What if the Confederacy had been allowed to secede peacefully?

[TakeAStepBack]

The standard and style of living in the North for the middle and laboring classes would have been much higher than the South.

How do you come to that conclusion? The south had a higher standard of living overall than the northern states prior to the Civil War.

Yep. The south was a lot of wealth in those days. Still is, actually. Northern loyalists are always quick to revise history though. As Churchill said, history is the victor's spoils.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Try to imagine what would have happened if the eleven states of the Confederacy had been allowed to secede peacefully from the United States in 1861.

The South has always been the problem child of the United States. I think what remained of the United States would have been better off without the South. If the United States had been able to peacefully unite with Canada the results would have been even better.

In the South slavery impeded the development of industry, and of labor saving agricultural machinery. The vast majority of whites did not own slaves. Those who did not own slaves usually had a lower standard of living than their skills would have earned for them in the North.

Negro slavery discouraged the development of a work ethic among Southern whites, because they thought hard work was something slaves did.

An additional advantage of letting the Confederacy go peacefully is that the Negroes would have remained slaves. They would not have been able to move to the North and turn downtown areas of Northern cities into crime ridden slums.

The premise of this thread is absurd and factually incorrect. The standard of living in the south was higher than the north because of the low cost of labor due to the use of slavery. They had a more bustling economy than the north. The end of slavery coupled with the destruction of infrastructure caused by the war and racial discrimination are what plummeted the south into poverty for over a century to follow.

While the southern states have had their fair share of causing problems for the union overall, today they are once again outperforming the northern states economically. The southern states have been growing while the northern states have been decaying. You only need to follow the migration patterns and the amount of wealth leaving the north for the south to see that.

 

[Toro]

The standard and style of living in the North for the middle and laboring classes would have been much higher than the South.

How do you come to that conclusion? The south had a higher standard of living overall than the northern states prior to the Civil War.

Of all people or white people?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The standard and style of living in the North for the middle and laboring classes would have been much higher than the South.

How do you come to that conclusion? The south had a higher standard of living overall than the northern states prior to the Civil War.

Of all people or white people?

As if in those days the north had no slaves...or treated blacks and women as equals...

More revision from northern loyalists.

 

[Foxfyre]

In my opinion, had the South been allowed to secede peacefully, it would have been a financial blow to all, north and south alike, but both countries, temporarily divided, would have proceded and advanced. Slavery would have ended anyway as it did in Canada and Mexico and throughout most of the Roman Empire, but it would have happened due to consent of the people rather than government decree and threfore would have happened more slowly and methodically. The transition from slavery to freeman would have been less traumatic for the black man, and the horrendous bloodshed of the Civil War would have been avoided.

And I believe the countries would have reunited by mutual consent within a decade or two.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The South has always been the problem child of the United States.Well that's not true, it generated loads of income and vast amounts of trade I think what remained of the United States would have been better off without the South. until progs demanded that you go to war in other countries, again.If the United States had been able to peacefully unite with Canada the results would have been even better. good lord, that is painfully ignorant.

In the South slavery impeded the development of industry, and of labor saving agricultural machinery. more ignoranceThe vast majority of whites did not own slaves. Those who did not own slaves usually had a lower standard of living than their skills would have earned for them in the North. link that please, b/c this is the first I heard of it.

Negro slavery discouraged the development of a work ethic among Southern whites, because they thought hard work was something slaves did. wow!!! didn't you just say they did the same work as northern folk for less?

An additional advantage of letting the Confederacy go peacefully is that the Negroes would have remained slaves. They would not have been able to move to the North and turn downtown areas of Northern cities into crime ridden slums. so po' white folk don' go committin no crimes?

 

[Two Thumbs]

OMG

I just got pimp smacked by some irony.

'Freinds' (irony) avi is that of a black furred monkey cuddling a white furred tiger.

 

[Toro]

Try to imagine what would have happened if the eleven states of the Confederacy had been allowed to secede peacefully from the United States in 1861.

The South has always been the problem child of the United States. I think what remained of the United States would have been better off without the South. If the United States had been able to peacefully unite with Canada the results would have been even better.

In the South slavery impeded the development of industry, and of labor saving agricultural machinery. The vast majority of whites did not own slaves. Those who did not own slaves usually had a lower standard of living than their skills would have earned for them in the North.

Negro slavery discouraged the development of a work ethic among Southern whites, because they thought hard work was something slaves did.

An additional advantage of letting the Confederacy go peacefully is that the Negroes would have remained slaves. They would not have been able to move to the North and turn downtown areas of Northern cities into crime ridden slums.

The premise of this thread is absurd and factually incorrect. The standard of living in the south was higher than the north because of the low cost of labor due to the use of slavery. They had a more bustling economy than the north. The end of slavery coupled with the destruction of infrastructure caused by the war and racial discrimination are what plummeted the south into poverty for over a century to follow.

While the southern states have had their fair share of causing problems for the union overall, today they are once again outperforming the northern states economically. The southern states have been growing while the northern states have been decaying. You only need to follow the migration patterns and the amount of wealth leaving the north for the south to see that.

It's been a long time since I studied economic history of America, but that doesn't sound right, at least on the standards of living. Again, maybe I am wrong, I don't know. But generally, manufacturing paid higher wages by the end of the 19th century, and manufacturing was a big reason why slavery in the North ended in the first place. Manufacturing required higher education because it was more productive (and hence, higher wages), and wasn't conducive to an uneducated society.

The Civil War was not the reason for the stagnation of the South for the next century. Social organization, including slavery, was the reason. The economy was based on agriculture, which inhibited the growth of cities and the critical mass necessary to develop manufacturing. In the South, the primary center was the county seat, not the city, and fewer cities developed in the South because there was little need for large cities in an agrarian society. Though certainly not the only reason, It's no coincidence that the industrialization of the South really began to take off after it shed its racist segregation laws.

 

[Two Thumbs]

It would have been poorer because it would have remained more agrarian whose products would have been subject higher tariffs. It also probably would have turned into an international pariah state like South Africa, shunned and boycotted by the rest of the world.

In what?

100 or closer to 150 years?

 

[Two Thumbs]

We'd probably be speaking German.

Unlikely, just due to the size of both countries.

however all of europe would

 

[Toro]

How do you come to that conclusion? The south had a higher standard of living overall than the northern states prior to the Civil War.

Of all people or white people?

As if in those days the north had no slaves...or treated blacks and women as equals...

More revision from northern loyalists.

Can you answer the question?

In the North, people were generally paid. In the South, much of labour was not. So if we looked at GDP per capita, which is a measure of living standards, was it higher in the South or the North? And what was the median?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Try to imagine what would have happened if the eleven states of the Confederacy had been allowed to secede peacefully from the United States in 1861.

IMHO, if the South had been allowed to secede there would have been no Spanish American War. Japan would have no reason to see the US as a threat and would not have attacked us at Pearl because we would not have Pearl. Hawaiil would have been a British possession and Japan would have turned its attention upon helping bring the Brits to their knees and providing support for Germany's effort agianst the Soviets.

Further, the US would not be nearly the industrial giant as the oil and coal wealth was concentrated in Southern states. This combination would have resulted in the Nazis easily winning WWII and we would now be speaking German.

WW1 probably wouldn't have had any Americans in it, so WW2 probably would not have occurred

 

[Toro]

It would have been poorer because it would have remained more agrarian whose products would have been subject higher tariffs. It also probably would have turned into an international pariah state like South Africa, shunned and boycotted by the rest of the world.

In what?

100 or closer to 150 years?

The Confederacy probably would have been our South Africa.

 

[Two Thumbs]

It would have been poorer because it would have remained more agrarian whose products would have been subject higher tariffs. It also probably would have turned into an international pariah state like South Africa, shunned and boycotted by the rest of the world.

In what?

100 or closer to 150 years?

The Confederacy probably would have been our South Africa.

doubtful

I think Foxfire was much closer.

Slavery was nearly at an end, but then the cotton gin came along, so whatever came after would have replaced the gin and the need for slaves.

And just the vast numbers of blacks would have prevented an SA

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Of all people or white people?

As if in those days the north had no slaves...or treated blacks and women as equals...

More revision from northern loyalists.

Can you answer the question?

In the North, people were generally paid. In the South, much of labour was not. So if we looked at GDP per capita, which is a measure of living standards, was it higher in the South or the North? And what was the median?

No, because it's a false premise. The insinuation being that the north did not have slaves post 1861. Law was written, sure. But they were gradual measures. Furthermore, northern states certinaly did not extend the franchise to blacks post abolition.

So to ask for all people or white people from a standard of living context of the south is moot. As Bro said, the south had a very wealthy culture following the cotton boom. The north, being more industrialized, (contrary to other assertions) saw standards of living in shambles. Textiles being the obvious go-to as a point of reference...or shall we say, sweat shops.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It would be one more in a long list of countries we send foreign aid to.

Very likely. And of course the Southern Accent would have devolved further in pidgin English, making communication between the American People and the confederate tribes more difficult than it is already.

“If I must be enslaved let it be by a King at least, and not by a parcel of upstart lawless
Committeemen. If I must be devoured, let me be devoured by the jaws of a lion and not
gnawed to death by rats and vermin.ʺ

Samuel Seabury


You would have made an excellent and outspoken Loyalist.

Not likely, I tend to question authority. Sometimes those in power act agreeably, sometimes like fools and mostly in their own self interest. I prefer the pen over Brinkmanship or the fist - but both have their moments.

Only an idiot cares who enslaves them; only an idiot or a monk believes s/he is an island unto themselves.

 

[thanatos144]

Try to imagine what would have happened if the eleven states of the Confederacy had been allowed to secede peacefully from the United States in 1861.

The South has always been the problem child of the United States. I think what remained of the United States would have been better off without the South. If the United States had been able to peacefully unite with Canada the results would have been even better.

In the South slavery impeded the development of industry, and of labor saving agricultural machinery. The vast majority of whites did not own slaves. Those who did not own slaves usually had a lower standard of living than their skills would have earned for them in the North.

Negro slavery discouraged the development of a work ethic among Southern whites, because they thought hard work was something slaves did.

An additional advantage of letting the Confederacy go peacefully is that the Negroes would have remained slaves. They would not have been able to move to the North and turn downtown areas of Northern cities into crime ridden slums.

I guess it sucks that evil fucks who think people should own other people started the war in first place huh? I have a better question why the fuck are idiots like you still worshiping democrat fucks like that?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Try to imagine what would have happened if the eleven states of the Confederacy had been allowed to secede peacefully from the United States in 1861.

The South has always been the problem child of the United States. I think what remained of the United States would have been better off without the South. If the United States had been able to peacefully unite with Canada the results would have been even better.

In the South slavery impeded the development of industry, and of labor saving agricultural machinery. The vast majority of whites did not own slaves. Those who did not own slaves usually had a lower standard of living than their skills would have earned for them in the North.

Negro slavery discouraged the development of a work ethic among Southern whites, because they thought hard work was something slaves did.

An additional advantage of letting the Confederacy go peacefully is that the Negroes would have remained slaves. They would not have been able to move to the North and turn downtown areas of Northern cities into crime ridden slums.

I guess it sucks that evil fucks who think people should own other people started the war in first place huh? I have a better question why the fuck are idiots like you still worshiping democrat fucks like that?

Question: Are you a liar or as ignorant of American History and how political parties have evolved as your post claims.?

 

[thanatos144]

Try to imagine what would have happened if the eleven states of the Confederacy had been allowed to secede peacefully from the United States in 1861.

The South has always been the problem child of the United States. I think what remained of the United States would have been better off without the South. If the United States had been able to peacefully unite with Canada the results would have been even better.

In the South slavery impeded the development of industry, and of labor saving agricultural machinery. The vast majority of whites did not own slaves. Those who did not own slaves usually had a lower standard of living than their skills would have earned for them in the North.

Negro slavery discouraged the development of a work ethic among Southern whites, because they thought hard work was something slaves did.

An additional advantage of letting the Confederacy go peacefully is that the Negroes would have remained slaves. They would not have been able to move to the North and turn downtown areas of Northern cities into crime ridden slums.

I guess it sucks that evil fucks who think people should own other people started the war in first place huh? I have a better question why the fuck are idiots like you still worshiping democrat fucks like that?

Question: Are you a liar or as ignorant of American History and how political parties have evolved as your post claims.?

Aww is the democrat sad because the truth was let out?

 

[legaleagle_45]

Slavery was nearly at an end, but then the cotton gin came along, so whatever came after would have replaced the gin and the need for slaves.

And just the vast numbers of blacks would have prevented an SA

Slavery would have come to an end, probably not latter than 1900, not because it was profitable, but because of the engrained cultural tradition. But for that cultural tradition, it would have ended at least 20 years earlier. Segregation is another matter entirely. Segregation would have continued well into the 1960's and 1970's, if not longer and would have been quite similar to SA.