I've had a few thoughts in the back of my head since our discussion on Thursday about codes of Honor.  For many people hold a code of conduct dear to themselves.  You see it a lot in mafia movies, where you have blood vengeance and other acts that are centered around family.

Systems or codes of honor seem to develop most in areas rife with conflict, or in places where sudden violence is something that people fear could ensue at any time.  It seems that it comes back to the family each and every time.  Protecting the family, saving the family, ensuring the survival of the family.  One thing that this reminds me of is something from the Game of Thrones TV, one of the characters is the head of one of the noble houses and he is reminding his son that when he is dead and gone what survives is the family name.  There will be those who carry the family name to future generations, and that the actions of the individual members of the family need to look to the survival of the family.

I feel like this reasoning could be a central root of the blood and honor mentality of the south.  You've got a lot of people who care more about the purity and honor of the family name than they do about the people around them.  Though it might be a more aristocratic mentality, it might be a significant contributor to the system of Blood and Honor.

I regret not being able to participate in discussion on Thursday.  Was at an information session for possible free job training.  It was not an opportunity to pass up.

However, on the matter of Mills response to Lincoln's apology, Mill appears to be consciously not using Utilitarian terminology in his rhetoric.  I noticed from posts that during the in class discussion there was a general consensus that Mill missed the reasons behind why Lincoln made the apology.  I would directly disagree, since, insofar as Mill is a brilliant man who spent so much of his life studying a vast variety of subjects, he would not be able to not notice the reasoning behind the apology.

Rather I see Mill as deliberately overlooking the real reason in order to support Lincoln.  If it were considered that if the British intervened the Union would clearly lose, he hoped to shame his colleagues into inaction.  Since, as Mill describes, Britain would be remembered for enabling a resurgence of slavery.  He seems to be working to convince his fellows that such actions would be remembered poorly by future generations.