The power of delusion

Men are blind and crazy, they think all the people of Ohio are trying to steal their slaves and incite them to rise up and kill their masters; I know this is a delusion—but when people believe a delusion they believe it harder than a real fact and these people in the South are going, for this delusion, to break up the government under which we live.

William T. Sherman, letter to his daughter, December 1860, in Sherman: Fighting Prophet, by Lloyd Lewis, 1932, p. 132.

The letter is quoted in a November 2004 VFR post about Sherman, one of my favorite American figures, in which I present many passages from his biography detailing his remarkably incisive intellect. It’s followed by a vigorous discussion on whether Sherman’s harsh measures were justified, a highly relevant topic in light of our current discussion, which has continued all through today, about the morality of using military power against civilians in Iraq and against German and Japanese civilians in World War II. The 2004 thread also has a debate on whether the Northern suppression of the South was responsible for modern liberal statism. Readers will see that I had to use some Shermanesque measures of my own to suppress the expression of views that were inappropriate for this website.

- end of initial entry -

Charles G. writes:

Interesting that your hero should turn out to be Sherman. As far as I can tell, he had absolutely no qualms about slavery at all, having a rather more intense interest in union. He even admitted after the war that, had the South won, they would have been justified in hanging him as a war criminal. Those were his words. But you’re welcome to the hero of your choice. I guess we all need heroes.

LA replies:

I don’t know that I would call Sherman my hero, a word that conveys uncritical adoration. I do not necessarily support everything Sherman did in his two marches. I’m open to persuasion that actual actions of his were wrong or unnecessary. But I do admire him for the clarity of his intellect on essential matters. After Atlanta fell and the South did not surrender, which he had expected it to do, he understood that the fighting spirit of the South was such that the only way to restore the Union and bring real peace was by utterly crushing the will of the South, removing any hope from them that they could continue to resist. He was correct. That America became a unified and strong country for the next hundred years is due in no small part to Sherman’s clarity of vision.

And since Charles takes on a certain bitterness of tone regarding my admiration for Sherman, let us recall that if the U.S. had followed Charles’s kill-no-civilians, drop-no-A-bomb, don’t-invade-Japan philosophy in 1945, the U.S. would have formed some kind of blockade around Japan, waiting—months, years, decades?—for Japan to surrender, and the insanely gung-ho aggressive belief system that made the Japanese a danger to the world would never have been defeated. It was only the total defeat of Japan that defeated that spirit.

Charles writes:

A little further down in that letter of Sherman’s you quote, he wrote the following…

“Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth-right at your doors.

“You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.”

I am very impressed with Sherman’s ability to grasp the socio-economic realities so clearly, particularly his insight into European politics which would prevent the South from gaining aid there. Southerners of the time appear to have been completely blind to the series of revolutions which had occurred in Europe since the defeat of Napoleon. Seemingly, France would have been their most logical ally, but the French simply took advantage of the war to try to seize Mexico. Looking back from our lofty perch today, the determination and prescience of the United States in 1861, as personified by Sherman, becomes more and more impressive.

James N. sends Sherman’s Shermanesque statement to the people of Atlanta:

You might as well appeal against the thunder-storm as against these terrible hardships of war. They are inevitable, and the only way the people of Atlanta can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war, which can only be done by admitting that it began in error and is perpetuated in pride.

We don’t want your Negroes, or your horses, or your lands, or any thing you have, but we do want and will have a just obedience to the laws of the United States. That we will have, and if it involved the destruction of your improvements, we cannot help it.

You have heretofore read public sentiment in your newspapers, that live by falsehood and excitement; and the quicker you seek for truth in other quarters, the better. I repeat then that, bu the original compact of government, the United States had certain rights in Georgia, which have never been relinquished and never will be; that the South began the war by seizing forts, arsenals, mints, custom-houses, etc., etc., long before Mr. Lincoln was installed, and before the South had one jot or title of provocation. I myself have seen in Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi, hundreds and thousands of women and children fleeing from your armies and desperadoes, hungry and with bleeding feet. In Memphis, Vicksburg, and Mississippi, we fed thousands and thousands of the families of rebel soldiers left on our hands, and whom we could not see starve. Now that war comes to you, you feel very different. You deprecate its horrors, but did not feel them when you sent car-loads of soldiers and ammunition, and molded shells and shot, to carry war into Kentucky and Tennessee, to desolate the homes of hundreds and thousands of good people who only asked to live in peace at their old homes, and under the Government of their inheritance. But these comparisons are idle. I want peace, and believe it can only be reached through union and war, and I will ever conduct war with a view to perfect an early success.

But, my dear sirs, when peace does come, you may call on me for any thing. Then will I share with you the last cracker, and watch with you to shield your homes and families against danger from every quarter.

Mark Jaws writes:

Thanks for the post, LA. Like you, I find Sherman fascinating. I have been reading Jay Winik’s “April 1865, The Month That Saved America” and of course the actions and philosophy of Sherman are discussed. During his march through Georgia Sherman said, “We are not only fighting hostile armies, but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hand of war.”

As I have said before, if you we going to fight in Iraq, than we must fight to win. We cannot possibly win hearts and minds in the Islamic world where 75 percent of the people believe it was the Jews who flew those planes into the towers. However, we can make them suffer the consequences of supporting or tolerating fanatical terrorists who operate in their neighborhoods and mosques.

Christopher L. writes:

You write:

“After Atlanta fell and the South did not surrender, which he had expected it to do, he understood that the fighting spirit of the South was such that the only way to restore the Union and bring real peace was by utterly crushing the will of the South, removing any hope from them that they could continue to resist.”

I believe that this is a key point. By any reasonable standard, the South should have surrendered. Europe was not going to come to its aid, Lee was pinned to defending Richmond in attrition warfare, foreign trade was virtually non-existent, Lincoln was reelected, and Sherman was deep in the South with an army that far outnumbered its Southern counterpart. The South was thoroughly beaten and should have sued for peace. Instead, it continued to resist. Sherman understood that the only way to make the South yield was to unleash a swath of destruction that would illustrate the futility of further resistance. His march was a demonstration of the inability of Southern arms to protect their territory. Had the South surrendered when it should have, it would not have been necessary.

If you keep getting up off the mat when you should stay down for the count, do not be surprised if your opponent decides to land an even harder punch to make sure you stay down.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 22, 2007 11:51 PM | Send