Live data from Hacker News

What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

historytoday.com

71–80 of 278 posts

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#71

I'd be interested in how the world would/might react to an American civil war today ? Would we see America's "enemies" sending arms to the side of their choice to fight a proxy war on American soil? Would a side accept that aide? Would America's "allies" sit out or pick sides? Would those sides align with the sides "enemies" would choose?

I think the world would collectively shit its pants. The world's largest economy and military suddenly splintering while in control of several thousand nuclear weapons? It would seem like Armageddon.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#72
post #63
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could argue that the Confederacy actually started the Cotton Famine, on purpose. Early on the Union blockade was essentially a paper blockade, and therefore of dubious international legality. There were laws regarding blockades, but those laws were fuzzy when it came to civil wars & a nation blockading their own ports . The Union would have been in violation of international law if the Confederacy were a recogniz…

Not doubting to be clear, but do you have recommended sources on the desire for the American abolition of slavery being a principal motivation for Britain's non-involvement in the American Civil War? Would be curious to read it. I've generally had a pretty cynical view towards British abolitionism, which is that the elites only disliked slavery to the extent that they found capitalistic imperialism (i.e. systems that…

The book I recommended in original comment (A World on Fire) will give you a good inside-look at the British political thought & decision making during that time, including Parliamentary debates & communiques between Palmerston and his ministers. Their motivations are complex, like any other politician, but if they were purely economic & geopolitical opportunists I would have expected them to leap at dividing America and keeping the cotton flowing. They didn't.

> I've generally had a pretty cynical view towards British abolitionism

I am not an expert on abolitionist movements or their political effects, but there was a strong moral outrage to slavery in the 19th century and it developed very rapidly, starting in Britain. I recommend reading about the British public's reaction to the publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin.

> their empire, whose 19th century wealth was bootstrapped on the profits of of slave-trading and the manufacture of raw materials extracted via slave labor, was uniquely-well-positioned to come out on top in a world order deprived of slave labor

You're not wrong, and you can toss colonialism in there, too. The Japanese were made the same argument in the early 20th century as they were trying to expand and acquire colonies and kept getting their knuckles whacked by the Europeans, who were (mostly) trying to pump the brakes on colonialism by that point.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American russophobia is a sad state of affair considering history, they also gave Alaska for a negligible price. > When the Civil War broke out, both England and France considered hostile intervention on behalf of the South and they tried to convince the Tsar to join them. Alexander II’s refusal was critically important because the British and French then decided to abort their plans. It's crazy to think Russia deter…

You mean the country committing war crimes daily and threatening the world with nukes?

No post body was provided.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#74

  If we and the French could just help the Confederates a bit more America might be ripe for reconquest! The French are already in Mexico and we have ships in Canada! The mad king was a fool for letting those backwards colonists break away in the first place.

  Those darn Russian fleets showing up in 1863 in NY and SF with sealed orders to attack anyone who attacked the US! How dare they, those Russians will pay!

  Get those Freemasonic/B'nai B'rith networks pumping out more confederate spies! 

  Cotton cotton cotton

  That Lord Palmerston and his Zoo!

  Whew, they didnt find our connections to John Wilkes Booth.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#75
post #15

Not enough, actually. The American Civil War was the first big war where railroads and telegraph lines allowed coordinated operations over a large area, and machine guns and repeating rifles allowed killing large numbers of advancing troops. Grant got this; he wrote "War is Progressive", meaning that there was progress through technology. This was a radical idea in military thinking at the time. Most European militar…

It also featured a little bit of trench warfare. I imagine the European observers who saw that were like "Huh, definitely not important, let's not come up with strategies to counter this sort of thing" and then forgot about it for the next 50 years or so.

I mean, it had been 50 years, it wasn't like there had been another war fought 10 years prior that also devolved into trench warfare that they completely failed to learn anything from.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#76
post #15

Not enough, actually. The American Civil War was the first big war where railroads and telegraph lines allowed coordinated operations over a large area, and machine guns and repeating rifles allowed killing large numbers of advancing troops. Grant got this; he wrote "War is Progressive", meaning that there was progress through technology. This was a radical idea in military thinking at the time. Most European militar…

It also featured a little bit of trench warfare. I imagine the European observers who saw that were like "Huh, definitely not important, let's not come up with strategies to counter this sort of thing" and then forgot about it for the next 50 years or so.

[deleted]

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#77
post #37

The Civil War in America absolutely dominated the British national conversation, especially in the early years of the war. Politicians followed the conflict closely, and there were even several debates in Parliament over British policy toward the conflict. Frequently discussed was a line that a lot of Americans would recognize today, of "when should Britain get involved??" because of the destructiveness of the confli…

A point I found interesting along the lines of perceived British ambivalence, my understanding is that the Emancipation Proclamation was a brilliant piece of diplomacy. It was anti-slavery enough to make it possible to convince Britain that the war was all about slavery and so they shouldn't intervene because of how much they were against slavery. Yet also weak enough against slavery - only freeing slaves in the territory they hadn't conquered yet - to make it possible to convince the Union officers and politicians that it was a tactical economic ploy against the Confederacy and not a changing of the primary war aims. They were rather ambivalent about slavery, and Lincoln himself feared that "half the officers would fling down their arms and three more states would rise" if he made full emancipation a primary war aim.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#78
post #15

Not enough, actually. The American Civil War was the first big war where railroads and telegraph lines allowed coordinated operations over a large area, and machine guns and repeating rifles allowed killing large numbers of advancing troops. Grant got this; he wrote "War is Progressive", meaning that there was progress through technology. This was a radical idea in military thinking at the time. Most European militar…

It also featured a little bit of trench warfare. I imagine the European observers who saw that were like "Huh, definitely not important, let's not come up with strategies to counter this sort of thing" and then forgot about it for the next 50 years or so.

In fairness, I think people thought the Eastern and Southern armies fought in a "civilized" manner.

It's just that the Western armies and Western generals came in, and they fought in a significantly different fashion. You can call the West of the Union more "modern". Or "pragmatic". Or maybe "barbaric" is the right word.

No one wanted to be seen as being "Barbaric". Except Western armies, who really didn't care what people thought about them. (At least, not as much as they cared about their orders.)

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#79

I'd be interested in how the world would/might react to an American civil war today ? Would we see America's "enemies" sending arms to the side of their choice to fight a proxy war on American soil? Would a side accept that aide? Would America's "allies" sit out or pick sides? Would those sides align with the sides "enemies" would choose?

America's allies would probably not support a side unless there was going to be a clear winner OR it was in that nation's interest to do so.

America's enemies maybe would pick a side in an attempt to destabilize the country more... But I think a splintered America would be extremely reluctant to accept help from Russia/China.

Re: What did British officers think of the American civil war as it was happening?

#80
post #15

Not enough, actually. The American Civil War was the first big war where railroads and telegraph lines allowed coordinated operations over a large area, and machine guns and repeating rifles allowed killing large numbers of advancing troops. Grant got this; he wrote "War is Progressive", meaning that there was progress through technology. This was a radical idea in military thinking at the time. Most European militar…

> The American Civil War was the first big war where railroads and telegraph lines allowed coordinated operations over a large area, and machine guns and repeating rifles allowed killing large numbers of advancing troops.

Hi, the Crimean War would like to remind you that it existed.

Post reply on HN