• Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    There’s lots of countries that ended slavery without a war. Some via external diplomatic pressure, some via internal societal pressure.

    As far as I understand it (I’m not a historian or American) the confederacy being economically weaker than the union was a significant factor in the civil war.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      being economically weaker than the union was a significant factor in the civil war.

      They were economically weaker because they were a one trick pony. Slaves producing cash crops was extremely effective at creating a vast amount of wealth for plantation owners, which is why they didn’t diversify their economy at all. This meant they didn’t have a manufacturing capacity anywhere near the north, but per capita had a lot more ultra wealthy individuals.

      It just wasn’t an economy that was suited for war unless they could purchase outside aid. Which is why Lincoln went so hard in the paint and declaring anyone country who materially aided the south would instantly be at war with the Union.

    • LurkingLuddite@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      You’re right, but that just shows how shitty the US, and humanity as a whole, still is.

      People wanting to be lazy fucks exploiting others is older than history.

      That doesn’t magically make slavery unprofitable: It’s VERY profitable to the douchebags exploiting it! Zero labor for profit? Are you insane?!

      The selling point from a mindless shitstain perspective is obvious.