主题：【原创】即使没有文革,中国经济也不会提前进入第二世界 -- 葡萄
家园 看看小说乱世佳人，亚特兰大被放火烧了几次？ 那个时代，可没有统计平民伤亡的说法。再看看当时美国总人口多少？
家园 It is the first time in my life that somebody cited a novel as historical evidence.
I knew Sherman burned down Atlanta. As to how many times, I do not know. You tell me.
I want to see a debate with reason and reasonable evidence. Not 信口開河的百萬或千萬.
家园 俺只是想提醒你，注意当时美国的人口总数和平民伤害。 至于拿不拿小说作证，俺有用过小说中的数字之类的么？我说，这些事情至于让你这么难以理解么？
家园 美国内战是为什么打的？ 家园 interpretation Southern states believed that it was their natural right to choose to stay or leave the union.
Northern states believed that the union was nonrevocable.
When 13 states formed the Union, the slavery provision in the Constitution was a compromise to accommodate the Southerners.This issue became the explosive when Abraham Lincoln was elected. Competiting point: new states should be non-slavery or not.
Of course, one can argue that it is a battle between Northern capitalists and Southern plantation owners. That's the Chinese textbook version, because everything was interpretted there as a class struggle.
But my questions:
1.The line was drawn between slave states vs. non-slave states (38 degree latitude line) not industrialized vs. non-industrialized. Virginia was more industrialized, but joined the south. Maryland was also industrialized, but a slave state and was occupied by the federal troops to thwart the secession attempt.
2. After the war, Southern states were still the poorest non-industrialized part of America, as the largest cotton exporter to the British empire and the world. US South still accounted for 1/3 of global cotton consumption (mainly to the British textile manufacturers). It was not industrialized by North until 1960s, when labor union pushed the big companies to move south for non-unionized workers.
3.Black Americans actually were never a major source of Northern industry labor forces until World War II, when for the first time, women and black minorities were attracted to the Northern industry plants.
4.(by me) 北方解決勞動力短缺是靠歐洲移民. 內戰之前主來源地是愛爾蘭與德國. 當時有不少北方士兵來自于剛下船的愛＼德人，后者往往違英文命令都聽不懂.小時候中國歷史課本一直把南北戰爭歸因于資本家需要南方的黑人labor--及南方的工業品市場, 是資本主義與南方種植園農業主義的斗爭.
但這一中式理論很難解釋為什么戰爭結束后北方工業界并不喜歡用南方黑人, 雖然后者有了人身自由.而且內戰后南方是赤貧, 一直到１８７７年才緩過勁來. 也沒多少需求.美國ヱ業化成功的市場需求來自于貴通東西二岸后的大需求.
From Wiki, "In the presidential election of 1860, the Republican Party, led by Abraham Lincoln, had campaigned against the expansion of slavery beyond the states in which it already existed. The Republican victory in that election resulted in seven Southern states declaring their secession from the Union even before Lincoln took office on March 4, 1861. Both the outgoing and incoming U.S. administrations rejected secession, considering it rebellion."
家园 你的帖子看起来还挺费劲 家园 你对阶级斗争理论的理解太机械了 南方要分裂是战争的直接起因。但是南方为什么要分裂出去？难道不是因为这两种生产方式已经无法并存于一个正在工业化的美国吗？如果不用阶级利益或是类似的范畴，如何解释战前南北之间长期的紧张？道德冲突吗？
家园 道德冲突吗？ of course it existed.
Several largest church denominations divided into the northern and southern congregations before the war over the slavery issue.
Chinese do not believe in any religion, but you should not assume that religion is nothing in the American history.
The slavery issue definitely teared this nation apart along the morality dimension.
For southerners, slaves were assets. While Northern side did not want to live with slavery forever. Yes, you can argue slavery is about 生产方式, but for me it is a morality issue.
BTW, in my other post, I have refuted the argument that the war helped to free the labor market for African Americans. The fact was the Northern side imported skilled or unskilled labor from Europe to satisfy industrial needs.
The southern slave states of Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Lousiana were the poorest states in the union ever since the end of civil war and they had been like this for around 100 years.
Market for industrialization comes from the mid-west and far western states. Most railway routes in late 1860s were east-west, with much less mileage devoted to link the deep south.
- 复 道德冲突吗？
家园 基督教跟奴隶制是可以兼容的 道德本身随历史不断演化，并非出于什么绝对律令。与旧约里杀尽敌人妇孺的教训相比，奴隶制本身在历史上也算是一种进步。究其原因，无非是随着生产的发展，战胜者可以养得起奴隶并且通过这个来获利。
南北战争时的美国，反对奴隶制的力量比独立战争时强大。这是因为经过近一百年人们变得更虔诚了？更道德了？还是因为工业资本主义更加发展了？
家园 can you cite some books or articles that lend support to your personal judgment?
南北战争时的美国，反对奴隶制的力量比独立战争时强大。
--At 1789, among 13 founding states, slave-states vs non-slave ones, close to 50:50. More states were free states by 1860s.Esp., those in the mid-west. Populationwise, North was definitely larger than the south.
这是因为经过近一百年人们变得更虔诚了？更道德了？
---There is no measure of 虔诚. So I have no answer for you.
Keep in mind, during the independence war, Yankees needed to lock in the southern slave states for a common cause against Britain. Yankees compromised a lot, which was obvious during the Constitution meeting.
What I can only say is that Northern non-slave states were more intolerant of the slavery because since 1820s, the British threat was gone. Yankees took more violent actions over time.
If you read the English documents, slavery issue popped out as a heated issue several times before 1860s. 1861 was not the first crisis year.
But both North/South sides took action to suppress the final showdown. Final showdown was triggered by the clear majority of non-slave states over slave states and endless interference from Yankees over southerner's internal "affairs". For Southerners, they were on a losing track if they still stayed in the Union.
When it comes to morality, human rights and human civility, I do observe a progressive trend in US, Europe and China. It MIGHT have nothing to do with 虔诚, but more due to external pressure (China's case, so that it is no longer another North Korea), economic well-being, and education (US and China).
In 1920/1930s, Chinese were more or less treated as yellow monkeys in States. But 1960s civil right changed it. I SEE NO role of INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION in 1960s, but I did see civility increase in 1960s.
还是因为工业资本主义更加发展了？
-hehe, you have your viewpoint, I keep mine. I do not think 阶级斗争理论 applies everywhere, any time. I see historical facts and I want people to convince me with facts, 而不是馬列主義教條, I saw too much in my early years back in China.
家园 美洲大陆上的印第安人都去哪里了？ 家园 西班牙征服 整個墨西哥, the slaughters had nothing to do with industrialization at all.
It was casualty due to invasion.
George Washington was the mastermind of Indian slaughter ever since USA was founded.
Before that, French America, did that even 400 years ago (Jean Chartier, Mon. Chomedy de Maisonneuve).
At that time, America was totally an agricultural economy.
不要阿狗阿貓都往工業化上套.