It doesn’t seem that long ago when I wrote a column about a remarkable series published since 2011 by the New York Timeson the U.S. Civil War. Now, it appears, that series will soon come to a close.
Called Disunion, the collection of pieces followed the developments of the Civil War in something akin to real time, albeit 150 years later. As events unfolded throughout the course of the war, historians and analysts discussed what impact they had.
Disunion can be found at opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com.
I just realized that in a few weeks the 150th anniversary of the Confederate surrender at Appomattox Court House will come up. It seems remarkably brief — the war lasted only four years.
Perhaps it seems so brief due to the contrast with how long the United States was deployed to Afghanistan, the nation’s longest war in its history, and Iraq. Iraq is not as wrapped up as we thought it was, as the United States and numerous allies, including Canada, are getting pulled into the Syria/Iraq ISIS conflict.
I think that’s what stands out the most for me, having lived during a time when the United States, and by extension, Canada, has been at continual war since 2001 (as we’ve withdrawn from Afghanistan, it didn’t take long to deploy to Iraq). To the people of our time, this has become the new normal.
It wasn’t always like this. In most cases wars were relatively brief and often brutal. One way or another, a person could expect an end at some point, with someone “winning.” That’s not something we are seeing today. Modern war may be “won” in the opening weeks, but then drag on forever.
Indeed, today’s posting ponders the question of whether the Confederacy could have won the war. The “what-ifs” range from increased cotton sales before the blockade took hold to General Robert E. Lee’s style of command. One what-if centred on the development of a greater national spirit rather than an emphasis on “states’ rights,” which was one of the causes of the war.
It’s hard, in our current 21st century context, to believe men would volunteer to fight, and in many cases, die for the cause of “states’s rights.” In this context, those rights had a lot to do with slavery. But can you imagine anyone here today volunteering to stop a bullet for provincial rights in Canada? Or even North Dakota rights across the 49th? The whole concept seems absurd.
I still try to wrap my head around the key issue of the Civil War, slavery. How is it that not so long ago, slavery was a common practice? (In some parts of the world, it still is).
Let’s consider some other what-ifs. What if the Confederacy did win the war, not conquering the North, but successfully succeeding? Would we still have slavery today? Would it extend all the way to California? If not, what would have caused it to end? Would a Spartacus-like slave revolt have been inevitable? Would the North have taken another shot at it, 10 to 20 years later? Would there have been a series of continental conflicts for decades?
If the United States had remained fractured into the 20th century, what would the impacts have been globally? Would it have tipped the balance in the First World War in favour of the Allies? Would it have been the decisive player in the Second World War, leading to its superpower status, or would it have been too concerned about a future conflict with its southern neighbour? Would a slave-nation like the confederacy have looked kindly on Fascism? Perhaps it would have even allied with German and Italy?
And would there be a black president now? Or would Barack Obama have belonged to some master, with a whip in hand?
— Brian Zinchuk is editor of Pipeline News. He can be reached at [email protected].
