest of the country. 222 00:20:45.160 --> 00:20:51.160 The federalist party, which was the dominant political party in New England, was completely destroyed by this. 223 00:20:51.160 --> 00:20:55.160 They were viewed as being unpatriotic, even treasonous. 224 00:20:55.160 --> 00:21:04.160 And interestingly, by the way, that happens to be, at least in large part, the reason that during the Mexican War in the late 1840s, 225 00:21:04.160 --> 00:21:29.160 And interestingly, by the way, that happens to be, at least in large part, the reason that during the Mexican War in the late 1840s, that the Whig Party, which wasn't necessarily gung-ho about the war, nevertheless, you know, they waved the flag and went along with it, because they saw what happened. If you're ostentatiously anti-war, your whole party can just be blown to smithereens. 226 00:21:29.160 --> 00:21:35.840 Smithereens. But these are examples of secession or threats of secession. In 1798, as I indicated 227 00:21:35.840 --> 00:21:42.160 in a previous week, Thomas Jefferson's friend John Taylor argued that Virginia should secede 228 00:21:42.160 --> 00:21:46.360 because of the Alien and Sedition Acts. And we might cite other examples. There were murmurings 229 00:21:46.360 --> 00:21:51.600 of Massachusetts secession over the admission of Texas into the Union as a slave state in 230 00:21:51.600 --> 00:21:57.500 the 1840s. So it's not as if this just comes out of nowhere, a bunch of crazies think it 231 00:21:57.500 --> 00:22:04.100 up in 1860 and 61. It's a part of the American political conversation. 232 00:22:04.100 --> 00:22:11.020 Okay, good. It's also worth noting, I think, one final point along these lines is that 233 00:22:11.020 --> 00:22:17.740 when you consult soldiers' diaries and letters, it's interesting to see how they themselves 234 00:22:17.740 --> 00:22:24.540 conceive of the war. And this is useful because you can only learn so much from what official 235 00:22:24.540 --> 00:22:29.540 What do actual political sources say, a Senate resolution or a presidential speech? 236 00:22:29.540 --> 00:22:33.540 That doesn't necessarily get to the heart of what the average person is thinking. 237 00:22:33.540 --> 00:22:35.540 Well, what was the average person thinking? 238 00:22:35.540 --> 00:22:38.540 Well, thankfully we don't have to speculate wildly on this, 239 00:22:38.540 --> 00:22:40.540 because there's a whole book that's been written, 240 00:22:40.540 --> 00:22:43.540 it was written about ten years ago by James McPherson, 241 00:22:43.540 --> 00:22:47.540 wrote a book called For Cause and Comrades. 242 00:22:47.540 --> 00:22:51.540 It was originally, in the manuscript version, it was called What They Fought For, 243 00:22:51.540 --> 00:22:53.540 which is easier to understand, I think. 244 00:22:53.540 --> 00:22:57.540 But I guess the answer is the title he came up with, For Cause and Comrades. 245 00:22:57.540 --> 00:23:03.540 What's interesting is that you see the two different competing understandings of the American Union 246 00:23:03.540 --> 00:23:08.540 contained in Northern as versus Southern soldiers' letters. 247 00:23:08.540 --> 00:23:12.540 For one thing, we do notice that in most of these letters, 248 00:23:12.540 --> 00:23:16.540 we see patriotic motives cited as to why they're fighting. 249 00:23:16.540 --> 00:23:20.540 We don't see acknowledgement that they're fighting for or against slavery, 250 00:23:20.540 --> 00:23:27.540 In the northern case, the principle is that we are fighting for what our ancestors gave us, which is this great union of states. 251 00:23:27.540 --> 00:23:34.540 The southern soldier typically is arguing, we are fighting for what our ancestors gave us, which is the right and principle of self-government. 252 00:23:34.540 --> 00:23:43.540 Well, in a nutshell, really both of those things are fighting for the right and principle of self-government. 253 00:23:43.540 --> 00:23:47.340 Which is the Right and Principle of Self-Government. 254 00:23:47.460 --> 00:23:52.300 Well, in a nutshell, really, both of those things came from our ancestors. 255 00:23:52.420 --> 00:23:56.860 But in a way, you can see that nationalist versus compact theory right there. 256 00:23:56.980 --> 00:24:01.340 The northern soldier arguing that the fundamental thing about the United States is that it's one. 257 00:24:01.460 --> 00:24:03.820 It's fundamentally one thing. 258 00:24:03.940 --> 00:24:08.860 The southern contention that, no, the United States is fundamentally a plural thing. 259 00:24:08.980 --> 00:24:13.140 It consists of individual states with their own rights of self-government. 260 00:24:13.140 --> 00:24:15.140 And I'm fighting to vindicate that. 261 00:24:15.140 --> 00:24:20.140 Those two views that we've seen throughout the 19th century up to that point, 262 00:24:20.140 --> 00:24:24.140 there they are, right there on the battlefield. 263 00:24:24.140 --> 00:24:27.140 All right, now a few other little things I'd like to say, 264 00:24:27.140 --> 00:24:29.140 and then we'll have our adjournment. 265 00:24:29.140 --> 00:24:33.140 I sure wish that I had some water, but that's okay. 266 00:24:33.140 --> 00:24:35.140 That's quite all right. 267 00:24:35.140 --> 00:24:40.140 Make me enjoy it all the more when we actually get it. 268 00:24:40.140 --> 00:24:55.140 One of the scholars who's associated with the Institute as an adjunct scholar is Thomas D. Lorenzo, who's a professor at Loyola College in Maryland. 269 00:24:55.140 --> 00:25:02.140 He writes a book. It seems like he's writing in his sleep while he's eating. I don't see how he's as productive as he is. 270 00:25:02.140 --> 00:25:08.140 But he has a book out, a new book on Lincoln. He's got two books on Lincoln that have been controversial. 271 00:25:08.140 --> 00:25:15.140 He's got a brand new one that's just out, oh I would say it's been out for a month at most, called Lincoln Unmasked. 272 00:25:15.140 --> 00:25:22.140 And I want to make reference to a couple of the points that he makes in that book because I think they are serious points. 273 00:25:22.140 --> 00:25:29.140 These aren't just trivial potshots that he's taking, unfair or silly. 274 00:25:29.140 --> 00:25:34.140 These are serious arguments that are typically not raised but I think need to be raised. 275 00:25:34.140 --> 00:25:50.140 Now, what I mentioned last time in the discussion was that the idea of a modern state is such that there is one sovereign voice and there is no other competing jurisdiction that is equal to that sovereign voice. 276 00:25:50.140 --> 00:25:53.140 Everything is subordinate to that one overriding sovereignty. 277 00:25:53.140 --> 00:25:56.140 And I said that this is the modern political idea. 278 00:25:56.140 --> 00:26:06.140 And this was not a pre-modern idea, that in the Middle Ages and into the early modern period, there was another way of organizing political life, where you had a series of layers in society. 279 00:26:06.140 --> 00:26:13.140 You've got this jurisdiction, that jurisdiction, you've got states, you've got institutions with liberties that cannot be trampled. 280 00:26:13.140 --> 00:26:18.140 Whereas today, pretty much throughout the Western world, you have a single flat plane. 281 00:26:18.140 --> 00:26:22.140 And in fact, I think the European Union is trying to do that to all the countries, too. 282 00:26:22.140 --> 00:26:27.140 and all the countries, too, make that a great big flat plane where there are no competing jurisdictions. 283 00:26:27.140 --> 00:26:38.140 And I think this idea then becomes taken to the nth degree by people like the great totalitarians of the 20th century, like Stalin and Hitler. 284 00:26:38.140 --> 00:26:43.140 And I don't mean to say that if you don't agree with me, then you basically agree with Hitler 285 00:26:43.140 --> 00:26:46.140 and you want to put people in concentration camps, so that would be unfair. 286 00:26:46.140 --> 00:26:52.140 I'm not suggesting that, but I am suggesting that it is interesting to know sometimes what Hitler thought about something. 287 00:26:52.140 --> 00:27:01.140 And now Hitler, I'm sure, had some good ideas, like I'm sure he believed that people should breathe and eat food and, you know, listen to the radio. 288 00:27:01.140 --> 00:27:10.140 So, I mean, it doesn't necessarily prove anything, but I don't think I would want to be on Hitler's side if I could avoid it on most issues. 289 00:27:10.140 --> 00:27:14.780 Well, it's interesting to note that if you read Mein Kampf, which is this, you know, 290 00:27:14.780 --> 00:27:20.580 Hitler's ponderous book that he wrote in the 20s, what does he have to say about the 291 00:27:20.580 --> 00:27:26.040 American Civil War? Well, he's totally in favor of the Northern cause and Lincoln's 292 00:27:26.040 --> 00:27:31.140 cause, totally in favor of it, and he's totally against the idea of states' rights. Surprise, 293 00:27:31.140 --> 00:27:38.900 surprise, surprise. Hitler despised the tradition of states' rights in Germany, because it, 294 00:27:38.900 --> 00:27:41.900 You know, why do you think? Because it was an obstacle to him. 295 00:27:41.900 --> 00:27:46.900 Because it was an obstacle in the way of the exercise of absolute power. 296 00:27:46.900 --> 00:27:49.900 And so, he's quite clear about this. 297 00:27:49.900 --> 00:27:54.900 Hitler, in fact, promised that the Nazis, quote, 298 00:27:54.900 --> 00:27:58.900 would totally eliminate states' rights altogether. 299 00:27:58.900 --> 00:28:02.900 Since for us the state as such is only a form, but the essential is its content, 300 00:28:02.900 --> 00:28:04.900 the nation, the people, 301 00:28:04.900 --> 00:28:09.400 It is clear that everything else must be subordinated to its sovereign interests. 302 00:28:09.400 --> 00:28:12.900 In particular, we cannot grant to any individual state within the nation, 303 00:28:12.900 --> 00:28:18.400 and the state representing it, state sovereignty and sovereignty in point of political power. 304 00:28:18.400 --> 00:28:24.400 He said, the mischief of individual federated states must cease and will someday cease. 305 00:28:24.400 --> 00:28:29.400 National Socialism as a matter of principle must lay claim to the right to force its principles 306 00:28:29.400 --> 00:28:35.400 on the whole German nation without consideration of previous federated state boundaries. 307 00:28:35.400 --> 00:28:39.400 And then as I say he actually goes on and comments specifically on the American Civil War 308 00:28:39.400 --> 00:28:43.400 and has nothing but the most withering contempt for the southern cause 309 00:28:43.400 --> 00:28:49.400 because it runs exactly counter to this fundamental principle. 310 00:28:49.400 --> 00:28:55.400 Another important contribution of the DiLorenzo book is that DiLorenzo is interested to look at 311 00:28:55.400 --> 00:29:02.400 We're going to look at how the Lincoln mythos, you might say, is being employed today. 312 00:29:02.400 --> 00:29:08.400 What purpose it serves today? There are no slaves in the country to free, so why would people refer to Lincoln? 313 00:29:08.400 --> 00:29:14.400 What purpose does it serve? Well, it so happens that the Lincoln legacy, 314 00:29:14.400 --> 00:29:23.400 because it involves so many departures from settled law, such as throwing tens of thousands of political prisoners in jail, 315 00:29:23.400 --> 00:29:28.400 or shutting down 300 opposition newspapers or censoring telegraph messages. 316 00:29:28.400 --> 00:29:36.400 Well, as a result of that, the Lincoln legacy can be and has been cited on behalf of all manner of political atrocities, 317 00:29:36.400 --> 00:29:41.400 from the decimation of civil liberties to the waging of war against civilian populations. 318 00:29:41.400 --> 00:29:47.400 The religious veneer of Lincoln's political rhetoric seared into the American consciousness 319 00:29:47.400 --> 00:29:52.520 and Business, the idea of the U.S. government as an instrument of God's will to be employed 320 00:29:52.520 --> 00:29:58.600 without mercy against any force so impious as to resist that holy will. 321 00:29:58.600 --> 00:30:02.000 This conception of the Federal Government works even for politicians who might feel 322 00:30:02.000 --> 00:30:06.760 uncomfortable with openly religious language. The idea of a righteous central authority 323 00:30:06.760 --> 00:30:13.240 steamrolling all opposition, ipso facto wicked and perverse, of course, as part of the inevitable 324 00:30:13.240 --> 00:30:19.240 The historical forward march of history fits quite nicely into just about any nationalist agenda, left or right. 325 00:30:19.240 --> 00:30:25.240 This is why the Lincoln myth is so stubborn, so resistant to evidence, and so difficult to overturn. 326 00:30:25.240 --> 00:30:31.240 The entire American political class has a vested interest in its preservation. 327 00:30:31.240 --> 00:30:38.240 Eric Foner, the Marxist professor of history, who has spent much of his career at my old alma mater, Columbia University, 328 00:30:38.240 --> 00:30:43.240 has even cited Lincoln on behalf of the preservation of the Soviet Union. 329 00:30:43.240 --> 00:30:48.240 In February 1991, an article called Lincoln's Lesson 330 00:30:48.240 --> 00:30:51.240 that Foner wrote for the Nation magazine, 331 00:30:51.240 --> 00:30:58.240 he denounced the secession movements in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia on Lincolnian grounds 332 00:30:58.240 --> 00:31:01.240 and called upon Gorbachev to suppress them 333 00:31:01.240 --> 00:31:05.240 with the same ruthlessness that Lincoln showed the South. 334 00:31:05.240 --> 00:31:10.320 According to Foner, quote, no leader of a powerful nation should tolerate the dismemberment 335 00:31:10.320 --> 00:31:11.800 of the Soviet Union. 336 00:31:11.800 --> 00:31:17.160 And he said, the Civil War was a central step in the consolidation of national authority 337 00:31:17.160 --> 00:31:19.160 in the United States. 338 00:31:19.160 --> 00:31:22.760 The Union, Lincoln passionately believed, was a permanent government. 339 00:31:22.760 --> 00:31:25.280 Gorbachev would surely agree. 340 00:31:25.280 --> 00:31:29.440 Well, for all the talk about slavery, there it is in a nutshell. 341 00:31:29.440 --> 00:31:33.400 The Civil War and Lincoln's legacy involved the violent suppression of independence, exactly 342 00:31:33.400 --> 00:31:36.400 This is really what Foner wanted to see in the Soviet Union. 343 00:31:36.400 --> 00:31:42.400 What better condemnation could we ask for than that? 344 00:31:42.400 --> 00:31:51.400 Now again, I refer you to some of the violations of civil liberties that are at least briefly referred to in the book. 345 00:31:51.400 --> 00:31:54.400 And it's important to remember these. 346 00:31:54.400 --> 00:31:59.400 And it's important not to say, well, Lincoln had to do this, and what else is he going to do? 347 00:31:59.400 --> 00:32:02.400 Of course he had to throw people in jail, and this and that. 348 00:32:02.400 --> 00:32:11.400 The point to make here is that Lincoln has now provided the ideal pretext for anybody since then to do things like that. 349 00:32:11.400 --> 00:32:18.400 Because then, because Lincoln is viewed as almost a demi-god, people can simply say, well, even Lincoln did thus and so. 350 00:32:18.400 --> 00:32:22.400 So how can you object? Even Lincoln censored the telegraph messages. 351 00:32:22.400 --> 00:32:27.400 Even Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus. So how can you object to it? 352 00:32:27.400 --> 00:32:33.400 So in fact, over the past year, the controversy involving wiretapping developed. 353 00:32:33.400 --> 00:32:35.400 It was just only a matter of time. 354 00:32:35.400 --> 00:32:41.400 You had to just sit not too long to wait for the even Lincoln did it crowd to start making their arguments. 355 00:32:41.400 --> 00:32:47.400 And sure enough, Republican Party loyalists began making precisely this argument. 356 00:32:47.400 --> 00:32:51.400 Well, how can you object to what George W. Bush is doing, even Lincoln did this? 357 00:32:51.400 --> 00:32:56.400 And so there it is. That's why they love him. They love him. It's a pretext for everything. 358 00:32:56.400 --> 00:33:02.400 Now, De Lorenzo, incidentally, raises a good and useful response to that 359 00:33:02.400 --> 00:33:07.400 it's okay because even Lincoln did it and it's wartime and you got to do what you got to do argument. 360 00:33:07.400 --> 00:33:12.400 He quotes Supreme Court Justice David Davis, who was a personal friend of Lincoln, 361 00:33:12.400 --> 00:33:16.400 from the 1866 case X Party Milligan, in which he wrote, 362 00:33:16.400 --> 00:33:21.400 The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people equally in war and peace 363 00:33:21.400 --> 00:33:25.400 and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men at all times 364 00:33:25.400 --> 00:33:32.400 In fact, if it were the case that government were simply to be given carte blanche during wartime, to act as it wished, 365 00:33:32.400 --> 00:33:39.400 all that would be necessary to whittle away the people's liberties would be to concoct, or even provoke, an endless series of crises. 366 00:33:39.400 --> 00:33:46.400 Now, pointing all this out does not mean that the government is simply to be given carte blanche during wartime. 367 00:33:46.400 --> 00:33:53.400 The way to whittle away the people's liberties would be to concoct or even provoke an endless series of crises. 368 00:33:53.400 --> 00:33:58.400 Now, pointing all this out does not make you a neo-Confederate, or whatever that means. 369 00:33:58.400 --> 00:34:05.400 The Confederate government also was too big and countenanced or promoted intolerable enormities. 370 00:34:05.400 --> 00:34:11.400 The point simply is that some of these arguments that I've raised here are not raised ever, 371 00:34:11.400 --> 00:34:14.400 and probably ought to be by a free people. 372 00:34:14.400 --> 00:34:19.400 And yet, it is understandable that the issue of slavery still lingers in the back of our minds. 373 00:34:19.400 --> 00:34:22.400 That for all this, after all, slavery was ended. 374 00:34:22.400 --> 00:34:28.400 I did try to address that point to some degree last time about the nature of the modern state 375 00:34:28.400 --> 00:34:33.400 and the bad things it gets up to, as well as the good things. 376 00:34:33.400 --> 00:34:40.400 But it is not plausible to suggest that slavery could have lasted much longer, even in an independent South. 377 00:34:40.400 --> 00:34:45.400 If slavery being abolished everywhere, the Confederacy would have been an international pariah. 378 00:34:45.400 --> 00:34:52.400 And it is unreasonable to suppose that it could have long withstood the inevitable and overwhelming international moral pressure 379 00:34:52.400 --> 00:34:55.400 to which its isolated position would have exposed it. 380 00:34:55.400 --> 00:35:01.400 And according to Jeff Hummel, who wrote a highly acclaimed book called Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men, 381 00:35:01.400 --> 00:35:07.400 the fact that emancipation overwhelmed such entrenched plantation economies as Cuba and Brazil 382 00:35:07.400 --> 00:35:11.100 suggests that slavery was politically more abundant anyway. 383 00:35:11.200 --> 00:35:13.900 Slavery was doomed politically even if Lincoln had permitted 384 00:35:14.000 --> 00:35:17.440 the small Gulf Coast Confederacy to depart in peace. 385 00:35:17.540 --> 00:35:20.740 The Republican-controlled Congress would have been able to work toward emancipation 386 00:35:20.840 --> 00:35:24.540 within the border states where slavery was already declining. 387 00:35:24.640 --> 00:35:29.180 In due course, the radicals could have repealed the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. 388 00:35:29.280 --> 00:35:33.720 With chattels fleeing across the border and raising slavery's enforcement costs, 389 00:35:33.720 --> 00:35:39.720 The peculiar institution's destruction within an independent cotton South was inevitable. 390 00:35:39.720 --> 00:35:48.720 And again, I've just added, as I've noted last time, that every country that abolished slavery in the Western Hemisphere in the 19th century managed to do so peacefully other than the United States. 391 00:35:48.720 --> 00:35:55.720 The last forbidden question I will raise, though, is this one, and this actually is in the form of a question rather than an answer. 392 00:35:55.720 --> 00:36:02.720 And that involves trying to think about the alternate universe in which the South had peacefully seceded. 393 00:36:02.720 --> 00:36:04.720 What would have happened? 394 00:36:04.720 --> 00:36:07.720 And I think there is something that's worth thinking about. 395 00:36:07.720 --> 00:36:12.720 Suppose, for instance, World War I comes along. 396 00:36:12.720 --> 00:36:15.720 Now, what would have happened? 397 00:36:15.720 --> 00:36:19.720 Would both countries, would both the Confederate States of America and the U.S., 398 00:36:19.720 --> 00:36:22.720 would they both have intervened in World War I? 399 00:36:22.720 --> 00:36:23.720 I think that's doubtful. 400 00:36:23.720 --> 00:36:26.720 Maybe neither one of them would have intervened in World War I. 401 00:36:26.720 --> 00:36:31.720 And it is not a crazy theory, but quite mainstream to suggest 402 00:36:31.720 --> 00:36:37.720 that World War I ushered in countless horrors in its wake. 403 00:36:37.720 --> 00:36:43.720 It gave impetus to the Nazi movement certainly because the Versailles Treaty 404 00:36:43.720 --> 00:36:50.720 embitters the German population and they just become sitting ducks for a hyper-nationalistic politician like Hitler 405 00:36:50.720 --> 00:36:55.720 to exploit their resentments over Germany's treatment. 406 00:36:55.720 --> 00:37:02.320 It was, in a way, the handmaid of the Bolshevik Revolution, World War I. 407 00:37:02.320 --> 00:37:10.920 The strains that war exacted from the civilian population and the fighting forces 408 00:37:10.920 --> 00:37:13.320 were too great for the regime to survive. 409 00:37:13.320 --> 00:37:22.520 And so a terrible, lawless, czarist regime gave way to an even worse and more lawless Bolshevik regime. 410 00:37:22.520 --> 00:37:29.520 There is practically no trend in Europe that was not shockingly exacerbated by that conflict. 411 00:37:29.520 --> 00:37:33.520 And particularly when Woodrow Wilson decided to involve the United States in it, 412 00:37:33.520 --> 00:37:42.520 that seemed to tip the balance such that it now became possible to impose this type of bitter settlement upon Germany. 413 00:37:42.520 --> 00:37:49.520 Well, what would have happened if there had been two unions in this geographical territory now called the United States? 414 00:37:49.520 --> 00:37:53.520 What would have happened? Maybe one of them wouldn't have entered the war. 415 00:37:53.520 --> 00:37:58.520 Maybe then you wouldn't have had it tip so heavily in one direction. 416 00:37:58.520 --> 00:38:03.520 Maybe you wouldn't have had all these unfortunate trends being exacerbated quite so badly. 417 00:38:03.520 --> 00:38:09.520 There are so many things to consider in this what-if universe that we are not permitted to entertain 418 00:38:09.520 --> 00:38:16.520 because it is taken for granted that the one moral position to take was the suppression of secession. 419 00:38:16.520 --> 00:38:29.520 Maybe it wasn't, and maybe this opens up a whole field of other possibilities and other ways that the unfortunately tragic 20th century might have unfolded. 420 00:38:29.520 --> 00:38:35.520 Well, that's what I leave with now. Well, I just run to get some water and then we will resume when I can.