The three Union era Campaigns were the Civil, Indian, and Spanish campaigns. Customarily, and according to the populist modern paradigm, the highly modern USA’s populace believes de facto that only the Civil Campaign occurred. Further, though the US Civil War was a very complicated quagmire pertaining to the Federalist initiation of a globalist industrial agriculture structure, centuries of labor policy dispute being impacted by an imminent industrial revolution, public/private domain rights structure on an “infinite” new continent, technological advancement’s initiation of transportation sector development, the real and potential migration of intellectual property, and even men’s fashion relative to the denotation of power; the conflict is often portrayed as simply a struggle for the abolition of a cast system relative to people with more highly pigmented skin who had been “imported” as though livestock to Southern ports by the French; prior to the Union conquest of Spain which had been foreshadowed by the Lincoln/Douglas debates.
The impetus of abolitionist sentiment perspective upon history is highly valid within the context of our modern USA’s paradigm, and correspondingly applicable to the objectives of a society highly contemporaneous to the temporal currency. Dr. Martin Luther King’s egalitarian vantage presides in modern America; within this modernity paradigm. Yet, in the temporal contexts of grander historic paradigms and in proofs therein founded upon their then existential basis; abolition was merely the brainchild of higher academics at such places as Harvard, Bates, Bowdoin, Yale and Weslean colleges. This; while beyond the ivy halls of academia; the agrarian labor and waterwheel industry classes and the burgeoning initial robber barons of the gilded age of Trusts legal structure struggled for raw commodities within a near subsistence level era of the slightly post colonial, highly biblical, paradigm.
While academic theorists contemplated the ethics of labor and what to do on the future map of mechanized scenarios; the mills of such places as Lowell MA and Biddeford ME, then both within the Massachusetts Bay Colony (*), knew the basis of their livelihood was both raw fibers from southern plantations, and also the technologies of their looms. Other mills dedicated themselves to war product in places like Hartford and Springfield where Colt and the Springfield Armory lathe spun rifle stocks and interchangeable revolver parts. Metaphorically; it can be said that the Union fear of loom technology “going south” was epitomized by the field ready Cotton Gin that had been invented by Eli Whitney, and by the entwined power of the pulpit’s dominion of particularly Massachusetts protestants which was then so highly based in the power of “the cloth” amongst men who purported to speak the word of God donned in (perhaps Kudzu) starched cotton collars atop homespun wool shirts… with at best Chinese silken ties.