How did you reach your conclusion? Lincoln may simply have been hampered by his understanding of economics in his time. He was a trained lawyer. He must have known about eminent domain and corporate welfare.

He could have precluded the Civil War by ending slavery through eminent domain. Corporate welfare is not always a bad thing.

To suggest that Lincoln, as opposed to the planter elite of the south, split the nation asunder requires some interesting reasoning.

If you regard the industrialization of the nation as a mistake, then you can say that the industrial/commercial/capitalist interests (and the Republican Party, of the Whigs before them, or the Federalists before that, as their representatives) were at fault for moving us in that direction. If you start with that premise, you can then say that the planter elite of the south, and the Democrats as their representatives, were making a justified rational move to escape industrialization by leaving the country.

But if you do that, you also say that the U.S. should never have become a modern nation, technologically advanced, or a great power. We should, you must be saying, have remained technically backward, and today be what we call a "third world country," or perhaps several third-world countries, the union having sundered into two or (more likely) more components.

Quite honestly, I don't find that image appealing in the least. But if you do, hey, there's no arguing with taste. Just be honest with yourself about what it is that you're calling for as a should-have-been.

The planter elite as you call them were pursuing industrialization but were doing it in the south which troubles the north as they thought it their domain.

__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

you have obviously never read a historical work regarding the south and industrialization.

try "inudstrialization and southern society" by thomas cobb, one of the elite southern historians of our time.

once you have learned something, get back to us about how wrong you were.

__________________

Why would the South need to industrialize with free labor at its disposal?

the kid is dreaming. he couldn't name one source of work that is authoritative on the time period.

__________________

No, they were trying to stave off industrialization. The conflict was between two elites, one that got its wealth from slave labor and cash crops, the other from an oppressed proletariat and industry and commerce. All of the conflicts of the time were over what benefited one elite as opposed to the other. The capitalists wanted high tariffs to let them keep prices high on manufactured goods, the planters wanted low tariffs so they could keep those prices low, because they were buyers not sellers of such equipment. The planters wanted to keep their slaves, whom the capitalists saw as a huge chunk of the labor force reserved from the labor market and thus keeping them from driving wages down as far as they could otherwise. The capitalists wanted a central bank, the planters didn't. The capitalists wanted subsidized railroads, the planters didn't. And so on.

The idea that it was just nasty jealous Yankees not wanting the south to industrialize is historically ignorant. It's totally wrong.

I think the South would have been willing to industrialize if they had been compensated for their private property through eminent domain laws.

The price tag would have been astronomical, even if the slaveowners would have agreed.

why ship your cotton up north to process if you can do it locally ?

do you thnk the north would be happy losing that business ?

do you think the south would prefer to make that money themselves ?

__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

give it up pal, or show some real specific evidence that the planter elite wanted to industrialize.

you present some logical questions but you present no evidence that the planter elite wanted to industrialize. (because there is none)

__________________

daddio, it's not that your arguments don't make logical sense, it's just that they're wrong as a matter of observable fact. OF COURSE it would have been sensible and smart for the south to industrialize. The fact remained, they didn't want to.

I refer you to Article I, Section 8 of the Confederate Constitution. Actually, this leads nicely back to the thread topic, because the first subsection reads as follows:

Note that this (like the Confederate Constitution in general) was almost the same as the U.S. Constitution. Of course they took that as their model, and changed it where they wanted to. Here, they cut the "provide for the general welfare" language altogether, making this a much more restricted tax and spend power. The Confederate Congress' only general spending power was to provide for the common defense. Otherwise, it was restricted to spending to "carry on the government of the Confederate States," which is what the U.S. Constitution would have read, more or less, if a general spending power was not intended. Also, the Confederate Constitution explicitly forbade Congress from spending any money from any source to "promote or foster any branch of industry."

Not only that, but they did this twice, just to make sure:

So there you go. They were practical enough to allow some improvements when it facilitated the sale of cash crops, either through river traffic or through ports. But nothing else. The goal of the Confederacy was to preserve an economy based around slave-grown cash crops, not industry and, except for the sale of those cash crops, not commerce. One reason the southern states seceded was because the federal government was too supportive of industry. It became even more so during the Civil War, because the southern Congresscritters weren't sitting and voting to block measures they didn't like.

I fully agree that all this was dumb. Nevertheless, they did it.

technology, innovation, and southern industrialization: from the antebellum era to the computer age by susanna delfino and michele gillespie

try

Technology, Innovation, and Southern Industrialization

From the Antebellum Era to the Computer Age

Edited by Susanna Delfino
and Michele Gillespie
ISBN 978-0-8262-1795-0
232 pages
6 x 9
index, tables, 2008
$29.95s paper

__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

if you are trreferring to purchasing slave's freedom, its not that high a price tag and this was how the rest of the world handled it. Depreciation is the key.

__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

The North was busier getting corporate welfare for their industries.