Book Review: Authoritarianism in the American South: Beliefs That Led to Slavery and Civil War, 1606-1861
Authoritarianism in the American South: Beliefs That Led to Slavery and Civil War, 1606-1861. By Robert L. Dipboye. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., 2024. Softcover, 283 pp. $49.95.
Reviewed by Albert Mackey
In this interesting book, Robert L. Dipboye, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Central Florida, proposes a novel explanation for not only the cause of the Civil War but also the reason why the colonists in the New World established slavery, and specifically why American southerners established a society based on slavery. He confirms the desire to protect slavery was the immediate cause for secession and thus the Civil War, but he says the root cause of the war was an authoritarian worldview among the planter class of the American South. Indeed, it was this authoritarianism, according to Professor Dipboye, that led to slavery becoming the linchpin of the southern economy and society in the antebellum years.
Professor Dipboye has done prodigious research in the latest psychological studies on authoritarianism as well as scholarship on the coming of the Civil War. The book is strongest in explaining authoritarianism and its themes, which are first, a belief in a world filled with danger and competition; second, an orientation toward dominance and obedience; third, an “Us vs. Them” mentality; and fourth, what Professor Dipboye calls “closed mindedness.” Using fear of an ”out-group,” the authoritarian leader will divide society into “Us,” which is the “in-group,” and “Them,” which is the “out-group.” The authoritarian structure demands obedience of the leadership, if that leadership serves the “in-group’s” goals, but denies the legitimacy of authorities who do not do that. Those with an authoritarian worldview will discount any information that doesn’t conform to their beliefs.
In four chapters, Professor Dipboye explains this mindset and then applies it to the early colonial and then later antebellum southern elites and their newspapers and other media organs. His argument that these elites held an authoritarian worldview is persuasive. Not so persuasive is his claim that the authoritarian worldview caused them to turn to slavery and then to Civil War. Much more convincing to this reader is that the shortage of labor led early colonists to turn to slavery and the lucrative profits, combined with the climate of the South, led to widespread use of slavery, and the need to maintain control over the enslaved combined with the habituation of controlling others led to an authoritarian worldview. Rather than being the root cause of the Civil War, as Professor Dipboye asserts, it seems more likely authoritarianism was an indirect contributor to the events that led to the war, explaining how the fire-eaters were able to gain support for secession to protect slavery from the perceived threat of Abraham Lincoln’s presidency.
Still, this work is fascinating because of its approach to what caused the Civil War from another perspective, one based on scientific evidence. The discussion of authoritarianism is useful in understanding the planter class and can even be useful in understanding a number of politicians and other elites throughout history up to the present day. He tells us how the authoritarian mindset corrupted the thinking of the southern elites and even corrupted the power structure of the United States, with Supreme Court decisions, such as the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, regarding slavery being some of his prime evidence. During the first four decades of the United States, slaveholders controlled the operation of the government, and some of the compromises made in writing the Constitution dealt with mollifying the fears of slaveholders. The authoritarian worldview these slaveholding men held influenced their actions and their arguments.
The book thus makes an important contribution to our understanding of the people who led the secession movement, as well as our understanding of how they were able to gain the support of so many. Additionally, it has the added benefit of helping to explain behavior of elites to the present day. The reader will find much useful information in this book.
Al Mackey is a retired US Air Force colonel currently contributing to his community by serving as a substitute teacher in Pennsylvania. A lifelong student of the American Civil War since taking an undergraduate course with Professor James I. “Bud” Robertson at Virginia Tech, Al blogs at Student of the American Civil War, where he posts reviews, videos, interviews, interesting articles he finds, and research results.
There is much to contemplate here. I have always been puzzled how my kind, caring great aunts & uncles could have been produced by a slave society. I say that I am terribly sorry that question led me into a detailed study of slaveholding. It is an encyclopedia of things I would rather not know.
Politically correct drivel.
When you seek to back argue a position, you unfortunately narrow your focus. Many of these same “symptoms” of authoritarian societies were also present in the industrializing north. It was the continued economic and social viability of slavery that gave the southern social structures their peculiar, often anti-democrat twist.
Messrs. Olson and Pryor beat me to it with sharp, accurate comments.
“Beliefs that led to slavery”? Slavery has been around since Man first walked the Earth! Pharoah enslaved the Israelites! (Which, amongst many things, led to some great reggae songs.) “[T]he colonists in the New World established slavery”? Oh no – slavery was established in the New World by the colonizers – France, England, Holland, Spain, Portugal – not by the colonists. And, for that matter, the Native American nations, almost without exception, practiced slavery; the Aztecs, for one, slaughtered tens of thousands of their slaves for their human sacrifice rites. “…and specifically why American southerners established a society based on slavery”? Is this a joke? The English established slavery throughout the 13 colonies – and Americans inherited it.
Though some of the colonies in the north began to ban slavery in the 18th and early 19th centuries, the north, through the end of the Civil War – especially the mills in New England – benefitted more than any other region from slavery. And no, we did not have a “society” based on slavery. How ridiculous. At the height of slavery in 1860, in the 11 states that seceded, only 7% of the people owned slaves. Slavery was left to Americans by the departing English, and it was in America, and part of American agriculture and industry, but no “society based on slavery” ever existed in colonial America or the United States of America.
Such beliefs are the ugly result of 21st century CRT fantasizing, along with the revision, rewriting and outright destruction of American history. Let’s stop it.
Interesting review.