#1
Post rating: ~


http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/how-the-pilgrims-landing-led-to-the-u.s.-civil-war-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/

Dick Morris, famous trot conservative adviser to Bill Clin-Ton, goes into the originating roots of the American Civil War. His theory is that the American civil war originated in the migration of the Cavaliers to Jamestown after Cromwell's seizure of power in Britain, and the later migration of the Roundheads to Massachusetts after Cromwell's faction was overthrown.

Interesting.. interesting... gives more bulk to the history of the development of industrial capitalism in settler America, surrounding the bloody civil war.

Edited by Crow ()

#2
Post rating: ~
Btw check out the great historical book plug at the end. Highly recommended
#3
Post rating: +
dick morris is a really shitty person
#4
Post rating: +
Bleeding Kansas? What, sorry I had an escort's toe in my ear so I couldn't quite hear you.
#5
Post rating: ~
how did these divisions play out the us war of independence?

i read a tiny part of a book (that i since gave away and forget the title) that it would be more accurately called the first civil war, as loyalist american militias did much of the fighting against independence.
#6
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
this strikes me as kind of odd and over simplified but its a basically unobjectionable narrative. he doesn't explain why the migration patterns went the way they did and it does undermine his narrative a little bit. colonial america was not organized socially in a homogenous way, each colony was socioeconomically distinct from the other, and the basic dichotomy of planter vs small-plot existed long before the english civil war, in fact it dates to the initial settlements. the colonists established those patterns according to regional conditions and incentives, the head right program was abused in order to found agricultural monopolies in virginia, while new england was populated by puritan intentional communities that were more concerned with economically self-sufficient family units than commercial profiteering. also, the migration that resulted from political ousting is probably pretty insignificant in comparison to the outright expulsion of scots and irishmen, and the proletarianization that was occuring in southern england. i'd bet that the movement of bureaucrats overseas with the institution of british government after mercantile policies were adopted and the dominion over the colonies established resulted in more wealth migration than the civil war.
#7
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

xipe posted:
i read a tiny part of a book (that i since gave away and forget the title) that it would be more accurately called the first civil war, as loyalist american militias did much of the fighting against independence.



i think that argument has been problematized a little bit in recent times. the militias were significant in that they were able to harass the brits and encourage loyalty of the population to the patriots but the continental army was definitely the patriots' most significant military power

edit: woops misread your post

Edited by babyfinland ()

#8
Post rating: +
What also bothers me is that he's buying into the old Confederate mythology that the plantation class were descended from the Norman nobility and thus genetically and culturally superior. A lot of this was inspired by a weird fetish for Sir Walter Scott that gripped the south in the antebellum years, and some of them took to actually calling themselves Southrons
#9
Post rating: ~
if lee had mûmakil cavalry this not happen
#10
[account deactivated]
#11
Post rating: ~
watching this now, its funny & somewhat relevant


#12
Post rating: ~

xipe posted:


best part of that doc is the soundtrack, imo