Started By
Message

How the North Strangled the South after The War

Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:43 am
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
52342 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:43 am
Here is an article from the April 17, 1961 edition of US News & World Report that covered the 100th anniversary of the War Between the States. It reported some aspects of reconstruction that are little mentioned today.

Archive.org link.



quote:


There was no great relief efforts by the North comparable to those made by the U.S. after WWII, even though more than a million persons faced starvation in the South during the years following the war and some DID starve. Only a pittance of aid came from the North. The Government in Washington created a Freedmen's Bureau, which got $4 in taxes on cotton for each $1 it gave in relief. Funds from private charities were pathetically small in comparison to what was needed..."

"U.S Treasury agents streamed through the South in 1865 grabbing cotton, land, anything that they claimed to have been the property of the Confederacy. They took cotton valued at $30 million. Behind them came hordes of carpetbaggers (With the Wall Street Journal's blessing I'm sure. They'll invent some economic theory to justify it while professing to hate the looters in Atlas Shrugged) from the North to drain away any Southern Capital they could lay hands on..."

"Between 1868 and 1874 the carpetbaggers managed to build up the state debts in the South by $101,232,000.....Mississippi's tax rates for example, were 14 times higher at the end than the beginning.

"At that time (decades following civil war), the South was trying to educate a third of the nation's children in a dual school system, but it only had a sixth of the nation's school revenues."

"Northern capitalists took command of many Southern resources. A cottonseed-oil firm owned in the North controlled 88% of the production of that product. the entire supply of American bauxite, found in four Southern States, went to ONE Northern company. Control of 80% of America's sulphur was picked up by another firm....

Control of the major Southern railroads, the Alabama coal and iron industries, many millions of Southern timberlands was all held by Northern interests. Only the cotton-textile and tobacco industries, among major enterprises, remained principally under Southern control..."

Southern shippers had to pay higher freight rates than did shippers in the Northeast for sending the same goods equal distances (Everyone got that?) Rates were set by Southern railroads but the roads were controlled , largely, by Northern Capital. The rates held the approval of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Not until 1945 was this changed.

The Southern steel industry, doing a booming business in 1900, was virtually stopped in its track, Southerners said, by a rate structure imposed by the North. The rates required payment of price differentials so sharp that it became cheaper for an industry in New Orleans to buy steel from Pittsburgh than from Birmingham. Not until World War II were changes made in this system."



That last part is true. Found old newspaper articles from 1930's that reported Southern Governors and their delegations raising hell in DC over this.
This post was edited on 4/8/24 at 9:50 am
Posted by Michael T. Tiger
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2004
8346 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:45 am to
quote:

Here is an article from the April 17, 1961 edition of US News & World Report that covered the 150th anniversary


The math isn't mathing...1861 + 150 = 2011
Posted by GreatLakesTiger24
One State Solution
Member since May 2012
56494 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:46 am to
FAFO
Posted by jizzle6609
Houston
Member since Jul 2009
6232 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:46 am to
Sheer numbers my bruh.

The South had better leadership and the best strategist on the military side.

The North did exactly what China and Russia do. Throw numbers at the problem. Whoever dies isnt upper class anyways so who cares. Just kill them to death!
Posted by SaintlyTiger88
Louisiana
Member since Apr 2013
2038 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:46 am to
Would you guys agree the South is still feeling the effects of losing the Civil War, all these many years later?
This post was edited on 4/8/24 at 11:54 am
Posted by Saint Alfonzo
Member since Jan 2019
23330 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:46 am to
Oh well, FAFO.
Posted by Tantal
Member since Sep 2012
15357 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:54 am to
And now the Southern pro-business environment has everyone moving down here.
Posted by FredBear
Georgia
Member since Aug 2017
15407 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 10:00 am to
The yankee carpetbagger did as much damage, if not more, than Grant and Sherman combined
Posted by The Boat
Member since Oct 2008
166619 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 10:09 am to
The North strangled the South before the War. That was a big reason for the War. Muh Slavery.
Posted by SantaFe
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2019
6854 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 10:25 am to
Northern banks and the cutting off of credit to southern planters was the cause of the War, not freeing the slaves.
Also the northern business owners were envious of having to pay their laborers where the south only had to feed and house their slaves.
Posted by cypresstiger
The South
Member since Aug 2008
11378 posts
Posted on 4/8/24 at 11:23 am to
There was no great relief efforts by the North comparable to those made by the U.S. after WWII, even though more than a million persons faced starvation in the South during the years following the war and some DID starve.
----this is unfair criticism. The Freedman's Bureau and other Northern programs to help the South after the war, amounted to more govt help that any victor had ever given any defeated opponent. WW2 was almost 100 years later.

first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram