Essay on "Whither Southern Economy?"
by Robert W. Watson
(13 October 2001)

After writing his doctoral dissertation about Iowan populism, Herman Clarence Nixon claimed that he completely endorsed "the liberal side of agrarianism." One of the planks of the Populist movement was a personal income tax. Of course, it is easy to understand why the farmers at the turn of the last century favoured such legislation. From a business point of view, farmers for the most part merely break even, and it was inconceivable that any farmer would have to pay an income tax. The legislation was aimed at the money-based economy, and the Populists hoped that America's contribution to the world, the billionaire, would return some of his personal gain to the maintenance of the government. An income tax made sense when the majority of citizens were existing primarily on a subsistence economy while supplementing it with a cash one. Nevertheless, Western Populism with its easy money and more control by "the people" put Nixon outside the conservatism of most Southern agrarians.

For nearly fifty years, Nixon taught history and political science at several colleges including Louisiana State University and Vanderbilt. During his teaching years, Nixon wrote a few textbooks: A Short History of the American People (1945) with Frank L. Owsley and Oliver Chitwood, American Federal Government: A General View (1952), and State and Local Government in America (1963) with Daniel Grant. Perhaps his most popular book about social planning is Possum Trot. His writings clearly show that Nixon did his best to undermine "the worship of industrial gods and mere economic progress."

Nixon's essay, "Whither Southern Economy?" represents a concise history about the role of agriculture in the South directly, and in the North, indirectly. The land used to hold a special meaning to those in the South. Only the most miseducated of souls would fail to know that George Washington revered Mount Vernon. Regarding farming in general, Washington said, "The life of the husbandman of all others is the most delectable. It is honourable, it is amusing, and, with judicious management, it is profitable." Yet today, agriculture is seen as disgraceful, boring, and unimportant. At least, this is the perception inculcated into the minds of youngsters by big education, big business, and big government. When young people consider what future vocation they will pursue, few, if any, will even consider farming.

One of the Yankee myths that has been popularised in the governmental schools is that had it not been for the Union defeating the Confederacy, the South would never have been industrialised. As usually is the case with the myths promulgated by the North, the Yankee view is not only uncritically accepted as the right one, but it is the only view worth considering also. Implicit with this view is the desirability of industrialisation, and those who oppose its progress is lacking in sense, morals, or both. Yet, Nixon questions whether industry in and of itself should be considered a positive good. According to Nixon, there are two ways that a nation can achieve industrialisation. First, a region, whether a nation or a city, can achieve industrialisation at the expense of an agrarian region. Or second, the region can become industrialised through a gradual process that is consistent with its culture. The former approach destroys regional values and traditions; the latter process maintains and advances an established culture.

New England opted to go the route of exploitation. Historically, any nation that will not encourage the development of the small farmer will sow the seeds that will weaken the moral fibre of its citizens. Perhaps it was inevitable that the Northern states would become industrialised due to the short growing season and poor soil. Nevertheless, regardless of these accidents of nature, the merchant class emerged and set the mood in Yankee society. Farms were abandoned for stills, since rum became the cash crop in New England. After all, farms produce only food; distilleries produce lots of money. Yet, in order to make the rum, the necessary ingredient--molasses--had to be imported from the West Indies. The loss of the farmer was not detrimental, since New England could rely on the South to supply the necessary agricultural products. In addition to this, with a high tariff, the fledgling enterprises were protected from the importation of inexpensive foreign goods, and the South would pay a disproportionate share of revenue to the federal government.

Therefore, New England followed closely the experience of Great Britain. With the Enclosure Acts in 1760, Parliament effectively destroyed the yeoman farmers, who were forced to go to the cities, causing overcrowded slums, rampant disease, and increased crime. With a huge surplus of labour, wages were very low. Even without the small farmer, the industrialists in Great Britain were not concerned with the exodus from the land, because the island nation had colonies to supply her with food to eat and raw materials for manufacturing. It is this mercantilistic mentality that New England adopted and therefore it could justify its conquering, or rather "liberating," the agricultural South. Later, in like manner, Bolshevik Russia would exploit the rural provinces of Georgia and the Ukraine. In short, an industrialised society is a parasite, and since it is unable to sustain itself, the society must go outside its boundaries to get raw materials, food, and people to work in its factories and to fight in its armies. Thus, the predominantly industrialised nation has a policy of intervention, both in domestic and foreign affairs.

On the other hand, the antebellum South was moving along a different route towards industrialisation. Not only were the climate and soil conducive to farming, but many settlers were of the agrarian classes. For an example, in Darian, Georgia, there was a large community of Highlanders, and in Ebenezer, Georgia, a community of Germans. These folks were already a people of the soil. Staple crops like tobacco, sugar, rice, and cotton fetched a higher price than the grain crops, and the Southern farmer had the advantage of good transportation for his crops, because of his proximity to navigable rivers and to coastal seaports.

Also, the expansion of cultivated land took a reasoned approach in the South. Only enough land was cleared for immediate use. Oftentimes, "old fields" were abandoned and left to nature that supplied the grass, weeds, and eventually trees. Therefore, pockets of "frontier" along with agrarian civilisation covered the South. Contrast this approach to the over-cultivation of western lands by agri-corporations with their fleet of machinery early in the twentieth century. The unnecessary ploughing of prairie sod contributed to the "Dust Bowl" years when the top soil was destroyed. In addition to the destruction of the soil, the overproduction of crops (when there were crops to harvest) required governmental price supports in order to bail out the agri-businesses. Farming cannot be run like an international corporation with its division of labour and mass-production without disastrous results.

With the invention of the cotton gin, cotton became the crop of the South. Foreign nations coveted cotton, and the federal government liked the revenues that it brought. The South became the "Cotton Belt," the "Cotton Kingdom," and the land of "King Cotton." Nevertheless, the antebellum South was not a single-crop economy. In addition to sugar, rice, and tobacco, other crops included corn, wheat, and sweet potatoes as well. Just before the Yankee invasion, Southern farmers were working steadily towards crop diversification and agrarian reform. The factories that developed in the South centred predominately on agriculture. The Southern railroads were built for the purpose of moving the commodities to local processing plants, particularly the cotton mills. According to Nixon, in 1850 there were over 20,000 small factories throughout the South that employed over 110,000 workers. Among these factories included manufacturers of cotton gins, boots, clothing, carriages, and railroad locomotives. The South was industrialising, but the industrial growth was checked by its agrarian economy. As Nixon points out, "The so-called old South, with its recruited aristocracy, was working toward a balanced industry, a reformed agriculture, and a free school system for the yeomen, when the war upset the orderly process of evolution." Upset, indeed!

If the Southern people had known that they would have to wage a war with the North, they would not have left the Union. The fact that the seven Deep South states seceded was based on the intelligence that they would be permitted to leave peacefully. The abolitionists welcomed the departure, and many Northerners recognised the right of a state to leave a political association in accordance with the Declaration of Independence. The Southerners were not foolish. From a military point of view, the South had little chance of winning a prolonged fight with her Northern neighbours. Her population was outnumbered 3 to 1, which included the slaves, had no navy, had few up-to-date weapons, and only one cannon manufacturer. In one early engagement, 3000 Confederate volunteers were sent home, because there were no weapons to issue to these troops. War was the last thing the South wanted. Nevertheless, the new nation was formed, and after its citizens were deceived and misled, they had to fight because of honour. In every major battle, the Confederates were outnumbered. When General Lee finally surrendered, his 10,000 men were surrounded by over 100,000 Yankee troops. The wanton destruction of property and livestock throughout the South by the advancing Union armies ensured that the Southern agricultural economy would fail to recover for a long time.

The war ended the check that the Southern statesmen provided in the federal government. The Republican radicals were unrestrained in political policy, because the Southern gentry was replaced by the lords of industry. In addition to this, Northern opportunists were given a freehand in the South. Southern railroads, factories, plantations, and debts were now owned by the carpetbaggers and speculators. Referring to the new masters of the South, a writer said in the November 1866 issue of the De Bow's Review that history has never before revealed "an aristocracy half so powerful, half so corrupt, so unprincipled, and rapacious, nor one-tenth so vulgar and so ignorant, as the moneyed aristocracy of the Northeast."

Since the South had no money to speak of, Southern farmers, white and black, were at the mercy of the "crop lien" system, where their cash crop was used as collateral for equipment and seed. At this point, the South became primarily a one-corp economy, because the "advancing man" dictated what crop would be planted. Since cotton brought the most return to the acre, farmers, if they wanted an "advance," were forced to plant cotton. Every year the story was the same. After the cotton was picked, ginned, bagged, and weighed, the price of the cotton always was less than what was owed to the advancing man, or as the black farmers simply called him, "the man." After a whole year's labour, the farmer went home with no money in his pocket, but deeper in debt. Abraham Lincoln's war destroyed one form of slavery in order to replace it with another kind. Thus, very little money remained in the South, since most of the manufactured goods were made in Northern factories, which were strengthened during the war. The South did not have the capital to replace the destroyed factories or to start up new enterprises. The Southerner for the most part was tied to the land, having no greater status than a Russian serf.

This was the state of things for several decades following the war. With the end of World War I, the New South proponents lured Northern money to the Cotton Belt with promises of cheap labour, abundant natural resources, and favourable taxes. Meanwhile, property taxes began to creep up on cultivated lands regardless of income. Even today, the foreign corporation is given favourable treatment, and the local farmer is being squeezed off his land. In fact, the rapid industrial growth in parts of the South is due to the infusion of outside money, not from capital that was generated locally. The profits are still flowing Northward. Because the growth has been artificially induced, one could argue that no real growth has really taken place in the South. What has been produced during the twentieth century has been an alien society of Southern consumers, who are eager to bargain their productive lives away to the highest bidder. This is not liberty; this is slavery, regardless whether you have the freedom to choose your master, like many of the slaves were permitted to do in the antebellum South.

Industrialism has proven to be the worst enemy of a free people. What then can be done to retard the exploitation of the South? Confederates must ensure that there is no rapid industrialisation in their rural counties. This will mean joining the local chamber of commerce in order to keep an eye on misguided policies. Any prospective industry should be congenial to the local economy and culture. Industry centred on agriculture should always be welcomed. Small independent factories and manufacturers should be recruited as well. However, Confederates need to be especially leery of expansion plants from foreign corporations. These plants seldom provide jobs for the local citizens, but will import workers from their discontinued plants or to fulfil promised promotions. You can bet that the upper management will definitely not be hired from the local community.

More Confederates need to become involved in local clubs, committees, and councils. In the small community, the chance of providing needed leadership is excellent. With Confederates in positions of local strategic importance, the community will have its champions to preserve and advance its local culture, avoiding the indiscriminate and wasteful use of the land marked by industrialisation. In addition to this, there needs to be a crusade, let me repeat--a crusade--to exempt all land that is under cultivation or pasture from property taxes. Since the property tax is a county issue, this platform ought to gain a favourable following and can be implemented on a county-by-county basis. It is hoped that this exemption will encourage more folks to attempt some sort of farming. Also, in conjunction with less revenue, the local school board will be forced to reform its educational policy. Since most money for "education" goes into non-educational programs like new buildings (when the old ones are still adequate), new swimming pools, football fields, and social engineering, maybe the school board with Confederate members who hire a Confederate Superintendent, who in turn hires Confederate teachers will finally get back to the business of educating unique individuals, instead of indoctrinating future human resources for the industrial-governmental cartel.

The antebellum Southern economy was a model for reasonable and sensible economic growth. Over seventy years have passed since Herman Nixon wrote his essay. If a defence of the Southern way of life was needful in 1930, then an even more desperate defence is now required more than ever. The financial capitalistic programme of big business has proven itself to be incapable of providing human values. On the other hand, the Southern agrarian communities have excelled in developing lifelong relationships between neighbours and the land. Confederates must subordinate industry to be their servant and escape the plight of millions of Americans who have allowed the lords of mammon to become their masters. What is at stake is the survival of the Southern agrarian tradition, which represents the noblest and most humane civilisation in modern times.