Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
Sure would have resulted in the a lot of short threads and posts here on this board!
Myself, I think there would have been other problems the US would had to have faced, but none would have resulted in civil war or rebellion. Slavery was the one issue that people seemed willing to kill and die for.
But I am sure others on this board would point out tariffs and other issues that were a source of contention, but I doubt if they could support the idea of violence, in a big way, would have resulted from those issues.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
This would be a whole different country! One primary result would be that the South would have developed much differently. Without slaves, the huge plantations could not exist. How would the south have developed? Who knows?
Perhaps there wouldn't have been the aristocratic bent. Probably there would have been more industry.
It's a concept well applied instead of counting sheep. I believe I'll try that tonight.
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
There would never have been a United States of America. The southern states would not have ratified the Constitution. Heck, one of the compromises in ratification was that the U.S. would not pass any laws restricting the African slave trade until 1808. Article 1 section 9.
Boy that would have been very interesting. It does make you wonder how the Southern plantations would have developed. The antabellum way of life was steeped in the tradtion of large share holders and slavery, but it makes you wonder if the concept of sharecroping would have evolved faster, and that you would have ended up with similar circustances, such as the South still developing into a "plantation" nation. If that be the case, I think that the advent of farming technology would have sped up, since the Civil War put a damper on some of the first tractors and threshers. The first steam motors for farming, single engines, were developed at the time of the Civil War, but were put on the back burner due to the war effort. Farming in the South would have continued without slavery, but it would have been a somewhat endentured form. Remember, the colonists had no problems with enduture servitude.
You raise some very interesting questions on Southern developement without slavery. Doug, the country would not have formed at all. Are you saying the Southern states would have remained loyal to the Crown and England? Why is that?
Jenna, I thought that farm technologhy DID evolve quicker during the Civil War, to include many labor saving machines, such as McCormick's reaper. It just seems to me the South lacking an industrial base simply could not produce such machines with almost all of its tiny industrial base going into the war for weapons.
As for you idea of indentured servitude, what a concept! I wonder if that had been the primary source for labor in the South instead of slavery, what would have been the population make-up of the country today? Would whites have revolted over such a system or would they have considered it a normal custom and continued it to the present day? Interesting.
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Doug, you have a way of cutting to the heart of the matter. By the time of ratification, slavery was well established. The south would not have agreed and there would be two nations from the beginning. However, I believe Casey's question went around the "what if" you adroitly excised from the proposition. So, given agreement with you, I think I'll merrily step past that impossibility and keep exploring the endless possibilities until I fall asleep.
Jenna, I suspect that there could have been no large landholders and that farming would develop more along the lines of the yeoman-farmer of the north: till only as much ground as you and your family (plus a hired-hand or two) can handle. And you said the war interfered with the development of farm machinery. That may be true, but the idea is that there is not slavery hence, not much likelihood of a war. And the south's need for mechanization would have accelerated development of same. Finally, indentured servitude would have lasted only as long as it took for word to get back to the old country about the intense labor involved in cotton, tobacco and rice.
Neil, I think the south had gone too far during the Revolution to go back to England tugging their forelocks. They'd have insisted on a separate country or the slavery concession. Without slaves, the plantation society could not have developed and the aristocratic bent would have been further crimped (pun intended). (It would likely have continued in another form because it always does, but it wouldn't have been based on plantation income.) On to mechanization. Steam tractors were very expensive and were operated much like the combining companies that sweep the western plans in the late summer harvesting wheat and corn. McCormick's reaper would be of no use on cotton, tobacco, sugar and rice -- these were hand crops. Deere's plow might have had more use in the south, but the south certainly is nothing like the great plains. Perhaps mechanization would have been stimulated by the lack of hand labor. Meanwhile, we've been doing without King Cotton and the affect that condition would have had on the south's development. No cotton? Food crops? More industry? Interesting to think about.
Thanks for the stimulation.
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Fatal error. If the south had insisted on a separate country or the slavery concession, then in either case there would be slavery.
OK. Back to highly unlikely, if not impossible, "what if." No slavery. Skip logic. Start there.
Don't want to start another thread, but what if the south was its own country? What affect would its separation have had in 60 years? A king of its own? Tolls on river traffic? A grown-up railroad system?
Remind me to stay on topic.
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
As for the farming industry, yes McCormick had come out with the reaper, but would the lack of war had increased the inventions of the threshing machine faster, probably. The war, due to it happening in reality, did slow down the evolution of farm machinery. Now, without getting into a disortation on that subject, and belive me, I could. I am married to a man that has 9 tractors, all dating to before 1959, and is the VP of a tractor club, I do know a bit about the evolution of farm machinery. You don't just live with someone like that and not learn a thing or two about it.
Now, as to the other idea of the South being it's own country, I think Tommy had touched on that once. So I would dare say, he should field that one. He's got his own little idea of becoming King Tommy of Southern United States But it would be interesting. Shall have to ponder that one.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
But it would be interesting. Shall have to ponder that one.
Linear Mode
