Confederate Populist Backlash

Predicting how using slave labor in factories might have impacted industrialization in a Confederate nation is difficult. I believe that slaves could learn most industrial tasks, but how effective industrialization in the South would be using enslaved workers is open to discussion. Say a factory in the South in 1910 had 500 free laborers and 4,500 enslaved laborers, could this style of factory have been successful? Slavery may work fine on a plantation, but it is unknown if factory with thousands or tens of thousands of enslaved workers would be profitable is hard to predict. Barracks with 5,000 to 10,000 enslaved factory workers living there might lead to difficulties.
 
Why wouldn’t the US have welcomed them?

Would the bulk of the white population want was it about 3 million freed blacks who threatened to undercut them in the jobs market, let alone any racial feeling. Free states were as much about keeping out blacks as keeping out slavery. Hence also why during the New York Draft riots blacks were often targeted.

There would be some that would be idealistic enough to call for them to be allowed to migrate to the north and possibly some of the growing business elements who would see cheap labour to force labour costs down. However the bulk would oppose it, quite possibly violently.

Don't forget that Lincoln, whatever he actually thought privately felt he had to play the race card. Rejecting the idea of blacks as full citizens equal to whites and supporting calls for freed slaves to be repatriated to Africa. Which would be a hugely expensive task in that time period given the numbers involved.
 
The Confederate States is going to be a country of light industrialization.

There are 5 cities off the top of my head that are conducive to that sort of economy in the South.

1. New Orleans: Already a major shipping hub, cultural center and cotton export hub. When oil is eventually found in South and Western Louisiana and Texas. New Orleans is the prime candidate for the nouveau riche and Confederate oilmen to start using the city as the headquarters for a multi-billion dollar Oil and Gas Industry. This in turn will attract rural whites across the Confederacy to Louisiana for jobs.

2. Houston and Dallas: The same as New Orleans, much like historically, the oil boom will cause a population migration across the Confederacy to Texas.

3. Atlanta: Spared from Sherman's wrath, the city's landscape looks almost completely different than we know it. Already a major hub of rail transport and communications. Atlanta's centralized position in the Confederacy makes it an ideal location for a standardized railroad network. As well as an eventual radio network for news and information across the country. Hello Ted Turner!

4. Birmingham: Known in the 1860's as the small village of Elyton (Eely-ton), Jefferson County, Alabama was well known for it's iron deposits. Just like historically, a group of independent financiers, from home-grown Confederate cotton planters, Yankee steel magnates and European investors will kick start the steel foundries that will create a large industrial center for the Confederacy. Also attracting rural whites and blacks to the city in large numbers.

Some other places:

Charlotte, North Carolina: Charlotte will largely be dependent on cotton textiles like it was historically.

Charleston, South Carolina: It's highly possible since the war never ravages South Carolina, Charleston may see an uptick in production for shipping.

Nashville, Tennessee: Known in the 1850's-60's as the "Athens of the South", due to the large presence of colleges in the city. Particularly Vanderbilt. Nashville will be the city, just like Atlanta, a center of white, Confederate culture and intellectualism. That will especially become true when sociologists start going into the Tennessee mountains with recording equipment and come back with bluegrass, folk and country music. And commercialized "hillbilly music" or "cracker music" gets sent all over North America. Hello WSM radio!
 
The prevailing wisdom seems to be that slavery would have eventually become extinct under an independent Confederacy. That might have occurred at some future date, but since chattel slavery was such an integral part of Confederate identity, and was the reason that southern states seceded to begin with, I tend to be of the opinion that slavery in the south would have lasted at least into the 20th century, by which time the south might have expanded its economic base, developed greater ties with the United States, and found it harder to resist the world wide trend towards emancipation.
The country with the closest history to the American South is South Africa which did have slavery in the Nineteenth Century. More likely then not an independent Confederacy would of somewhat resembled that of South Africa . In common with the American South, South Africa had very strict laws against miscegenation vs say the Nineteenth Century colonies of Portuguese Africa which in turn had something similar to share cropping during the latter part of the Nineteenth Century.
Leftyhunter
 
Predicting how using slave labor in factories might have impacted industrialization in a Confederate nation is difficult. I believe that slaves could learn most industrial tasks, but how effective industrialization in the South would be using enslaved workers is open to discussion. Say a factory in the South in 1910 had 500 free laborers and 4,500 enslaved laborers, could this style of factory have been successful? Slavery may work fine on a plantation, but it is unknown if factory with thousands or tens of thousands of enslaved workers would be profitable is hard to predict. Barracks with 5,000 to 10,000 enslaved factory workers living there might lead to difficulties.
Enslaved workers don't make conscientious and efficient workers but I can only cite examples via PM.
So yes we know how well large factories with enslaved workers would work.. not real well.
Leftyhunter
 
The Confederate States is going to be a country of light industrialization.

There are 5 cities off the top of my head that are conducive to that sort of economy in the South.

1. New Orleans: Already a major shipping hub, cultural center and cotton export hub. When oil is eventually found in South and Western Louisiana and Texas. New Orleans is the prime candidate for the nouveau riche and Confederate oilmen to start using the city as the headquarters for a multi-billion dollar Oil and Gas Industry. This in turn will attract rural whites across the Confederacy to Louisiana for jobs.

2. Houston and Dallas: The same as New Orleans, much like historically, the oil boom will cause a population migration across the Confederacy to Texas.

3. Atlanta: Spared from Sherman's wrath, the city's landscape looks almost completely different than we know it. Already a major hub of rail transport and communications. Atlanta's centralized position in the Confederacy makes it an ideal location for a standardized railroad network. As well as an eventual radio network for news and information across the country. Hello Ted Turner!

4. Birmingham: Known in the 1860's as the small village of Elyton (Eely-ton), Jefferson County, Alabama was well known for it's iron deposits. Just like historically, a group of independent financiers, from home-grown Confederate cotton planters, Yankee steel magnates and European investors will kick start the steel foundries that will create a large industrial center for the Confederacy. Also attracting rural whites and blacks to the city in large numbers.

Some other places:

Charlotte, North Carolina: Charlotte will largely be dependent on cotton textiles like it was historically.

Charleston, South Carolina: It's highly possible since the war never ravages South Carolina, Charleston may see an uptick in production for shipping.

Nashville, Tennessee: Known in the 1850's-60's as the "Athens of the South", due to the large presence of colleges in the city. Particularly Vanderbilt. Nashville will be the city, just like Atlanta, a center of white, Confederate culture and intellectualism. That will especially become true when sociologists start going into the Tennessee mountains with recording equipment and come back with bluegrass, folk and country music. And commercialized "hillbilly music" or "cracker music" gets sent all over North America. Hello WSM radio!
Why not heavy Industry? South Africa with a smaller white population was able to become an industrialized nation with essentially the same racial polices as the American South.
Leftyhunter
 
Predicting how using slave labor in factories might have impacted industrialization in a Confederate nation is difficult. I believe that slaves could learn most industrial tasks, but how effective industrialization in the South would be using enslaved workers is open to discussion. Say a factory in the South in 1910 had 500 free laborers and 4,500 enslaved laborers, could this style of factory have been successful? Slavery may work fine on a plantation, but it is unknown if factory with thousands or tens of thousands of enslaved workers would be profitable is hard to predict. Barracks with 5,000 to 10,000 enslaved factory workers living there might lead to difficulties.
South Africa which had essentially the same racial polices as the American South and at least up to 1837 had legalized slavery managed to become a sophisticated industrilised nation. It's not rocket science to become an industrilised nation just some hard work.
Leftyhunter
 
Why not heavy Industry? South Africa with a smaller white population was able to become an industrialized nation with essentially the same racial polices as the American South.
Leftyhunter

The Confederate Constitution really did go far in hampering industrial development. That didn't exactly stop private investors from propping it up in places where they could.

The planter class investing money to build rail lines to oilfields in western Texas, to pull even more profit is the likelier scenario in my mind.

Shrewd capitalists.
 
There was also the El Dorado strike in Arkansas, mid 1920's, followed by Louisiana's Caddo Strike in the mid 1930's.

Both were bread and butter on my family's table. Great grandfather worked the former and my Grandad worked the latter. Grandad was excused by his local draft board in 1942, because he worked in geological survey for a major oil company.

The South provided the crude oil that allowed our country to beat back the Germans and the Japanese in World War II.

Connecticut, not so much.
Kern County California quite a bit.
Leftyhunter
 
The Confederate Constitution really did go far in hampering industrial development. That didn't exactly stop private investors from propping it up in places where they could.

The planter class investing money to build rail lines to oilfields in western Texas, to pull even more profit is the likelier scenario in my mind.

Shrewd capitalists.
How exactly did the Confederate Constitution hamper industrial development with of course the caveat there was a war on? On one hand the Confederate Constitution lowered tarriff's but on the other hand the Confederate Congress imposed high tarriff's. The American South would industrialize the same way the South Africans did and that is by foreign investment and foreign licensing. Eventually the South Africans could do industrial development up to world class standards on their own.
The white population of South Africa was even much smaller then the white population of the American South yet they still were successful at industialization without slavery.
Leftyhunter
 
The Confederate Constitution really did go far in hampering industrial development. That didn't exactly stop private investors from propping it up in places where they could.

Except for the fact that the Confederate Constitution contained certain protections for slavery, which would certainly not encourage industrial development, what other aspects of that Constitution hampered development? For that matter, did the US Constitution explicitly encourage industrial development, or did the democratic institutions that it established lay the groundwork for encouraging private enterprise?
 
Except for the fact that the Confederate Constitution contained certain protections for slavery, which would certainly not encourage industrial development, what other aspects of that Constitution hampered development? For that matter, did the US Constitution explicitly encourage industrial development, or did the democratic institutions that it established lay the groundwork for encouraging private enterprise?
How exactly did the Confederate Constitution hamper industrial development with of course the caveat there was a war on? On one hand the Confederate Constitution lowered tarriff's but on the other hand the Confederate Congress imposed high tarriff's. The American South would industrialize the same way the South Africans did and that is by foreign investment and foreign licensing. Eventually the South Africans could do industrial development up to world class standards on their own.
The white population of South Africa was even much smaller then the white population of the American South yet they still were successful at industialization without slavery.
Leftyhunter

The Confederate Constitution's limitations on internal development and building in respects to commerce.

The only way, as I've always seen it, is that the Confederate States get's standardized railroads at the hands of defense spending.
 
How exactly did the Confederate Constitution hamper industrial development with of course the caveat there was a war on? On one hand the Confederate Constitution lowered tarriff's but on the other hand the Confederate Congress imposed high tarriff's. The American South would industrialize the same way the South Africans did and that is by foreign investment and foreign licensing. Eventually the South Africans could do industrial development up to world class standards on their own.
The white population of South Africa was even much smaller then the white population of the American South yet they still were successful at industialization without slavery.
Leftyhunter
I think Desert Kid is mosly thinking of Article I, §8, Clause 3, which gives Congress the power to: "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes; but neither this, nor any other clause contained in the Constitution, shall ever be construed to delegate the power to Congress to appropriate money for any internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce; except for the purpose of furnishing lights, beacons, and buoys, and other aids to navigation upon the coasts, and the improvement of harbors and the removing of obstructions in river navigation; in all which cases such duties shall be laid on the navigation facilitated thereby as may be necessary to pay the costs and expenses thereof."
 
I think Desert Kid is mosly thinking of Article I, §8, Clause 3, which gives Congress the power to: "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes; but neither this, nor any other clause contained in the Constitution, shall ever be construed to delegate the power to Congress to appropriate money for any internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce; except for the purpose of furnishing lights, beacons, and buoys, and other aids to navigation upon the coasts, and the improvement of harbors and the removing of obstructions in river navigation; in all which cases such duties shall be laid on the navigation facilitated thereby as may be necessary to pay the costs and expenses thereof."
Also @Desert Kid
With a bit of Royal change of mind the Confederacy would realize that the above clause is what Southern folks would call " a really dumb idea". Nations that are successful in industrialization do what they got to do to actually industrialize.
Leftyhunter
 
Except for the fact that the Confederate Constitution contained certain protections for slavery, which would certainly not encourage industrial development, what other aspects of that Constitution hampered development? For that matter, did the US Constitution explicitly encourage industrial development, or did the democratic institutions that it established lay the groundwork for encouraging private enterprise?
Alexander Hamilton wrote" a report on manufactures" where he argued for high tarriff's especially in military industries to encourage industrial and military self sufficency. Obviously by the ACW that idea fell into disuse as both sides (the Union side up until maybe late 1862) were heavily dependent on importing military grade rifles and parts especially rifled musket barrels.
Leftyhunter
 
Last edited:
Alexander Hamilton wrote" a report on manufactures" where he argued for high tarriff's especially in military industries to encourage industrial and military self sufficency. Obviously by the ACW that idea fell into disuse as both sides (the Union side up until maybe late 1862) were heavily dependent on importing military grade rifles and parts especially rifled musket barrels.
Leftyhunter

Well it was still popular, especially in the north as tariffs to support northern manufacturer's were another bugbear the south had with Washington. It simply hadn't gone on long enough to have much impact yet.

Also since the US maintained a very small military there wasn't really the basis for a large armament industry. As such when there was suddenly a huge demand for military firearms both sides were caught very short and highly dependent on imports for the 1st year or so in the north and the duration of the conflict in the south.
 
Back
Top