Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 31, 2014, 10:34:15 AM
530351 Posts in 40029 Topics by 5000 Members
Latest Member: Devostator
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Television  |  THE CIVIL WAR reruns « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: THE CIVIL WAR reruns  (Read 3250 times)
Flick James
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 487
Posts: 4645


Honorary Bastard of Arts


« Reply #15 on: April 15, 2011, 11:38:54 AM »

Lester and I agree on some fundamental principles, and may differ on some fine points. In general, I leave lester to his own devices, and he seems to leave me to mine. We don't "team up" of spend any amount of time defending one another. I get the feeling he is just fine with that.

It is extremely unfair to say that he doesn't care about evil prevailing in the world. I think he is highly principled, whether you agree with him or not. He clearly thinks of America first and has demonstrated so on many occasions. Just because he is largely a non-interventionist doesn't mean he agrees with leaving the world open for the evil to conquer it. That is just extremely narrow-minded.

 I don't normally get into defending lester but I felt a rare need to. People who think for themselves or go out on a limb often get ostracized, alienated, and called a kook. Don't fall into that trap. If you don't agree with him, fine. Disagree with him all you want.  But don't say he doesn't care. If he didn't he wouldn't make a point to get involved as much as he does.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2011, 11:43:21 AM by Flick James » Logged

I don't always talk about bad movies, but when I do, I prefer badmovies.org
Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1769
Posts: 14251


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 15, 2011, 12:32:05 PM »

I like this article http://takimag.com/article/robert_e_lee_forever

"What I learn as I get older is that like most wars, the Civil War was pursued by so-called Honest Abe because big Northern business wanted to conduct big business in the Union. They wanted to build railroads and wanted interstate roads and access to markets. The South wished to remain sleepy and agricultural. Lincoln did not make slavery an issue until two years after the first shots over Fort Sumter. "

So to some of us, it's a little more nuanced is all.


Nuance doesn't require you to overlook the obvious.

That Greek guy cites no authority for his proposition that "the Civil War was pursued by so-called Honest Abe because big Northern business wanted to conduct big business in the Union. They wanted to build railroads and wanted interstate roads and access to markets."  Maybe there's something to it, but he sounds crazy to me. 

He also speaks of "one of the loveliest societies that ever existed, the antebellum South."  I can't see how anyone could call a society built on slavery one of the loveliest ones that ever existed.  Maybe he's thinking along the same lines as the Mississippi legislature:

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery -- the greatest material interest of the world," proclaimed Mississippi in its own secession declaration, passed Jan. 9, 1861. "Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of the commerce of the earth. . . . A blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization."  From an article I like: Five myths about why the South seceded

Logged

"The best parts are watching Sly go through the full range of emotions: deadpan, deadpan with raised eyebrow, deadpan with quivering lip. There's also a great sequence where Sly drives his VW Beetle down the interstate for about 20 minutes, staring dramatically through the windshield.."-Joe Bob on A MAN CALLED RAMBO
lester1/2jr
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 636
Posts: 7443



WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 15, 2011, 12:53:14 PM »

Rev-  he's referring to the morril tariff. a very steep one that aimed to send much of the prosperity of the south the norths way.


flick - thanks.
Logged

Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1769
Posts: 14251


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #18 on: April 15, 2011, 01:10:07 PM »

Rev-  he's referring to the morril tariff. a very steep one that aimed to send much of the prosperity of the south the norths way.


flick - thanks.

Sure there were tariffs the South didn't like (and legislation the North didn't like introduced by Southerners).  But the author says that the Civil War was fought for economic reasons by a predatory North and implies the slavery issue was only a pretext.  That's the part of his claim that's unsupported and sounds crazy to me. 

The "five myths" guy I linked addresses the contention that the Civil War was really about taxes and tariffs.  There were dozens of conflicts between states and the federal government before 1860, but no state every tried to secede over anything but precious slavery.

I admire you for thinking differently and going out on a limb here, but I think this particular limb is rotten.  I don't think that you don't care, I just think your priorities seem mixed up in this case.  The Confederacy is an odd horse to back for someone who doesn't believe in state power.  They claimed the most extensive and dangerous power any government could ever try to claim for itself: the power to define who is human and who is not. 
Logged

"The best parts are watching Sly go through the full range of emotions: deadpan, deadpan with raised eyebrow, deadpan with quivering lip. There's also a great sequence where Sly drives his VW Beetle down the interstate for about 20 minutes, staring dramatically through the windshield.."-Joe Bob on A MAN CALLED RAMBO
Flick James
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 487
Posts: 4645


Honorary Bastard of Arts


« Reply #19 on: April 15, 2011, 01:15:56 PM »

Quote
I admire you for thinking differently and going out on a limb here, but I think this particular limb is rotten.  I don't think that you don't care, I just think your priorities seem mixed up in this case.

I was referring specifically to Indy's post, not yours, Rev. Indy likes to think lester doesn't care, and that bugs me. I happen to disagree with Indy on a number of issues, but I would NEVER suggest he doesn't care, and I think he is a little out of line suggesting the same of lester.
Logged

I don't always talk about bad movies, but when I do, I prefer badmovies.org
lester1/2jr
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 636
Posts: 7443



WWW
« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2011, 01:40:07 PM »

there is actually a direct response to that column which not surprisingly WaPo did not run. I'll leave it to those two experts to really hash it out but I would note that his information on the tariff is not correct. The tariff of 1857 was 15% and it was then the Morril tariff that doubled it.

Logged

Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1769
Posts: 14251


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2011, 02:22:07 PM »

there is actually a direct response to that column which not surprisingly WaPo did not run. I'll leave it to those two experts to really hash it out but I would note that his information on the tariff is not correct. The tariff of 1857 was 15% and it was then the Morril tariff that doubled it.




The author of that article, Thomas di Lorenzo, actually taught at my undergrad college (University of Dallas) when I attended.  I don't believe I ever took a class from him, though.  There were a lot of anti-Lincoln folks in the politics department at that time, including Mel Bradford, whom I may have taken a class from over the summer.   
Logged

"The best parts are watching Sly go through the full range of emotions: deadpan, deadpan with raised eyebrow, deadpan with quivering lip. There's also a great sequence where Sly drives his VW Beetle down the interstate for about 20 minutes, staring dramatically through the windshield.."-Joe Bob on A MAN CALLED RAMBO
lester1/2jr
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 636
Posts: 7443



WWW
« Reply #22 on: April 15, 2011, 02:34:25 PM »

His background is economics not history so it may have been more along those lines.
Logged

indianasmith
Archeologist, Theologian, Elder Scrolls Addict, and a
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 1379
Posts: 8030


A good bad movie is like popcorn for the soul!


« Reply #23 on: April 15, 2011, 06:13:29 PM »

The idea that Lincoln did not recognize slavery as the cause of the war, or make it an issue until the mid-point, is demonstrably false. He wrote before he assumed office: "Half the country thinks slavery is right and ought to be extended, the other half thinks it is wrong and ought to be restricted.  That is the sum total of our differences."

The South seceded to protect slavery, and said so at the time.  Slavery was the one issue on which they were utterly unwilling to compromise, and more than willing to destroy the country.

Slavery might have been a dying institution worldwide, but NOT in the American South.  The number of slaves had increased steadily with every single census since 1800.  Slaves also were the largest economic force in the country, representing about 4.5 BILLION in 1860 dollars - more wealth than all the factories and railroads in the North combined!  Som much for the myth of the impoverished South!
Logged

"Carpe diem!" - Seize the day!  "Carpe per diem!" - Seize the daily living allowance! "Carpe carp!" - Seize the fish!
"Carpe Ngo Diem!" - Seize the South Vietnamese Dictator!
lester1/2jr
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 636
Posts: 7443



WWW
« Reply #24 on: April 16, 2011, 09:50:25 AM »

What was the impetus for the morril tariff?
Logged

Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1769
Posts: 14251


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #25 on: April 16, 2011, 12:25:05 PM »

What was the impetus for the morril tariff?

The purpose of a tariff is to raise revenue and protect domestic industries.

But the Morril tariff is just a Civil War footnote.  Tariff rates rose or fell all the time in the 1800s depending on the balance of power in the legislature.  The North never considered seceding because the South got its way with the Tariff of 1857.

If the South hadn't seceded and removed their anti-tariff votes before the bill was passed by the Senate, they could have possibly defeated the bill, negotiated a compromise, or bode their time and reversed it in a later session.  This is not a source I usually like to cite, but it seems Karl Marx was right on the money: "Naturally, in America everyone knew that from 1846 to 1861 a free trade system prevailed, and that Representative Morrill carried his protectionist tariff through Congress only in 1861, after the rebellion had already broken out. Secession, therefore, did not take place because the Morrill tariff had gone through Congress, but, at most, the Morrill tariff went through Congress because secession had taken place."
Logged

"The best parts are watching Sly go through the full range of emotions: deadpan, deadpan with raised eyebrow, deadpan with quivering lip. There's also a great sequence where Sly drives his VW Beetle down the interstate for about 20 minutes, staring dramatically through the windshield.."-Joe Bob on A MAN CALLED RAMBO
lester1/2jr
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 636
Posts: 7443



WWW
« Reply #26 on: April 16, 2011, 12:50:34 PM »

as usual and as always very glad to be on the opposite side of MR Marx.

from dilorenzo above

Quote
Tariffs certainly were an issue in 1860. Lincolnís official campaign poster featured mug shots of himself and vice presidential candidate Hannibal Hamlin, above the campaign slogan, "Protection for Home Industry." (That is, high tariff rates to "protect home industry" from international competition).

In a speech in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ("Steeltown, U.S.A."), a hotbed of protectionist sentiment, Lincoln announced that no other issue was as important as raising the tariff rate.

It is well known that Lincoln made skillful use of his lifelong protectionist credentials to win the support of the Pennsylvania delegation at the Republican convention of 1860, and he did sign ten tariff-increasing bills while in office. When he announced a naval blockade of the Southern ports during the first months of the war, he gave only one reason for the blockade: tariff collection.

As I have written numerous times, in his first inaugural address Lincoln announced that it was his duty "to collect the duties and imposts," and then threatened "force," "invasion" and "bloodshed" (his exact words) in any state that refused to collect the federal tariff, the average rate of which had just been doubled two days earlier. He was not going to "back down" to tax protesters in South Carolina or anywhere else, as Andrew Jackson had done.



So it was perhaps in anticipation of the raising of the tariff in conjunction with other issues that led to sucession?

Quote
The North never considered seceding because the South got its way with the Tariff of 1857.


exactly. THat's because they relied on the South. The south was happy to have free trade, the north demanded protectionism. The north wouldn't be the one to sucede in that scenerio.


Quote
The purpose of a tariff is to raise revenue and protect domestic industries.

the result here was CLEARLY going to benefit the north at the expense of the south.


Why if Lincoln was intent on having the south remain in the union did he raise tariffs so drastically ??? That makes NO sense.
Logged

Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1769
Posts: 14251


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #27 on: April 16, 2011, 03:16:21 PM »

Lester: Marx thought the sky was blue, are you on the opposite side?  Wink (just a joke, no need to respond)

Tariffs were certainly a grievance of the South, but I firmly believe no one would be willing to spill blood over a tariff bill.  I can't think of any case in history where such a minor, temporary piece of legislation was considered worth starting a Civil War over.  You just can't mobilize people's hearts and minds to give up their lives over issues like that.  Slavery was the only issue powerful enough to mobilize people and tear the country apart.       

The most I would say in favor of DiLorenzo's position is that possibly the fact that the South perceived they were going to lose on the tariff (they seceded before the Senate had a chance to vote on the bill) meant they saw the writing on the wall; that they no longer had the votes to guarantee slavery.  That might have provoked them to break away immediately, before the Republicans introduced legislation to outlaw slavery outright.  In that sense, insisting on the legislation would have been a mistake by the North and the Republicans, but that's only looking at it in hindsight through the eyes of the 20th Century.  You think Lincoln believed that insisting on enforcing the tariff would force the South to secede and that he deliberately provoked them?  I believe no one imagined Southern states would take such an unprecedented act. 

Anyway, no need to go back and forth.  You hold a minority position, and that's fine, if you really believe it on the basis of the evidence and not just because you think it serves some larger anti-Federalism agenda.  I was only drawn into this debate in the first place because of that unfortunate quote from Alexander Stephens, and we've gone way off the topic of the documentary. 
Logged

"The best parts are watching Sly go through the full range of emotions: deadpan, deadpan with raised eyebrow, deadpan with quivering lip. There's also a great sequence where Sly drives his VW Beetle down the interstate for about 20 minutes, staring dramatically through the windshield.."-Joe Bob on A MAN CALLED RAMBO
lester1/2jr
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 636
Posts: 7443



WWW
« Reply #28 on: April 16, 2011, 03:43:47 PM »

I just don't get why if he was insistent that the country stay unified, would he redouble his efforts to make that option as unpalatable as possible by doubling the tariff.

I just don't see how he can have these pure moral motives while also doing that.

Why not call the south's bluff and say fine, I'll LOWER the tariff to 7%?

It just doesn't add up.

Quote
I can't think of any case in history where such a minor, temporary piece of legislation was considered worth starting a Civil War over


Does "no taxation without representation" ring a bell? wars are fought over money all the time.


Quote
You hold a minority position

in some quarters
Logged

Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1769
Posts: 14251


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #29 on: April 16, 2011, 03:54:04 PM »


Quote
I can't think of any case in history where such a minor, temporary piece of legislation was considered worth starting a Civil War over


Does "no taxation without representation" ring a bell? wars are fought over money all the time.


Quote
You hold a minority position

in some quarters

I'll send you a PM, I don't think we should clog up this topic anymore.
Logged

"The best parts are watching Sly go through the full range of emotions: deadpan, deadpan with raised eyebrow, deadpan with quivering lip. There's also a great sequence where Sly drives his VW Beetle down the interstate for about 20 minutes, staring dramatically through the windshield.."-Joe Bob on A MAN CALLED RAMBO
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Television  |  THE CIVIL WAR reruns « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os∑mo∑sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.