Reply #58: This makes no sense [View All]

So, the loss in the Civil War forced the south to civilize? And, via this forced civilization, southerners had a Saul-to-Paul moment and realized that Hitler should be opposed? This is inane. What does that say about the widespread sympathy for the Nazis outside the south? Was that the hubris of the victors? Seriously, this proposition of arrogance seems weak when you consider what the winning side did under the same circumstances. After all, are we to consider the brutal barbarity of forced ghettoization and de facto second class citizenship of the same cut as Jim Crow? What's the practical difference between the two? It seems like a difference in degree, not kind.

My point is simple: the idea that influential southerners would forego economic and political ramifications in order to kiss Hitler's ass for ideological reasons is ludicrous. Is it plausible that a CSA that fought and killed their own countrymen in order to secede would simply roll over and become a client state of the Nazis? That was their choice: be a client state or take their place on the list. To assert this proposition is to assume that the CSA was about slavery for slavery's sake when it was about slavery for economic reasons. The Nazis wanted to kill off 'inferiors' which would have been anathema to slaveowners for the simple fact that it would have cost them money.