What were Jefferson Davis' political viewpoints?

Question

Aside from the support of slavery and seccession... states rights and the like?

Answer 1

It is often noted that Davis was not a "firebreather", desperately seeking secession. This is true. He clearly wanted to remain in the Union.

BUT his loyalty to the South--and SLAVERY-- was always far stronger than that to the Union or to "states rights", and so he was quite ready to secede rather than accept "Black Republican" government. And is was not simply that he felt threatened by the possibility that Republican policy to prevent the territorial SPREAD of slavery would (as Republicans hoped) eventually lead to it dying out in the South. It was the insult and 'humiliation' of having people in charge who believed slavery (and hence he and his fellow slaveholders) was morally wrong.

In all of this, he was much like Calhoun who argued
that slavery was a positive GOOD (and who might be called 'the father of the Confederacy').

The priority of the South and slavery to Jefferson's thinking is clear in his arguments and policy decisions during the 1850s

I don't usually cut and paste much but dictionary entries and primary sources (and things I've written myself!), but here is the central part of an EXCELLENT book review written by history professor Peter Carmichael . It captures all of this very nicely:

"Cooper['s biography of Davis] is correct that Davis sincerely believed in states' rights and that he loved the Union, but the thrust of his argument obscures Davis's true identity. At the most fundamental level, Davis was a Southern slaveholder who flew the banner of states' rights when it suited the advancement of Southern interests. He even jettisoned states' rights during the 1850s to promote pro-Southern policies. He wanted the Federal government to construct a transcontinental railroad that would pass through the South. He thought the national government should acquire Cuba for slavery expansion. He also favored the pro-slavery LeCompton Constitution in Kansas even though he knew it was a mockery of popular sovereignty, an egregious violation of states' rights.

"Davis can be better understood as a Southern radical who followed in the footsteps of the great South Carolinian John C. Calhoun. Both men preferred Union but feared that the South, as a minority region with an unpopular institution, might lose political equality in the united nation. They both aggressively prepared Southerners for the necessity of secession if an anti-slavery party like the Republicans gained national control. Davis, although quick to denounce the fire-eaters, told a Democratic convention that a Republican victory would result in a tyrannical majority. Recognizing Lincoln's "Black Republicans," he warned, was shameful and dishonorable. Cooper is right that Davis was not part of the secessionist vanguard in 1860, but the Mississippian, despite his pleas of loyalty to Union, was responsible for nourishing the dream of Southern nationhood that ultimately made secession a political reality. Instead of Jefferson Davis, American, a better title for Cooper's book would have been Jefferson Davis, Southerner."
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a6bf3eb3ee3.htm

______________________

Evidence for Carmichael's summary --

To see more on the story of Davis's political positions and behavior as Secretary of War (including the railroad issue), on slavery in the territories -- including the Lecompton Constitution AND supporting the effort to split off part of southern California to form a slave state, MANY books on the 1850s lay this all out. Here are two examples -- a new one I've just read and an old one I'm in the middle of (both excellent)

Leonard Richards *The California Gold Rush and the Coming of the Civil War* (2006)

Roy Ranklin Nicolls *The Disruption of American Democracy* (1948) [Pulitzer Prize winning book.. a classic]

Answer 2

i replace into quite shocked to assessment in my Civil conflict examining that he replace into not at all a so-referred to as "fireplace eater" yet replace right into a extra conservative individual who tried no longer undemanding on a similar time as in Congress to sidestep attending to the factor of secession, as have been an excellent style of the leaders of the accomplice government. the fireplace eaters have been given the finished secession factor going, however the extra conservative men ended up working the government. i've got no longer finished as lots examining approximately him for my section as quickly as the conflict began, yet i'm getting a feeling that he "lost it" using fact the conflict went on and the tension better.

Answer 3

Ask Robert Byrd

Answer 4

Look it up.