- This topic has 5 voices and 10 replies.
-
Posts
-
I recently saw (on Netflix) a program that briefly addressed the question of why preserving the Union was so important to the people of the North. I don't remember the name of the program or the exact numbers it cited. (If I can find it again I'll post the information.)It cited numbers showing that the percentage of (first generation) immigrant soldiers in the Federal army was far larger than the percentage of the (first generation) immigrant population in the North.The thesis advanced was that those in the North, especially recent immigrants, held a vision of a better life that was near and dear to them. The opportunity for economic betterment (in Europe those who immigrated to America could never own their own farm land, etc.) as well as have political freedoms in America that were lacking Europe resulted in many of the masses immigrating to America. (Having, for example, to doff one's cap to the squire was probably far more intolerable than we think about today.)People saw secession as an attack on that vision. They felt fighting for the Union was necessary to preserve their opportunity for a better life.The program stated that today we have a hard time understanding the motivation those in the North had for wanting to preserve the Union. That's probably true. (It's also true that I've done a poor job of explaining what I heard.)Any thoughts about why it was so important to those living in the North that the Union be preserved?
I would think the average Northerner probably was indifferent to whether the South remained in the Union or not. Loyalty was more to section than the Union at the time.
I would agree with Donnie – it seems to me like Northerners would have been indifferent. I would think that first generation immigrants would be less inclined to feel “patriotism” (or in this case, desire to preserve the union) than those who had grown up on the land that their fathers had left them.With that said, I wouldn't be surprised if the high number of first-generation immigrant soldiers in the North was due to desire to earn familial legitimacy among peers who came from older American families.
I can't speak for immigrant soldiers of the civil war period but I will say this. Some of the most patriotic soldiers I served with during my military career were not people whose family had lived in America for generations but people who had come to the US from other countries, especially corrupt ones. It may seem cliche but the few naturalization ceremonies I attended while in the military were some of the most emotional scenes I have ever witnessed. Those of us who have always been American and take our freedoms for granted have no idea how much they mean. Ask an immigrant from central America or Africa what freedom means to them and I bet you would get an answer you would not expect.I can believe the thesis that Daniel puts forth. To have when you have always been a have not is something we who have always been haves simply a=cannot truly appreciate. Do not forget that official and virtual serfdom still existed in Europe until late ion the 19th century. The experience of the Irish during the famine and of the 48ers from Germany would likely make them cherish what they had in the Union much more than we would think today. As a thesis for northern unity it actually goes pretty far in my opinion. It is probably not all the answer but is certainly a significant element of explaining northern unity.
Funny because it seems like today, we have a portion of the immigrant community that seems to want to come to the U.S. and immediately demand “change”. One wonders why people would want to enter a new land in order to change it.
Don't forget how many Northern soldiers were conscripts and the riots that ensued over conscription in the North. Many didn't want to fight because they didn't see how the South seceding affected them.
Don't forget how many Northern soldiers were conscripts and the riots that ensued over conscription in the North. Many didn't want to fight because they didn't see how the South seceding affected them.
Good point.
The current trend of immigrants, illegal or otherwise, demanding change is a result of political agitation and pandering by the left, it has nothing to do with why they came here in the first place.
I don't think that is entirely true. Yes, I think there is some “brainwashing” going on, so to speak, after they get here. But I don't think that they are necessarily “noble” before reaching our borders. From what I understand, there is at times the lure of welfare which brings them here. That strikes an odd note with me.
I am not speaking of the Illegal immigrants motives, I am talking of the way they are used as political pawns once they get here. I am willing to bet that most Latin American illegals just come seeking opportunities unavailable in their home country. Some probably come looking for handouts too, I think those are in the minority though. The problem is that those that speak the loudest are the ones who get heard, and on immigrant issues, that is the far left.Back to the original topic, it seems to me that there is probably something to the notion that immigrants were more patriotic than natives. Look at the histories of some German and Irish units and the reputations they got for tenacity and fighting spirit.
Those fleeing the failed revolutions of 1848 probably cared a great deal about seeing their new home preserved.Weren't some of the immigrant groups (Germans especially, IIRC) strongly anti-slavery - moreso than the majority of the non-immigrant North?
