3 ms·

But how does this effect the wealth and power of elites? That's the point. A civil war has to be organized from the top, and elites, who always look out for the

But how does this effect the wealth and power of elites? That's the point. A civil war has to be organized from the top, and elites, who always look out for their own self-interest first, aren't going to organize an expensive, disruptive war to prevent 10yo rape victims from getting an abortion.

wishfish 4y ago
Sometimes these things come from the bottom up. In some countries, a small number of violent people set the spark and the flames start. The elite do have far more power than the rest of us, but sometimes they're also caught up in a wave they can't control. Just like the rest of us. The elites of the South wanted to keep their slaves and their wealth. Many of them ended up having their plantations burned down or seized. Their wealth diminished or vanished. Their cities occupied. They lost control of the situation fairly quickly. And it's not like the wealthy are unified exactly. Some, maybe most, would like to avoid future conflict. While others give money to the groups that seem hellbent on creating a conflict of some sort. You're correct. No one's going to immediately start the civil war based on abortion. But, to me, it feels like dry tinder being set. Just needs a spark. I'm not saying it's a certainty by any means. We have a decent chance of muddling through the current crises. But it does feel like the stage is being set.
- jonnycomputer 4y ago
  Perhaps this is because I think there is a difference between a civil war and a revolt. A revolt can become a civil war, but only as soon as both sides are embraced by institutional leaders, i.e. elites.
- mywittyname 4y ago
  The Southern elites probably felt strongly they would "win" early. The sheer incompetence of the Union army in the early battles suggest to me that there were some sympathies in the Union leadership and this was probably common knowledge. They probably intended this to be a little tussle to show everyone they were serious.
  - wishfish 4y ago
    Oh definitely they thought they would win early and easily. They were a bit delusional. They thought solely of heroic battles winning everything through sheer courage, cleverness, and grit. And didn't think about what it meant for a largely agrarian society to go up against a highly industrialized one. But it's interesting how they lost control of the situation over time. Not just in the battlefield defeats and the industrial machine crushing them. But also in other ways. The Confederate government was short of everything and turned towards a centralized economy to produce what it needed. The elites found themselves constrained by the wartime needs. By 1865, they were planning on arming black men to fight in the Confederate forces. Had this plan succeeded, it would have meant the end of slavery in the Confederacy. The very reason why the war was started by the elites in the first place.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> A civil war has to be organized from the top No, it doesn't. A regional separatist movement (which the first ACW was, but not all civil wars are) generally is top-down organized, with a specific conscious elite decision to break away, but civil wars more generally don't need to be, at least to get started. EDIT: In general, the discourse around both revolutions and civil wars in America tends to be full of misconceptions driven by the fact that both the American Revolution and the American Civil War we're elite-driven regional separatist movements, which are not the norm for things labelled as either “revolutions” or “civil wars”.

wishfish 4y ago

Sometimes these things come from the bottom up. In some countries, a small number of violent people set the spark and the flames start. The elite do have far more power than the rest of us, but sometimes they're also caught up in a wave they can't control. Just like the rest of us. The elites of the South wanted to keep their slaves and their wealth. Many of them ended up having their plantations burned down or seized. Their wealth diminished or vanished. Their cities occupied. They lost control of the situation fairly quickly. And it's not like the wealthy are unified exactly. Some, maybe most, would like to avoid future conflict. While others give money to the groups that seem hellbent on creating a conflict of some sort. You're correct. No one's going to immediately start the civil war based on abortion. But, to me, it feels like dry tinder being set. Just needs a spark. I'm not saying it's a certainty by any means. We have a decent chance of muddling through the current crises. But it does feel like the stage is being set.

jonnycomputer 4y ago
Perhaps this is because I think there is a difference between a civil war and a revolt. A revolt can become a civil war, but only as soon as both sides are embraced by institutional leaders, i.e. elites.
mywittyname 4y ago
The Southern elites probably felt strongly they would "win" early. The sheer incompetence of the Union army in the early battles suggest to me that there were some sympathies in the Union leadership and this was probably common knowledge. They probably intended this to be a little tussle to show everyone they were serious.
- wishfish 4y ago
  Oh definitely they thought they would win early and easily. They were a bit delusional. They thought solely of heroic battles winning everything through sheer courage, cleverness, and grit. And didn't think about what it meant for a largely agrarian society to go up against a highly industrialized one. But it's interesting how they lost control of the situation over time. Not just in the battlefield defeats and the industrial machine crushing them. But also in other ways. The Confederate government was short of everything and turned towards a centralized economy to produce what it needed. The elites found themselves constrained by the wartime needs. By 1865, they were planning on arming black men to fight in the Confederate forces. Had this plan succeeded, it would have meant the end of slavery in the Confederacy. The very reason why the war was started by the elites in the first place.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> A civil war has to be organized from the top No, it doesn't. A regional separatist movement (which the first ACW was, but not all civil wars are) generally is top-down organized, with a specific conscious elite decision to break away, but civil wars more generally don't need to be, at least to get started. EDIT: In general, the discourse around both revolutions and civil wars in America tends to be full of misconceptions driven by the fact that both the American Revolution and the American Civil War we're elite-driven regional separatist movements, which are not the norm for things labelled as either “revolutions” or “civil wars”.