Best regards, Andrew Stewart
Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]> > Date: February 18, 2021 at 8:24:30 AM EST > To: [email protected] > Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Egerton on Richardson, 'How the South Won the > Civil War: Oligarchy, Democracy, and the Continuing Fight for the Soul of > America' > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Heather Cox Richardson. How the South Won the Civil War: Oligarchy, > Democracy, and the Continuing Fight for the Soul of America. New > York Oxford University Press, 2020. xxix + 240 pp. $27.95 (cloth), > ISBN 978-0-19-090090-8. > > Reviewed by Douglas R. Egerton (LeMoyne College) > Published on H-War (February, 2021) > Commissioned by Margaret Sankey > > On January 6, 2021, a pro-Donald Trump rioter was photographed > walking through the Capitol building while carrying a Confederate > battle flag. Having used violence to smash his way into the building > past security guards, the yet-unnamed rioter was evidently unaware > that he was photographed walking by a painting of Massachusetts > senator Charles Sumner, himself the target of racist violence. > Perhaps no better image illustrates the question that ends Heather > Cox Richardson's thoughtful, sober account of--as the book's subtitle > puts it--"the continuing fight for the soul of America." > > In a slim but ambitious volume largely tailored toward students, lay > readers, and nonspecialists in early American history, Richardson > carries her readers from the moment that English settlers planted > African slavery on Virginia's shores to President Trump's open > "support of white supremacist groups" (p. 199). In her closing and > now prescient paragraph, Richardson returns to William Shakespeare's > Miranda, who in _The Tempest_ marveled at the brave new world of > opportunity for those hindered by Old World class hierarchies. Nearly > two centuries later, Richardson adds, George Washington echoed that > sentiment, praying that his generation might forge Miranda's vision > into a "great experiment," even as he wondered whether such a > government of the people could long endure. "Our country's peculiar > history has kept the question open," Richardson observes in her final > line. > > Although most of Richardson's pages are devoted to the Civil War era > and the years after Appomattox, a lengthy introduction and two > wide-ranging chapters chronicle the emergence of what historian > Edmund Morgan once described as the "American paradox," in which > slavery and freedom not only existed side by side in early America > but occurred in a society in which many of the greatest proponents of > liberty and freedom were slaveholders. (Graduate students in general > will profit from Richardson's historiographical endnotes, in which > she acknowledges the scholars whose earlier work informs many of > these pages.) By the 1850s, however, the nation could no longer > ignore this fundamental inconsistency, and the new Republican Party, > with its free labor ideology, appealed to middle-class voters as the > best means to implement the ideals enshrined in the Declaration of > Independence. When southern planters, who believed that their > oligarchic views were the proper ideals for America, lost control of > the presidency, they precipitated a conflict that forced the nation, > as Richardson notes, to reconceive the powers of the federal > government so as "to promote the good of all rather than to protect > the wealth of the very few." For one brief moment in time, it > appeared that the country had truly achieved a new birth of freedom, > in which "all men, regardless of their race or background, were > equal" (p. 51). > > As chapter 3 opens, the importance and uniqueness of Richardson's > argument becomes clear. Most historians argue that the white South > ultimately won the peace by employing vigilantism and brutality to > end black voting rights and Reconstruction-era reforms. By > comparison, Richardson's thesis is that an emerging alliance between > the South and white settlers in the West quickly overturned the > nation's too brief flirtation with racial equality. Even before the > war, western states and territories had used both legal and > extralegal means to maintain white dominance over Chinese immigrants, > Natives, and people who just a decade before had been Mexican > citizens. In the twelve years between the acquisition of California > and the secession of South Carolina, Richardson observes, at least > 163 Mexican Americans were lynched, a rate comparable to the fate of > black southerners in the early years of the twentieth century. As in > the later Jim Crow South, mobs often mutilated the corpses of their > victims, slicing out tongues and burning the bodies as they swung > from trees. In 1850, as the California territorial assembly prepared > the legal framework for statehood, they restricted voting rights to > "free white persons," borrowed southern laws banning free blacks or > those with Indian "blood" from testifying against whites, and > prohibited marriage between "white persons" and "negroes or > mulattoes" (p. 63). > > The troubling connections between southern attitudes and western > practices posed problems for Abraham Lincoln during the war. In 1862, > just as Union military efforts reached their lowest moments, Dakotas > in the Minnesota Territory rose up to retake the 24 million acres of > land they had lost the decade before. Military officers in the > Midwest, hoping to execute all of the surrendering men, organized > courts-martial designed to eliminate hundreds of Dakotas. Aware of > the dangerous precedent of executing men found guilty of taking up > arms against the federal government, Lincoln commuted the sentence of > those found guilty of taking lives while on the battlefield and > reserved execution for those Dakotas who had murdered civilians. Even > so, the thirty-eight Dakotas hanged on December 26, 1862, constituted > the largest mass execution in American history. > > Southern and western politicians, who alike worried that federal > power was often wielded in the name of racial equality, collectively > advanced the argument that legislation designed to protect nonwhites > was tantamount to attacks on the property rights of the wealthy. In > an interview with a New York paper, former Confederate secretary of > state Robert Toombs compared former slaves to the 1871 Paris > Communards. "Only those who owned the country should govern it," > Toombs lectured, "and the men who had no property had no right to > make laws for property-holders" (p. 85). For their part, western > legislators were less concerned about black voters--there were only > about 1,700 African American males of voting age in California in > 1870--than they were about the potential 37,000 potential Chinese > voters. Members of the Nevada legislature refused to ratify the 15th > Amendment until Congress banned those born in China from voting, and > both California and Oregon rejected the amendment outright. Openly > appealing to racism, Democratic candidates gained political control > of California and Oregon, while in Los Angeles, a mob of roughly > 5,800 men lynched fifteen Chinese. In hopes of demonstrating their > fealty to the new racial order, the throng included a good number of > Mexican Americans. (California finally ratified the Fifteenth > Amendment in April 1962.) > > A series of events, culminating in the Republican nomination of > Arizona senator Barry Goldwater in 1964, finalized the alliance > between the Old South and the New West. Their platform praised > states' rights, denounced civil rights legislation, and called for a > return to individualism. Although Goldwater captured only 38.5 > percent of the popular vote and carried but six states, one of those > was his own Arizona while the other five were in the Deep South. > Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond, long estranged from the Democratic Party, > announced himself a Republican and endorsed Goldwater. "Thanks to the > American West," Richardson observes, the ideology of the Confederacy > had regained a foothold in national politics" (p. 165). By the 1980s, > the minority view grew to achieve majority status, as former > California governor Ronald Reagan achieved the sort of electoral > victories denied to Goldwater just years before. > > Richardson ends her story by giving voice to Georgia congressman > James Jackson. College professors, eastern elites, and northern > politicians, Jackson shouted, had illegally taken control of > Washington and intended to destroy "the equal rights of every citizen > of every State." The storm clouds of the incoming administration were > "black and ominous, and threaten[ed] to discharge its flood of fury" > unless righteous citizens engaged in trial by combat (p. 201). > Jackson was speaking in the fall of 1860, but those insurrectionists > who stormed the Capitol on January 6, and those who incited that > violence, could not have said it any better. > > Citation: Douglas R. Egerton. Review of Richardson, Heather Cox, _How > the South Won the Civil War: Oligarchy, Democracy, and the Continuing > Fight for the Soul of America_. H-War, H-Net Reviews. February, 2021. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=56005 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#6495): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/6495 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/80733258/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
