Immigrants, Slave Economy & Low Wages linked in South's Traditions

[KoKo]

(I caught this review on Buzzflash about a new book on the South..I thought Buzz's comments were incredibly good and explains much about why so many of us DU Southerners are anguished and frustrated)

----------------------------


Away Down South: A History of Southern Identity (Hardcover)
by James C. Cobb

Published by Oxford University Press, "Away Down South" is another book well worth reading to understand the modern Republican Party. We need to warn you that it is not per se about the GOP; in fact it is an eminently readable, but scholarly, study of the actual and perceived heritage of the South.

And the author, former president of the Southern Historical Association and a Professor at the University of Georgia, James C. Cobb, is painstakingly fair. As a specialist in the history of the South, he balances the facts with the myths about the region.

Indeed, the challenge to understanding the South is that it is such a mixture of myth and reality. If the North was prospering as a result of the gritty process of industrialization, the South was relying on the ultimate low wage market (as in slavery) and the intoxicating fuel of romantic notions about its "values."
-snip-

BuzzFlash has discussed before that the new South consists of two different worldviews from an economic standpoint. There is the high-tech, globalized Southern economy represented by people like Ross Perot, who made their fortunes off of the "new" American economy. Then there is the low-wage, natural resources, non-industrialized heritage of the South that came directly from the slave owning tradition.

It is the latter tradition (and these thoughts are BuzzFlash's, not the book's author) that the Bush/Cheney Administration owes its heritage to. That explains why Bush, despite the right wing objections of his party, wants low-wage immigrant workers to be allowed into the country. That is why Cheney and Halliburton and Iraq and oil are so important to the current regime. They harken back to a South that lived off natural resources and the cheapest labor available: slavery. (Again, the book doesn't get into politics much. These are BuzzFlash's observations.)

"Away Down South" is subtitled "A History of Southern Identity," and Cobb does a masterful job of dissecting the perception of identity vs. the reality of life. On the other hand, the self-image of many Southerners, historically, has had more to do with the perception of their identity than with reality. Sound like anyone we know?

http://www.buzzflash.com/

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. That's kind of interesting

but living in the deep south, I don't know too many southerners. Rare as hen's teeth. Most of the folks I know are from N.J. The South has boomed like crazy and there really aren't very many natives left.

[KoKo]

2. But, that's Florida. NC, SC, GA, MISS,AL,Tenn, Virginia,WVA...

all have "Old South" roots and relatives. Florida can no longer be considered South except in pockets here and there.

Are you a transplant?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

3. Yeah, I am from NJ

too, although my mom was born in FL. I live just over the GA border, so I'm not "Florida" as in beaches and such. But the south in general has boomed, with many companies locating down here because of low taxes, lots of land, etc. I'm sure there is still a southern ethic, but it is getting harder to find it all the time.

[KoKo]

12. I lived in NJ for a time....near Princeton!

so...I can understand transplant. Even though I grew up South and my roots and culture are SOUTH...I lived away for many years and so I have a different perspective...and an inquiring mind as to what the South I grew up in was all about...having distance.

It's not always a good thing to do that much "past digging" though....:-(

[sasha031]

4. this being the case, southerners should of joined the civil rights

movement, sadly they don't see the big picture, trapped in a ideology.

[rinsd]

7. Southerners WERE the civil rights movement...

Though many students traveled South to help with freedom rides/voter regiostration/marches etc, it was the people living there in the end who changed things.

[Warpy]

5. Paid labor was actually cheaper than slave labor in some cases

since slaves required a considerable initial capital investment and enough continuing investment to keep them well fed and healthy enough to work. Free labor required no investment, didn't represent the wealth of the owner, and could be paid starvation wages and simply replaced when the inevitable result of slow starvation made him to ill to work.

It's the latter system that this bunch is nostalgic for, not slavery.

[KoKo]

9. Remember though that the jobs from NewEngland (textiles, etc) migrated

to the South because of Cheap Labor and the lack of unions which Southerners viciously fought to keep out. Now those jobs have gone to Asia and the replacement was Bush's give aways to the Real Estate Developers and the low interest economy. The jobs in the South are hugely dependent on Real Estate, Land Values and Out of Staters buying second/vacation homes. The textile jobs have gone...there is some high tech and BioTech was supposed to carry the load...but Biotech is struggling and I'm not sure how long before high tech is totally offshored...so what will be left?

The Land has kept the Southern Economy going and then the climate which attracted so many. The Latino Laborers have fed the economy for house and shopping center building by working cheap with little or no benefits. They've helped the economy by paying rent and buying. But, in fact it's closer to "slave labor" than what happened when Southern Laborers mass exited to the North and Midwest in the Mid-20th Century to get the jobs in Detroit, Ohio, Chicago, Pa and New York. Those jobs were UNION JOBS and they paid health insurance and pensions and you earned a living wage.

The South has the problem they may end up like Detroit in another decade because the job market is so based on immigrants and Real Estate boom.

[stevietheman]

6. This relates to an article I recently found re: Southern honor

In The Journal of The Historical Society, Bertram Wyatt-Brown wrote an article: "The Ethic of Honor in National Crises: The Civil War, Vietname, Iraq, and the Southern Factor".

It's basically about how Southern honor in the United States has fueled conflicts that otherwise had no rational basis.

Here's a taste from the article:

In all three conflicts to be discussed--Civil War, Vietnam, and Iraq--similarities in the justifications proposed, the executions of warfare, and the outcomes are tragically evident. Some of these parallels bear the imprint of a sectional culture long noted for its resort to arms and violence. In all three wars, the heads of governments were deeply immersed in the ethos of the South. The three chief executives hailed from the Southwest: Confederate president Jefferson Davis of Mississippi (the "Old Southwest"); Lyndon Johnson of Texas; and George W. Bush, the latter a Southwesterner by adoption. Under such leadership, the southern influence, it could be said, helped to hasten the national crises that resulted in aftermaths not at all anticipated. "From the Quasi-War with France to the Vietnam War," argues David Hackett Fischer, both coastal and inland Southerners "strongly supported every American war no matter what it was about or who it was against. Southern ideas of honor and the warrior ethic combined to create regional war fevers...

Moreover, the emotional defense of honor's principles continues with special emphasis in the military culture of the nation, in which the southern presence is quite conspicuous...Thus, the intensity of the southern inclination toward the "warrior ethic" has helped to shape the meaning of honor even when it is not recognized as the compulsion it is. This code of conduct embraces these elements: that the world should recognize a state's high distinction; a dread of humiliation if that claim is not provided sufficient respect; a yearning for renown; and, finally, a compulsion fo revenge when, in both personal and collective terms, repute for one or another virtue is repudiated. What is honorable is also supposed to be ethically above question, even approaching the plane of a masculine purity of conscience under the rubric of conducting an Augustinian "Just War." Yet, invocation of this form of honor could well hide highly questionable reasons.

What we can clearly ascertain is our nation's current militaristic, imperialistic behavior is not occurring by accident. It stems from the crazed heritage of Southern honor.

[KoKo]

8. Having grown up in the Old South (child of older parents) I can identify

with the snips you posted. Do you have a link to the article. Looks like a great read.

My hope has always been that the Southern Honor would turn around and bite Bush in his butt when folks down here realized what he was up to. But, given that the South is in a real estate boom where Granpappy's land has made them millions and the developers more millions....it's hard to see when the South's tradition of honor for good or bad will ever kick in as "blowback." Not now, anyway...but soon, I think. Or the North will have to rescue the South once again from it's misguided "honor."

[stevietheman]

10. Here's a URL to a page that includes a PDF link

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-5923.2005.00140.x

I hadn't realized that is was online, and released as free content.

Also, here's cite info:

Wyatt-Brown, Bertram (2005)
The Ethic of Honor in National Crises: The Civil War, Vietnam, Iraq, and the Southern Factor.
The Journal of The Historical Society 5 (4), 431-460.
doi: 10.1111/
j.1540-5923.2005.00140.x

[KoKo]

11. Thanks!

:-)'s