The NY City Draft Riots - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Early modern era & beginning of the modern era. Exploration, enlightenment, industrialisation, colonisation & empire (1492 - 1914 CE).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By Scamp
#14044606
April 15, 1861, Lincoln calls for 75,000 volunteer soldiers to invade the South.

New Yorkers were very enthusiastic and optimistic and within 10 days 8000 citizens from NY city signed up.

July 21, 1861...After the Union troops got their butts handed to them at the First Battle of Bull Run Manassas, Virginia, this enthusiasm and optimism went right down the toilet.

Horatio Seymore won the NY Governor election running on an anti-war platform in 1862.

Since Union soldiers invading the South are dying in record numbers... Congress passes new laws announcing a draft to force more men to fight against the South.

July 11, 1863, the first lottery of the conscription law was held.

July 13 1863 The fine citizens of NY city responded with an all out rampage.

Five days of mayhem and bloodshed and murder began.

The riots were the largest civil insurrection in American history apart from the Civil War itself.

For some reason the New Yorkers must have blamed black people for the war.

They began to attack black people in the streets including women and children.

Blacks were murdered in the streets. Blacks were hung from lamp posts. Blacks were set on fire.

Many black peoples houses were burned down.

The Colored Orphan Asylum on Fifth Avenue was attacked and destroyed.

The police superintendent was attacked by the angry mob and left badly wounded.

The mayor's residence on Fifth Avenue, the Eighth and Fifth District police stations, and other buildings were attacked and set on fire.

Federal army troops were called in. They were attacked.

The Assistant provost-marshal-general received word from his superior officer, to suspend the draft. As this news appeared in newspapers the situation finally began to improve as many of the rioters settled down.

The exact death toll during the New York Draft Riots is unknown, but according to historian James M. McPherson , at least 120 civilians were killed. Estimates are that at least 2,000 more were injured.
#14046871
For comparison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Bread_Riots
The Southern Bread Riots were events of civil unrest in the Confederacy on April 2, 1863. The riots were triggered mainly by foraging armies, both Union and Confederate, who ravaged crops and devoured draft animals. The staggering inflation created by the Confederate government was also a primary cause. The drought of 1862 created a poor harvest that did not yield enough in a time when food was already scarce. From 1861 to 1863, the price of wheat tripled and butter and milk prices quadrupled. Salt, which at the time was the only practical meat preservative, was very expensive (if available at all) as a result of the Union blockade and the capture of Avery Island by the Union.

Similar to the French Revolution, citizens, mostly women, began to protest the exorbitant price of bread. The protesters believed a negligent government and speculators were to blame. To show their displeasure, many protesters turned to violence. In Macon, Atlanta, and Augusta armed mobs attacked stores and warehouses. In North Carolina, mobs destroyed grocery and dry goods stores.

It was far more profitable for plantation owners to grow cotton and tobacco instead of food. The taxes on clerks, apothecaries and teachers were a mere 2% while taxes on agricultural produce were 10%. This created obvious tensions between differing classes and robbed the farmer of his income and means of providing for his family. Because of this, food crops suffered tremendously through supply and demand.

Food riots were occurring before the arrival of Union troops because the Confederate Army was suffering the same food shortages and was taking food stocks for its own needs. Additionally, as the cost of war for the Confederate government exceeded the tax revenue, legislation was enacted that exacerbated the situation by deflating the Confederate currency and inflating prices of goods.

In the Confederate capitol of Richmond, Virginia, thousands of people, mostly women, broke into shops and began seizing clothing, shoes, food and even jewelry before the Militia arrived to restore order.

Jefferson Davis himself gave a speech and even threw the money from his pockets to the rioters, asking them to disperse, saying "You say you are hungry and have no money; here, this is all I have". The mob stayed put; only when Davis threatened to have militiamen fire on the mob did they disperse.
#14046948
My understanding is this was primarily a religious issue, not a racial or economic issue.

The draft riots were primarily carried out by recently immigrated Irish Catholics who didn't understand why they had to fight to liberate people they had nothing to do with. Native Protestants wanted to conscript them in order to share the burden and force Irish Catholics to pay their dues in order to assimilate into society.

Race and economics were just rationalized excuses used to make Irish Catholics appear as boogeymen.
#14047453
That doesn't really sound like a religious issue but political Dak. The catholics were identified by their religious affiliation, but the issue of conscription wasn't a question of theology for them. Further it was an economic/class issue, in that the catholics tended to be more recent immigrants and tended to have lower paying jobs, worse status etc.
#14047543
Smilin' Dave wrote:That doesn't really sound like a religious issue but political Dak. The catholics were identified by their religious affiliation, but the issue of conscription wasn't a question of theology for them. Further it was an economic/class issue, in that the catholics tended to be more recent immigrants and tended to have lower paying jobs, worse status etc.


Total depravity versus universal reconciliation is the same as debating freedom of assembly.

Native Protestants believed Irish Catholics had to prove themselves. Irish Catholics believed they deserved respect by default.

Catholics also recognize mortal sin which prohibits killing unless in self-defense or rectification. Since Irish Catholics had nothing to do with slavery, they didn't see why they had to kill anyone to fix it.
#14048335
Daktoria wrote:Catholics also recognize mortal sin which prohibits killing unless in self-defense or rectification. Since Irish Catholics had nothing to do with slavery, they didn't see why they had to kill anyone to fix it.

Catholics have fought in many wars despite this so I don't buy it. Can you refer to an instance where religion was used to justify the riots by Catholics?
#14048423
Smilin' Dave wrote:Catholics have fought in many wars despite this so I don't buy it.


Yes, wars had to be justified by casus bellis. Again, it's OK to them to engage in self-defense and rectification.

Can you refer to an instance where religion was used to justify the riots by Catholics?


The riots were provoked, not justified. Protestants threw the first stone in demanding that Catholics prove themselves:

http://www.mapsites.net/gotham/es/_alexblankfein_es.htm

    The social tensions that were manifested in the Draft Riots resulted from the various ethnic groups represented in New York. New York in the nineteenth century was not a melting pot of cultures and races. Rather, New York was an eclectic stew of races, nationalities, and religions that did not blend and did not get along. Between Irish-Catholics and Native-Protestants there was much distrust and animosity. For example, in a city election in 1839, native New Yorkers awoke to this astonishing poster: “Irishmen, to your posts, or you will lose America. By perseverance, you may become its rulers; by negligence you will become its slaves.”[6] Although the poster was most likely planted by native conspirators against the Irish, the poster took advantage of native New Yorkers’ fears of an immigrant conspiracy to take over the United States. Many Natives believed that the Irish were Catholic spies who took their orders from the Pope in Rome. Despite the abhorrence between Native-Protestants and Irish-Catholics, the mutual color of their skin was a significant detail not overlooked. On the other hand, African-Americans—no longer enslaved—still had relatively few freedoms and were considered to be at the bottom of the social hierarchy of New York City.

Another excellent record (quoting it would be insufficient, anti-Catholicism is pervasive) can be found here:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon_1_14_03ws.html

Lastly, there's the legacy of Tammany Hall which was explicitly built on assimilating Catholic immigrants:

http://www.virtualny.cuny.edu/draftriot ... h_set.html
#14049182
Daktoria wrote:Yes, wars had to be justified by casus bellis. Again, it's OK to them to engage in self-defense and rectification.

Yes but catholicism also doesn't tend to encourage dissent from the state, which tends to get to decide what the casus belli really was. If there was some kind of 'religious injunction' against Catholics participating in the Civil War I would have expected that you could find examples of some form of authority figure giving the okay for such dissent, Catholicism is also after all hierarchical.

There is also a problem with your logic, in that Irish troops did serve in large numbers in the Union army, and even had their own units:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/69th_Infan ... ew_York%29

Of course there is a different explanation - that 'native' Irish in America had no problem with serving, but recent immigrants did. Which again makes it something other than a religious issue.

The riots were provoked, not justified. Protestants threw the first stone in demanding that Catholics prove themselves:

Now you are changing the subject. You've got an alternate theory as to the cause of the draft riots, and it is kind of interesting... but you need to substantiate it with something. The piece you go on to quote actually suggests a motive that was not religious at all:
The social tensions that were manifested in the Draft Riots resulted from the various ethnic groups represented in New York. New York in the nineteenth century was not a melting pot of cultures and races. Rather, New York was an eclectic stew of races, nationalities, and religions that did not blend and did not get along.

Ethnic divisions are spoken of, not religious ones.
#14049267
Smilin' Dave wrote:Yes but catholicism also doesn't tend to encourage dissent from the state, which tends to get to decide what the casus belli really was. If there was some kind of 'religious injunction' against Catholics participating in the Civil War I would have expected that you could find examples of some form of authority figure giving the okay for such dissent, Catholicism is also after all hierarchical.

There is also a problem with your logic, in that Irish troops did serve in large numbers in the Union army, and even had their own units:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/69th_Infan ... ew_York%29

Of course there is a different explanation - that 'native' Irish in America had no problem with serving, but recent immigrants did. Which again makes it something other than a religious issue.


Why are you focusing only on Catholic organization and not Catholic values?

Now you are changing the subject. You've got an alternate theory as to the cause of the draft riots, and it is kind of interesting... but you need to substantiate it with something. The piece you go on to quote actually suggests a motive that was not religious at all:


I don't think you read what I cited.

You need to read up on total depravity versus universal reconciliation. Protestants believe people have to perform good works to prove their salvation. Catholics believe people are saved by default. Therefore, Protestants would believe Catholics had to be conscripted. Catholics would believe no such duty exists.

Ethnic divisions are spoken of, not religious ones.


I don't like people who soundbyte and make me repeat myself. My quote even satisfied your organizational inquiry made before, and in referring to perseverance, it confirmed the total depravity versus universal reconciliation conflict.
#14050132
Daktoria wrote:Why are you focusing only on Catholic organization and not Catholic values?

Catholic values tend to focus on organisations. Are you saying the 69th wasn't manned by people with Catholic values?

Daktoria wrote:I don't think you read what I cited.

I read enough of what you quoted to see it didn't back your religious conflict interpretation and instead ascribed it to ethnic divisions. And again as pointed out going on about supposed Protestant 'provocation' is a distraction from the need to prove one way of the other that Catholic religion was the motivator for the draft riots. Given that I've demonstrated that Catholics could and did fight in the Civil War, and you have yet to show an example of the rioters using religion as an explanation/excuse, it would seem to me that you have a lot to explain.

Daktoria wrote:I don't like people who soundbyte and make me repeat myself.

I don't like people who can't make an argument where even one bit of it is entirely accurate or logical, and I really really hate it when they claim to have proven something without actually doing so.

Daktoria wrote: My quote even satisfied your organizational inquiry made before

Your quoted text makes no reference to organisations. Tammany Hall (the Tammany Societies were originally about 'pure Americans') which you go on reference was not founded as an Irish organisation and did not represent their interests, and hence does not answer the question as to who gave Catholics the moral authority to abstain from the draft.

You want to go on about Catholic religious doctrine while ignoring key pillars like authority and hierarchy in traditional Catholicism. I asked you a direct question about it, and you rambled about something unrelated. I pull you up about it, and you complain that I asked you to repeat yourself? What are you going about?

Somalia, in certain respects, does better than the[…]

Rules to Teach your Children

Really haven't thought about these things much, Bu[…]

Why does the US want to turn away actual asylum se[…]

Nike, Kaepernick and Arizona...

If I call someone the "N" word, you wo[…]