The New Civil War--Could The Attack On The Auto Industry Really Be This Simple?

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sun Dec 21, 2008 at 15:45


At Salon, Michael Lind writes:

The Economic Civil War

The South's attempt to kill the North's auto industry is the latest battle in an ongoing conflict. It's time for a Third Reconstruction to put an end to it.

Dec. 18, 2008 | It is just as well that Barack Obama is emulating Abraham Lincoln by traveling to his inauguration in Washington by train. As the regional politics of the automobile bailout controversy demonstrate, the Civil War continues. If the major U.S. automobile companies go under, it will be partly because timely federal aid for them was blocked by members of Congress like Tennessee Senator Bob Corker, whose states have created their own counter-Detroit in the form of Japanese, Korean, and German transplant factories. The South will have risen by bringing down the North. Jefferson Davis will have had his revenge.

The most shocking thing about the alliance between the Southern states and America's friendly but earnest economic rivals to destroy America's most important industry is the fact that so few people find it shocking. Contrast the U.S. with the European Union. The nation-states of the European Union collaborate with each other in order to compete against foreign economic rivals, including the U.S., Japan, and China. By contrast, many states, particularly in the South, collaborate with foreign economic rivals of the U.S. in order to compete against other American states. Any British or French or German leader who proposed collaborating with Japan or the U.S. in order to wipe out industry and destroy jobs in neighboring EU member states would be jeered out of office. But it is perfectly acceptable for American states to connive with Asian and European countries in the destruction of industry elsewhere in the U.S.

Is it really that simple?  In a word: yes!

I mean, look, these people are traitors.  They tried to destroy the country in order to preserve slavery.  They are the last people to be lecturing anyone on patriotism.  And yet, quite unlike them, we cannot respond by trying to make them suffer.

More Lind on the flip.

Paul Rosenberg :: The New Civil War--Could The Attack On The Auto Industry Really Be This Simple?
The South has been playing this anti-American game for a long, long time, Lind notes:

Perhaps the lack of outrage over race-to-the-bottom rivalries among U.S. states and regions can be attributed to the longevity of this familiar Southern economic strategy. In the early 20th century, the Southern states were the first to adopt conscious statewide economic development policies, which then as now meant poaching industries from New England and the Midwest where wages and public spending and regulation were greater. That's how the South took the textile industry from New England, before losing it to lower-wage Asia. Now with the help of Nissan, Toyota, and BMW, the South is trying to replace Detroit as the center of U.S. automobile production, using low wages, anti-union laws, and low taxes to benefit from the outsourcing of industry from societies more advanced than the South, like Japan and Germany. The economic Axis is collaborating with the neo-Confederates against their common opponent -- the American Union. If they succeed, the losers will be not only non-Southern regions in the U.S., but the majority of Southerners of all races, whose interest in decent wages, good education, and adequate public services have almost always been sacrificed to the greed of the well-connected few by Southern statehouse gangs.

And there's a pretty grim future just a hop-skip-and-a-jump beyond the imminent destruction of Detroit that got's Southern Republicans drooling:

Today the division is no longer between slave and free states, or agrarian and industrial states, but between two models of industrial society -- the Northern model, based on adequate public service funding and taxation and unionization, and the Southern model, based on low-tax, low-service government and low-wage, non-unionized, easily exploited labor. If the industrial North and the industrial South compete for global capital investment, then the industrial South is likely to prevail, because Northern advantages in the form of a skilled workforce and superior public services are unlikely to overcome the South's advantages of low wages and low taxes and state and local tax subsidies. The result, sooner or later, will be the Southernization of the North and Midwest, as states in the historic middle-class core of the U.S. are forced by economic pressure to emulate the arrangements of Alabama and Mississippi and Texas.

Which leads directly to his proposed counter-strategy:

The alternative to the Southernization of the U.S. is the Americanization of the South -- a process that was not completed by Reconstruction and the New Deal and the Civil Rights era, which can be thought of as the Second Reconstruction. The non-Southern states, through their representatives in Congress and the executive branch, and with the help of enlightened Southerners, need to use the power of the federal government to put a stop to the Southern conservative race-to-the-bottom strategy once and for all.

Call it the Third Reconstruction. The first step is to end the race to the bottom in wages and regulation, by national action. The national minimum wage should be gradually raised until it is a living wage, of $10 to $12 an hour, and it should be adjusted for inflation. At the same time, federal regulations should set a higher floor with respect to worker safety regulations, environmental regulations, and others, preventing America's own internal rogue states from gaining any advantages by flouting national standards. Most Southern politicians and business leaders will howl that this will bankrupt the South. That's what they said about the abolition of slavery, child labor, and the convict lease system, too. The South was a better place to live after those reforms, and it will be a better place to live when there is a living wage throughout the South.

I have always hated the South.  Not the people. But the political system.  It is meanspirited, hateful, anti-American, downright evil. I want to destroy it once and for all.  And being the liberal I am, I would take great delight in killing them with kindness.

How about you?


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Thanks for the great essays on labor. (4.00 / 4)
It is something I take an interest in out of dafault.  If Obama doesn't do something about this, and I don't think he will, we are all so screwed.  We will be the have mores and the have absolutely nothings.  Can't they all still be rich without killing everything?  

They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich  

Killing with kindness (4.00 / 4)
Has always been our best strategy.

I agree. We need a massive (4.00 / 2)
program for the Americanization of the South.  

If only.... (4.00 / 1)
More massive than the Civil War and Reconstruction? Somehow, I don't think we'd have any greater chance of success than the British did among the wily Pathans. I'd be content with keeping their grubby paws off the American psyche for the next how many-ever centuries it takes for them to evolve into something a little less hostile toward liberal civilization.

[ Parent ]
Oh, c'mon. NC went blue in the last election. n/t (4.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
Two words (4.00 / 3)
Yankee immigrants.

[ Parent ]
I like your term... (4.00 / 2)
Americanization!

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
Thank you for posting this.... (4.00 / 1)
...I've wondered how we would be able to counter their "Sweatshop-lite" Southern strategy of a race to the bottom without having to give up the values that are important to us...

This article at least presents a strategy to do so...  I'm glad there is a possible way out!

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


disagreement comment 1 (4.00 / 4)
I think you're getting a few things wrong. this is obviously going to be a huge debate and take more time than just one comment. here are fundamental I find wrong with the thesis.

* nobody can claim to be "more american". to claim the north is more american because it had its auto industry first really doesn't make sense. one could argue its unamerican for the north to demand financial bailouts at the expense of industries elsewhere in the states. using any "ism" to claim the high ground in an argument is a crutch or shortcut. the claim needs to stick to the pertinent issues.

* if you want to claim 'business' incentives put forward by a state are traitorous you will have to include plenty of northern states. as an example, NY State has 'empire zones' (amusingly named) which are basically bundled deals for businesses the state uses to lour companies to ny with.

* the idea that the big three are more domestic that the plants in the south is silly. they have factories over seas, they import parts made from overseas, they have bank accounts overseas, their stock is traded on the NYSE, they pay US taxes. same for toyota, honda, et al. these are global corporations. would you like GM to be ostracized this way in Europe? they make millions of cars there.

* european countries do compete with each other. europe is not some liberal utopia. here is a sample, cheaper labor is in the east: http://www.rolandberger.com/co...

* you've misidentified the problem. the problem is not wage arbitrage within the us. Wages are pretty on par between the norther and southern companies. Legacy pension obligations are the big imbalance. Toyota could have set up its shops in Ohio with no legacy pension obligations and GM, F, and Chrysler and you would have the exact same competitive imbalance. also the race to the bottom problem does not go away even if all auto manufactures in the US were equal. the final arbitrage is being done between the US and south america, latin america, and china and india. as long as this core issue is ignored then all labor in the us will continue to get the shaft.

* you can not separate a govt from its people in a relatively functional democracy. if you want to argue that the US is not a relatively functional democracy, then fine, but I don't subscribe to that and its beyond the scope of this debate. the people elect the govt they want. if southerners want to change their unionization laws or change their taxation policies, or not, that is well within their purview, and they can select the government they want to do so. or sure, you can push that stuff through at the federal level - but be warned about over federalizing (see below)

* changing minimum wage won't change the competitive dynamics involved in this case. it certainly won't address the international wage arbitrage issue.

* there is no inflation right now, so do you want to support revising minimum wage relative to deflation?

* there are great risks to over federalizing. liberals have howled about the federal govt overriding california and other state attempts to put in tougher emissions requirements. federalizing everything is not a sure fire win, it can backfire on you when you don't control the federal arm. one must engage in federalizing eyes wide open.  

~* the * Will * to go on *~


Americanism is not at its core about (4.00 / 1)
what's good for the majority of its citizens? Southern politics and economics have been as good for most of its citizens as have nothern ones? A political and economic system that allows the few to exploit the many reflects American values? I'm confused here. Are you saying that the political and economic ideology and policies of the majority of southern ante-bellum landowners and post-bellum industrialists and their academic and punditocrcy apologists are just as American as those of Jefferson, Lincoln, TR, FDR and LBJ?

So basically, you're saying that of the two, "freedom" (and then only as very narrowly defined by the bright boys at AEI, Heritage and the Federalist Society) trumps "equality"? And abstract economic arguments over the relative merits of wages and prices trump the ability of regular Americans to have decent-paying jobs, afford decent housing, food and health care, have access to decent education, etc.? I.e. let the chips fall where they may is "American"?

Nice. Let freedom ring!

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


[ Parent ]
what is it you are arguing is good for the majority of citizens? (4.00 / 1)
I find debating the meaning of a word who's meaning constantly shifts, and is largely employed to avoid discussing policy specifics to be a pointless argumentative exercise; i won't be bothered. I was very specific about what I disagreed with in terms of analysis and policies; we can leave the "ism"s out of it, or it least I can.

As I pointed out above its a fallacy to try to lump many of these issues into "norther" "southern" categories.

numerous northern states tax its citizens to channel that money into "big business" incentives or just straight up cash give-aways. so that is not uniquely southern.

nor is channeling federal tax revenues to the benefit of an economic elite uniquely southern; to wit note the recent trillions of bailout dollars are disproportionately coming to my northern state.

if Toyota et al were located in ohio, GM would still be facing the same competitive imbalances. is corker protectionist, you bet. are levin's motives any different? not really, like all senators he's primary concerned with bringing home the bacon.

.

I don't know any southern land owners to be able to offer you any insight into their policy preferences. do you? however I suspect if we look at policy support along economic strata we'd find that at the higher end its pretty similar in the south as it is in the north. I suspect where we might find the most difference is in the middle and lower classes. This would mean that policy differences between northern and southern states is largely about differences between the masses - which is why I say you can't separate the government from the voters.

.

in what sense are you talking about equality? there are not vast wage differences between norther auto works and southern auto workers. please be specific? i don't know what freedoms I'm picking from here, I don't even have the vaguest idea what your talking about. the freedom to impose federal law on satellites vs freedom of being able to mandate local environmental standards for industry? I have the sense that you'd like to live in a simpler world where we can just pigeonhole things into all bad or all good. I've had 8 years of that, it was quite enough.

~* the * Will * to go on *~


[ Parent ]
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
I myself am having a really hard time following your reasoning here, not the least of which reason is your rather odd grammatical style. But in a nutshell, yeah, I absolutely, positively, uncategorically believe that it's the role of the federal government to set and impose uniform regulatory standards on the country, and think that RW federalism is a crock of shit designed to keep the rich rich, the poor poor and the middle class overburdened, and if the rich and powerful don't like it, then they're free to move to Russia, where oligarchies are welcome. The "free market" is not only a lie, but a lie that hurts everyone but the rich and powerful. To deny that is to deny the earth's roundness and the wetness of water. The standard of living in the south continues to lag the rest of the country, economically, educationally, medically, and in just about every other way. And it's simply absurd to claim that northern and southern wages are equivalent, because that only works if you don't factor in non-wage benefits like pensions, health insurance and paid time off. That might work for George Will, but it doesn't work for me.

And hell yeah I'm ok with blue collar workers effectively making $70/hr once you factor in everything beyond wages, especially when their clueless bosses get paid vastly more to do vastly less. Waggoner & Co. should be run out of town for what they've done to the big 3, as part of any long-term automaker rescue package. It's really quite simple. A person should get paid according to their bottom line contribution to a company. Which to me means that the CEOs of these firms (and Wall St. firms, some of which I've worked for) should be paid literally zero, beyond base (which should be extremely low--a real incentive structure based on net profits is how they should get anything beyond this), while their workers should get paid as well as their contributions warrant, and they shouldn't be punished for having crappy bosses.

Why even bother to call oneself a Democrat if one puts the interests of management above labor? It literally makes no sense to me. The Democratic party is the party of the people. The GOP is the party of the rich, powerful, mean-spirited and retarded. Period.

Now please learn how to structure a decent sentence, will ya?

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


[ Parent ]
Now please learn how to structure a decent sentence, will ya? (0.00 / 1)
sure, here's one: fuck you.

can't you assholes have a reasonable argument without it being about bullshit snide personal comments; we're you trained at dailyshumckheadkos? you think I'm writing a novel here or something? if I had the money I would get an editor, just to please you. these are fucking comments on a fucking blog, grow the fuck up.

.

you want federal regulation for everything - great - that's a reasonable argument that has nothing to do with north south. you haven't addressed the consequences of that however. if you can live with that then at least you're being honest and I can respect it. after the last 8 years however i'm less convinced I want more centralization of power.

regarding the pensions and health benefits bit; take a look around you, the jig is up, pensions across the country are underwater. so is health care, which will is 'solved' by being a national program. but pension and wage pressure won't go away through some 'war' on the south, global wage arbitrage will continue unabated and that is the cause for the 'northern' economic system collapsing.  

~* the * Will * to go on *~


[ Parent ]
It's Not That Complicated. They're TRAITORS, Dude! (4.00 / 1)
They tried to destroy the union, and killed ~360,222 Americans in the process.  That's treason on a massive scale.  Doesn't get any more anti-American than that.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
who did? (4.00 / 1)
everyone living today in the south who is white? just the white's in the south who don't agree with you on tax and unionization and big 2 bailout policy?

I'd dare to say that you're kind of engaging in a form of domestic jingoism, and personally i think it belittles the issues.

~* the * Will * to go on *~


[ Parent ]
Yeah, gonna have to say WHOA... (4.00 / 2)
Traitors that have been dead for 100+ years.

I was feelin this post until about now.


[ Parent ]
They Still Salute The Same Triator's Flag (0.00 / 0)
They've made their choice.  I've made mine.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I get the economic argument but geez (0.00 / 0)
this is NOT the way to go about it. Someone here needs to take a deep breath and re-examine the rhetoric and it ain't me.

Part of the problem is you don't know enough about this place to understand it. Period. If you did, you would know why this will blow up in your face. But you don't, so let it go.

Besides this is about as wise as those asinine arguments over Vietnam that helped muck things up in '04.

Bottom line is, that tack of argument is the height of folly and you should reconsider.


[ Parent ]
Is that why so many in-denial southerners (0.00 / 0)
persist in the pathetic vanity of referring to the Civil War as The War of Northern Aggression, or The War Between the States, contending that there was a legitimate case for secession, putting up racist flags, and electing corrupt good old boy bigots who do their best to put down minorities and the non-rich? Yeah, their hands are SO totally clean! And is that why so many in-denial southerners get so touchy when asked for the billionth time to finally get a grip on reality (hyperdefensiveness being a sure clue of culpability)? They caused over 600,000 people to die for literally NOTHING but their vanity, stupidity, greed and evil. Until they accept and admit that, they'll continue to be clueless and pathetic.

Seriously, is it the humidity?

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


[ Parent ]
This whole line of argument is disturbing (4.00 / 4)
Who is "they?"  Are you referring to the ancestors of the current residents of the South?  The current residents of the South?  Only the white residents?  Only those currently in government?  Who?

And your argument and numbers are also disturbing.  "TRAITORS?"  Really?  Is every member of the CSA during the time of secession a traitor?  Only those that participated in the execution of the war?  Are they truly traitors if they were forced to choose between two loyalties (see R.E. Lee particularly)?  Is one a "TRAITOR" if the choice is siding with a parent over a grandparent or sibling over a parent?  That was effectively the choices made, in some cases literally.

And your suggestion that "they" the "TRAITORS" "killed ~ 360,222 Americans" is disconcerting.  Over 260,000 AMERICANS of the CSA also died in the war between AMERICANS.  Whether you or I agree with their politics, they were still AMERICANS.

This whole line of argument reminds me of Sarah Palin suggesting that certain parts of America (her supporters) are more "American" than other parts.  This is a truly un-American way of arguing any point.

I think you are more than capable of arguing your point here more cogently than this.  Please don't stoop to Palin-like arguments.


[ Parent ]
Robert E. Lee Was The Biggest Traitor Of All (2.00 / 2)
Are they truly traitors if they were forced to choose between two loyalties (see R.E. Lee particularly)?

And the unending effort to whitewash his evil name is one of the most despicable crimes in American political history.

Since you seem to have a reading problem--comparing me to Sarah Palin and all--let me repeat:

I have always hated the South.  Not the people. But the political system.  It is meanspirited, hateful, anti-American, downright evil.

I want to destroy it once and for all.  And being the liberal I am, I would take great delight in killing them with kindness.

FYI: I have lived in the South. I have friends from the South. I have family in the South.  My attitudes are in no way similar to Sarah Palin's.

Time to go back to community college for a reading comprehension refresher.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Wow, just full of the Holiday spirit I see... (4.00 / 1)
Why the sudden out-burst of such vitriol Paul?  Why the personal attacks?

Just because you "have always hated the South" does not somehow exonerate your use of Palin-like tactics of demonizing parts of our nation as somehow not being American.  Perhaps you are claiming primacy in this and are asserting your claim to the tactic, so perhaps I should refer to this as Robinson-like tactics.

Maybe I just am not comprehending your writing well enough.  Those community college classes were kind of too easy...  Oh, and if you actually comprehended my writing as opposed to simply attacking some of the salient lines, you would have noticed I did not accuse you of holding Palin-like attitudes, but rather using Palin-like tactics (particularly here implied argument that some parts of the country were more "American" than others).

And the "some of my best friends are Southerners..." line of defense has always been very effective in diverting attention away from such vitriolic attacks...


[ Parent ]
There is no reason for Front Pagers to engage in personal attacks (4.00 / 3)
Time to go back to community college for a reading comprehension refresher.

First Sirota, now Rosenberg.

You guys need to show a little dignity.


[ Parent ]
There have certainly been rough incidents of late (4.00 / 1)
each one is complicated with a lot of emotion tied up in them. I love the content you guys provide, and it does seem to come all week without break. I know I read it all week. But I have to wonder if the pressure isn't starting to show on both staff commenters (by osmosis or just combustion).

The recent spates do need to be addressed on some level because I am concerned that it will end up hurting the community. And I meant not just passers through, but regular readers like me who have read damn near every post on this site.

I dunno what exactly needs to happen but tietack's right. Things have gotten a bit undignified around here.

Just back off is all.


[ Parent ]
i strongly agree (0.00 / 0)
front page writers have far more power than commenters; their voices are inherently louder. there is no reason for them to make things personal, and I agree that it only alienates readers and discussion. The community college comment is really over the top; over the top in reply to a comment in which someone questions whether Paul should be vilifying nearly a third of the country! it is remarkable. even in the case where a front page writer feels offended, they should be looking to set the bar higher by responding in a more dignified way.

~* the * Will * to go on *~

[ Parent ]
Seriously. (4.00 / 3)
I'm being as civil as I can. This is seriously unwise. Like earth-shatteringly so. Why are we trying to attach a  juvenile (and it seriously is, they're ALL DEAD) historical pissing contest to a complicated modern economic event?

This whole line of discussion unnecessarily divisive and inflammatory. There are a million different ways to go about this discussion without bringing this North/South culture war stuff into it.


[ Parent ]
When they stop electing pieces of shit (0.00 / 0)
like Graham, Chambliss, Shelby, Cornyn and Corker, then we'll talk. Until then, it's seriously hard to look at the south and regard it as a net political and policy plus to the country.

And yes, by DEFINITION, anyone who supported secession was a traitor, through ANY act both active and passive (which included ignoring being called up for service, as well as voting for CSA leaders). It literally doesn't get any simpler than that. Even if they were "forced" to make a choice, between a legal loyalty, and an emotional one. The significance of the latter in no way changes the irreducibility of the former. Although, obviously Lincoln and Grant decided to effectively do so in their terms of surrender, which were vastly more generous than they were legally obligated to offer. But they never ceased to be Americans, I'll agree, even if they were traitorous Americans all the while. I don't understand why anyone even bothers to argue otherwise as there's simply no logical underpinning to it. It's all emotion, zero logic or facts. The constitution was and is legally binding. Period.

Why is the south still unable to do 140 years later what Germany was able to do 10 years later? And yes, I do think that the comparison is valid. 250 years of slavery, 600,000+ war dead, and 100 years of Jim Crow clearly reach Holocaust levels of evil.

Stop denying it. It's just sad.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


[ Parent ]
why we're not outraged (0.00 / 0)
The worst globalization outrages are:
outsourcing middle class jobs
offshoring industry
offshoring retail profits to avoid taxes here (Walmart)
winking at undocumented labor here
visas to bring foreigners here for middle class jobs

By the time you get to foreign car corporations building plants here and employing Americans for $40 an hour and paying some American taxes, the outrage is pretty low.


[ Parent ]
Ah, great, the Plantation Society redux (4.00 / 1)
Which itself was feudalism redux. This, as always, is less about south vs. north, right vs. left, conservative vs. liberal, as it is about the rich, lazy and corrupt nth generation degenerate offspring of their robber baron ancestors wanting to have it all without actually earning it honestly, vs. everyone else, whom they seek to enslave by one means or another to serve their interests. Does anyone doubt that we effectively have a sharecropping economy today, which is just a more sophisticated version of slavery and serfdom?

Ah do declare! Lucius, Marcellus--mint juleps for all!

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


its not just geography, its about strategy too (0.00 / 0)
The South already gets more money from the federal government than it pays, but the money was shifted from the poor and working class to the business class.

Part of this shift from Democratic districts to Republican districts was a byproduct of Republican budget strategies that decreased spending on social welfare programs and increased spending on farm subsidies, business and industrial loans, and crop insurance.  "Rather than pork barrel projects for new GOP districts," reported the Associated Press, "the change was driven mostly by Republican policies that moved spending from poor rural and urban areas to the more affluent suburbs and GOP-leaning farm country

http://www.newrules.org/drdave...

Southern politicians have always whined about how progressive Northerners were going to wreck their wonderful way of life. You can find that whine all the way back .. to Jefferson, Madison and the 18th century.


Remember That Episode of TV Nation Where Michael Moore Interviewed Newt? (4.00 / 1)
And questioned him about all the federal spending in his district? (Newt's was third, I believe, right after a couple of counties in Northern Virginia, I think it was.  The one with the Pentagon and the one next door.)

Michael just kept asking Newt about one form of federal spending after another, and Newt just kept cheerily explaining how it was all good.

Delightful!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
have you absolutely lost your mind? (4.00 / 5)
I mean, look, these people are traitors.  They tried to destroy the country in order to preserve slavery.  They are the last people to be lecturing anyone on patriotism. And yet, quite unlike them, we cannot respond by trying to make them suffer.

This is either insane ("the people currently living in the American South are actually bearing the historical guilt for slavery in a way the rest of the nation doesn't"), patronizing ("there's something wrong about these people who don't think like me; but I have to be a bigger man than them"), or a terrifically bad joke ("the civil war and slavery is kind of funny, oh hey, a German exchange student, hey you Nazi!")


Gonna have to agree (4.00 / 1)
Paul, this sucks because its an otherwise good post, but you did seriously step over the line.

[ Parent ]
I Am Speaking Of The People Who Continue This Political Tradition (0.00 / 0)
and are even now trying to destroy the American heartland.

As I've made very clear on numerous occassions, I have nothing against the common people of the South--especially the very substantial black minority that lives there.  The political institutions and traditions that continue to dominate them, and threaten the rest of the country are a whole different thing--along with the Southern oligarchy that keeps pumping hatred, resentment, envy and bile into the national bloodstream.  

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
That's the conflict (0.00 / 0)
It's not logical to say you have "nothing against the people" but are against the institutions or leaders.

It's not different than what "W" said about Saddam Hussein and the people of Iraq.

We are better than that.


[ Parent ]
a good solution (4.00 / 1)
here is to delete that paragraph, and delete this comment thread. None of us would object, I imagine; we don't want to play "gotcha."

[ Parent ]
Disagree (4.00 / 1)
deletion is not the way to go.

This is an important discussion.  There are latent angers/frustrations/hatreds that still linger.  I don't just mean in the form of Paul's outburst against Southerners, or rather, the elements of Southern culture that still linger.

Rather there is a whole host of frustrations that create residual anger.  The use of the Confederate flag is one of the most heinous frustrating residual elements of our past.  It reminds us of our inherent faults, our past sins.

This whole post has been usurped by Paul's frustration with the elements of the past that continue to linger to today.  His anger is justified, but misplaced.  He rails against a system that is no longer relevant, but still present.  

What makes this site unique is its ability to discuss these topics, unadulterated.  We are thrashing out what it means to be Americans, to be Progressives in America.

It ain't always pretty, but it is always useful.

So leave all of the posts.  The good, the bad, the ugly.  Let us work out our differences, one ugly post at a time.


[ Parent ]
You are doing a good job of that yourself (0.00 / 0)
"pumping hatred, resentment, envy and bile into the national bloodstream", I mean.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Except for the last paragraph, this would have been an excellent diary (4.00 / 2)
I have always hated the South.  Not the people. But the political system.  It is meanspirited, hateful, anti-American, downright evil. I want to destroy it once and for all.  And being the liberal I am, I would take great delight in killing them with kindness.

How arrogant.

Last I checked, the South was still a part of the United States of America. We live under the same political system.

While I am fine with an "anything but the South" political strategy for progressives, such open hatred is hurtful.

This is still the United States of America.


So You Like Slavery, Segregation, Debt Peonage, All-White Juries, Etc. Etc., Etc. (4.00 / 1)
Good to know!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Those things ended decades ago (0.00 / 0)
If you've lived in the South, you might understand better.

The hatred shown in your comments after the diary would have been appropriate in 1877. Slavery ended in 1865. Segregation was the battle we fought and won starting in the 1950s. I don't even know what debt peonage is, but your arrogance makes me want to not look it up. All-white juries ended with the Civil Rights acts of the 1960.

While there is backsliding on a lot of this, last I checked:

- the 13th amendment was still in force
- the Brown v. Board of Education, Charlotte, etc cases are still the laws of the land
- the Civil Rights acts of the 1960s are still the law of the land.

All of this is not related to the economic war which you so rightly wrote about in the first 90% of your diary.

you might note that I did praise the rest of the diary.

I suspect, especially from your comments, that you're getting caught up in the hatred, which is not compatible with objectivity.


[ Parent ]
Slavery ended (4.00 / 1)
at the point of a bayonet when Union armies occupied most of the South.

the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were passed when many white southerners could not vote. They were stripped of that right during Reconstruction because they had taken up arms against the United States.

Those amendments and the overall movement toward equal rights for blacks were fought tooth and nail by many (and probably most) Southern whites. This was also true of Brown vs Board of Education and many other 20th century Civil Rights struggles.

There's a lot to love about the South, but the legacy of shame in this area of Southern history is well documented and there's no point trying to gloss it over.  



[ Parent ]
That does not justify the hatred in Paul's comments (0.00 / 0)
against Southerners for the sins of their forefathers.

Yes, he did say that he does not hate the "southern people", but that's inconsistent with the hatred of the political system, as discussed in other comments.


[ Parent ]
That's just silly (0.00 / 0)
Paul is not blaming the "sons" for the sins of their "fathers". He's blaming the "fathers" for their sins, and the "sons" for theirs, which in altered form are not that differenct. Modern wage slavery is still slavery, of which "Right to Work", which is huge in the south, is a big cause of, put and kept in place by the modern day equivalent of plantation owners, which are amoral corporations and rich southerners and the corrupt politicians whom they own, and whom southerners keep reelecting even though they've done jack shit for them that isn't either symbolic or the result of federal pork barrel welfare.

When they stop doing these things, and electing the assholes who do these things, is when they'll stop being "sinful". Until then, these attempts at feigned and unearned outrage are just silly, the blogging equivalent of Foghorn Leghorn fatuously protesting.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


[ Parent ]
Then attack the sin, not the sinner (0.00 / 0)
Dear Kovie, the first two sentences in your response is not consistent with the paragraph from the diary that I cite.

Your first paragraph, after the first two sentences, make excellent sense, however.

Next, I don't understand what you mean by

Until then, these attempts at feigned and unearned outrage are just silly, the blogging equivalent of Foghorn Leghorn fatuously protesting.

While I'd love it if a majority of the South became progressive,

My understanding is that the great majority of American conservatives (even in the South) believe in what they do, without racism, at least in their hearts.

Yes, the effect of many policies of the American conservative movement is certainly another matter. But much of it is based on class war against the poor, which is different from racism.

Finally, this whole diary, and the comments of some, suggests to me - that many here believe

the only way for the South to make amends for the Civil War is for its leaders to "see the light" and convert to Progressive politics.


[ Parent ]
Someday the US Is Going (0.00 / 1)
to have to confront the fact that the South must be let go if it is to survive, that fighting the Civil War to retain this retrograde albatross around our necks was a mistake.

Let them chart their own course; abolish the empty Plains states and give them back to the Native Americans.


That had better be snark... (0.00 / 0)
Native American issues aside, really? I mean, REALLY?

Last time I checked the great State of Florida was still a part of the United States and it was filled with people I love.

Thou shalt not fuck with America's Wang.


[ Parent ]
in the book "Lincoln" (0.00 / 1)
by Gore Vidal, it's claimed that William Seward, Lincoln's Secratary of State, strongly advocated that the South be allowed to secede.

He felt that the problems inherent in slavery and the agrarian economy there would always be a drag on northern region of the United States, and that it wasn't worth fighting a bloody war over. Just say: "bye bye, South... uh, good luck with the slavery thing".

According to Vidal, Seward held the opinion that the future for the country lay in the West and in the North, and that eventually the US would form a new political Union with Canada. For this reason he negotiated the purchase of Alaska from Russia (AKA "Seward's Folly").

Of course, William Seward had no way of foreseeing the rise of someone like Sarah Palin...

;>)  


[ Parent ]
Mistake? (0.00 / 0)
You do realize that emancipation would not have happened for at least another 50 years without the Civil War, and that the apartheid system that predominated after Reconstruction may have lasted as long as South Africa's had the South formed their own country, right?

I agree that much of the South is a huge drag on the rest of the country, but liberal federal government policy has been virtually the only safeguard for the human rights of minorities in the South.


[ Parent ]
Love the winters. (4.00 / 2)
Hate the place.  Some people think slavery ended, but it's just called prison labor now.  Poverty created a culture of drug abuse, and drug charges created a new slavery.  I'd be happy if we burned down the Republican South, and by that I mean if we razed their political system to the ground.  Every single thing about hatred and bigotry is wrong, and it flourishes in some of our most beautiful states.  It's not about black and white anymore.  Now it's about the authoritarian "haves" and the people who "have not."  

Ignorance has kept the people down far too long.  If the people all knew what really goes on in the world, not just what they see on the tv, then our nation would change overnight.  Enforced ignorance is the greatest tool of subjugation ever invented.

Hey, dkmich, Obama's Labor Secretary actually looks very good.  I don't expect a lot from our new administration, but some of it will be very good.


Some of the worst drug laws and highest incarceration rates are in NY State (0.00 / 0)
God damn NY State, we should slam their SOUTHERN ass!

~* the * Will * to go on *~

[ Parent ]
"Hate the place." You said it yourself, that's just hate. Unbelievable. n/t (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Yes, Paul is stating this in a very harsh way. (4.00 / 2)
But there's no doubt that in many ways the South of the old confederacy has lagged behind progressive breakthroughs in the rest of the United States.

Poverty rates in the South are higher than anywhere else. Even more so when you're looking at children living in poverty.

Spending on pre-school, primary and secondary education is lower in the South than in the rest of the United States, and the South has the lowest higher educational attainment of any region.  

Homes in Southern states have the lowest percentage of  computer ownership and access to the internet.

And on and on.

Again and again the region has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future, not only during the Civil War and the Reconstruction period, but during especially in the anti-Jim Crow, Civil Rights era of the 1950's and 60's.    

And certainly the most backward of the social, political, and racial attitudes of the region, which are still far too widespread, are at the core of many of the most divisive and long standing problems in the country.  

The ongoing battle over the Confederate flag is a symbol of how deeply this problem remains rooted in some quarters. Those that took up arms under the Confederate flag in the Civil War were in fact traitors against the United States. Flying that flag or defending it now is absolutely an insult to the Union dead and to all African Americans, (which, sadly, is why many people in the South choose to fly it). It's the American equivalent of wearing a swastika in modern Germany, and should be a crime, in my opinion.    

In any case, the entire United States needs a massive economic and educational "Reconstruction", but nowhere would that do as much good as in the South.  



The South needs to have its economy modernized (4.00 / 1)
so its interests are the same as the rest of the country.  I admit they are not the same as the rest of Americans, but we aren't going to get there with overgeneralizations like "I hate the South!"

Nice post (4.00 / 1)
This is one reason why the Employee Free Choice Act is so important.  It would help get around the anti-union labor laws of the South and level the playing field.  That's why we can expect it to be biggest fight of the first Obama term.  The entire Southern advantage in manufacturing depends on the continuance of right-to-work laws that undermine the working class.

Uncreative, irrelevant, loony. (0.00 / 0)
No doubt the efforts of the southern Republicans to kneecap a failing industry is irresponsible and a culmination of the race to the bottom, anti-union politics of the Republican party and the south.  Although calling the skirmish between the industrial unionized north and the anti-labor south a "civil war" is hyperbole, reflection on the historical division is worth discussion.

There are many ways to express the destructiveness of the Republican position.  But when you start calling opposing a bailout of an industry that is largely responsible for its own predicament "traitorous" and "anti-American" you are merely making yourself irrelevant and marginalized.

Many things have transpired in the last eight years that might be legitimately described as anti-American (eg, torture) or traitorous (Iraq war lies, the Plame outting).  But in using this unhinged and inapplicable language for the auto bailout, you do a disservice to your cause, and represent yourself as nothing more than am Ann Coulter style nut. The same concepts can be expressed with equal passion, more accuracy, and more creativity.  The terminology is sloppy, lazy, and none too bright - and increasingly the style on openleft.  If I want to hear loonies screech about anti-Americanism at every policy disagreement, I'll go to freerepublic.  

Personally, I'm finding the increasing shrillness and childishness of openleft has made the site completely unreadable.  I've enjoyed the site a great deal in the past.  My choice now is to no longer frequent the site.  I'm sure my readership won't be missed, but I just mention it because I may not be the only one.


This is a reading comprehension issue (0.00 / 0)
"These people are traitors. They tried to destroy the country in order to preserve slavery". This means that the original treason was the Civil War, which was acknowledged as treason at the time. This also means that when the South tries to support the foreign auto plants in their states as opposed to the domestic auto plants in the Midwest, we should remember that they have begrudgingly been part of the same country as the auto plants in the Midwest since that time. It says nothing about those who are skeptical about the auto bailout in general or prefer a managed bankruptcy, because not everyone who is is from the South.

I think the FPers are frustrated. At one time, you needed to elect more Democrats to have any hope of a progressive movement. Now you have done that. You have two years before electing "better Democrats" will do any good and you have Obama as a competing power center, who needs to be given a chance to have his policies work but keeps disappointing them if they ever gave themselves a chance to be disappointed by him. How do you build a progressive movement under these circumstances? I have no answers myself.

This is far better than DKos. People here can generally think, and write. There is no mob mentality.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  


[ Parent ]
Actually (0.00 / 0)
I was giving him the benefit of the doubt.

If he really meant what he literally said: that the views of southern Senators today are to be rejected as "traitors" because of the actions of their predecessors 150 years ago, then he is even more shrill, dense, and unhinged.  It is the same as saying "who are the Democrats to lecture anyone on civil rights and racism, when they opposed the voting rights act and Roosevelt sent the Japanese to camps" - which is exactly the sort of "reasoning" you'll see on freerepublic, again and again.

Kos went off track a long time ago.  When I visit kos, I understand exactly why Obama wants to distance himself from the rhetoric of the blogs.  It isn't rational, and hasn't been for some time.  Ultimately, the blogs will just drive out diversity of opinion and become a true echo chamber for true believers, just like the right.



[ Parent ]
Don't the blogs (0.00 / 0)
if you find them too shrill.

[ Parent ]
Whoa, whoa! (0.00 / 0)
On DKos we would have a whole diary defending the South, and it would be very well-written. However, I cannot copy what that person would say because these diaries are always based on boots-on-the-ground experiences. I would not call St. Louis "the South", although St. Louis had segregation.
Virginia and North Carolina were able to go for Democrats because parts of these states have been "Americanized" with high wages and high education levels. Georgia was also in the balance because Atlanta has become an "Americanized" city. But the Southern political system I would not want to live under. The South was once dominated by Democrats because of race-baiting and blacks were the only Republicans. The Deep South is now dominated by Republicans because of racial and cultural resentment and blacks make up most of the Democratic Party. The Michael Lind article was helpful in explaining why not even Shelby and Corker, but even Sessions, will get up there and repeat warmed-over conservative talking points. The talking points are a survival strategy for their states rather than window dressing for the cultural values which sent them there.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

"I have always hated the South." (0.00 / 0)
You should have just stop there. Why try to soften it with qualifiers?

Obviously Paul, Michael, and anyone else who subscribes to this kind of bigoted analysis has never actually driven on a highway in the south. For many of us southerners it was a point of pride in our families that we only bought American cars. What was your first car? Ford like me? Chevy? Or maybe it was a Toyota or a European import.

In the south we not only support the American auto industry with our rhetoric, we have traditionally supported it with our dollars. I don't see the same kind of support here on California highways, or out east when work brings me there.

Ask anyone from the south if they are a "Ford family" or "Chevy family." My family was a Chevy family and I was subject to endless teasing and eye-rolling with the purchase of my first car, a used Mustang. Ford vs. Chevy is a cultural dual long enjoyed among southerners.

Why do southerners reject democrats? Culturally ignorant bullshit like this from the liberal elite who would rather see different as evil, who would rather find the simplest answer than acknowledge that issues are complex, who would rather point fingers in their pontifications rather than actually do something to solve the problem. Before trying to Americanize the south, Americanize yourself. What are you driving?

There is nothing more un-American than ignorant sweeping generalizations about cultures different from your own.


Michael Lind is from the South (4.00 / 1)
Otherwise the cavalry is coming in with firsthand experiences. That's very good.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
In his New America Foundation biography (0.00 / 0)
Lind is said to be born in Austin, Texas. That is a Confederate state anyway.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
"traitor" (0.00 / 0)
Weren't the "liberal elite" up in arms about being called traitors for opposing the war? Oh, but that's different.

The hypocrisy is astounding.  


[ Parent ]
So (4.00 / 1)
what you're really outraged over is criticism of South Elites.

[ Parent ]
since he did soften it (0.00 / 0)
by qualifying he hated the political elites and not the people, I think this is just overblown outrage.

You are arguing a strawman now.

Also it is a stereotype to say southerners all like American cars.

I have been to the South and I have seen plenty of foreign cars down there.


[ Parent ]
It's no different on how W "softened" the invasion of Iraq (0.00 / 0)
He also said that he "supported the Iraqi people"

It is no strawman.  


[ Parent ]
I thought I was done with this thread, but.... (4.00 / 1)
One thing needs to be said to all those defending the South as a place filled with decent human beings, and those appalled by Paul's startling lack of tact:

(Disclaimer: my father was a Southerner born and bred, from a family which has lived in Tennessee since well before the Civil War; my mother was from New Jersey. I was raised from early childhood to my high school years in Alabama, Kentucky, Maryland, etc.)

The South is culturally different, and it is still resentful about losing the Civil War. It does see itself as the last bastion of Protestant Christianity, White Supremacy, and Individual Initiative (no unions.) It does hate Urbanism, Cosmopolitanism, Jews, Ay-rabs, and Liberals. In fact, it often confuses them. It does think that the Stars and Bars is America's true flag, and that Yankee race-mixers are the true traitors and anti-Americans.

Thanks to the Republican electoral strategies of the past forty years, these views have been embraced at a national level, and demagogued to death. The roots of Pat Buchanan's declaration of culture war on liberal civilization are set down precisely here. Those of us who know this have endured avalanches of bullshit about our lack of American-ness and patriotic fervor for decades.

Time to set the record straight. Southerners who think of themselves as nice folks can indulge themselves in the old Well, I never.... routine all they want; I for one don't mind reminding them that when you shoot at people, even purple-haired liberal faggots with nose-rings, they're very likely to shoot back.



That's a lot of accusations w.o. ANY evidence. (0.00 / 0)
Your faded memories just aren't that germane here. Again, NC and VA went blue in the last election. The Research Triangle area in which I live is both urban and cosmopolitan. I do not understand the impulse to meet imagined stereotypes with real ones. You aren't attacking systems here as did Paul; you're taking a direct shot at the people of the South and basing it on God knows what.

[ Parent ]
Yes, God does know what (0.00 / 0)
Experience is what I'm basing it on, and the memories are hardly faded. Research Triangle? Is that part of the fabled New South we used to hear so much about?

Such changes as have occurred in the South since I lived there are real enough, I'm sure, but so is the metastasis of a Southern regional culture which was -- and is -- exactly as I've described it. God is not mocked, nor history either, for those willing to remember it.


[ Parent ]
This is the crux and I agree... (0.00 / 0)
Harboring negative thoughts about the 'Other' are common, universal traits shared by all humans.  The net negatives and positives are determined when these feelings are approved or tabooed by a culture.

While there is racism and sexism in the North, the difference is played out in the ballot boxes.  I think Paul should be allowed to paint with a broad brush when we have 250 years of voting history to back up what he is saying.  

As someone who was raised in the South I understand completely his reasoning and I agree completely because I lived it.  First I laughed at the racist jokes. I reasoned and was told that minorities got what they deserved because of their own actions or inaction.  Even coming from a Democratic household, I was raised to believe in workers' rights but civil rights was never discussed.  As I got older I realized what a crock Southern politics was for workers.  They sold anti-worker policies wrapped and sold in racism. Then it was clear to me that minorities didn't get less because they deserved it through their own faults, it was Southern politics and culture that made hurtful policies by pitting white workers against minorities in a race to the bottom.  I never voted for a Republican even though I had considered and could rationalize the racist aspects of Southern policy and culture and even from that flawed position I was an electoral minority!

Until the South starts changing its voting patterns and puts equality and economic justice in its policies at a state level (not just in places like Austin, TX), Paul will be right in his broad brush assessment of the South.  You can take it as an insult but to me the proof is no farther away than the 2008 election returns.  


[ Parent ]
Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search