Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
Technology was ending it rapidly. Are you suggesting that without Lincoln slavery Wouk seems still exist ? England ended it 3 decades sooner. It was on its last legs.
The emancipation proclamation had no authority in the south.
Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
Technology was ending it rapidly. Are you suggesting that without Lincoln slavery Wouk seems still exist ? England ended it 3 decades sooner. It was on its last legs.
The emancipation proclamation had no authority in the south.
What are you talking about relating to technology? Cotton was still picked by hand for like 100 years after the civil war. The southern sharecropping system in much of the 20th century didn’t look much different from slavery in terms of how the crop was planted and harvested.
Additionally, you yourself in another thread implied to immense cost involved to the British treasury in emancipating just a few Caribbean slaves. And that this might have been unworkable on the scale needed in the US.
I’m not saying slavery would have lasted to well into the 20th century so don’t fucking twist. But it wasn’t anywhere close to being dead in 1860. Shit in Brazil it lasted till 1888.
Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
England was circling for a rematch of 1776 and was already supportive of the CSA. The limey textile mills needed the South’s cotton and their own de facto slaves.
Honest Abe checkmated the moral high ground by bringing the Union wholly against slavery and in line with British public sentiment had they been forced to choose sides. It effectively took the Brits out of the picture for the remainder of the war.
Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
Technology was ending it rapidly. Are you suggesting that without Lincoln slavery Wouk seems still exist ? England ended it 3 decades sooner. It was on its last legs.
The emancipation proclamation had no authority in the south.
What are you talking about relating to technology? Cotton was still picked by hand for like 100 years after the civil war. The southern sharecropping system in much of the 20th century didn’t look much different from slavery in terms of how the crop was planted and harvested.
Additionally, you yourself in another thread implied to immense cost involved to the British treasury in emancipating just a few Caribbean slaves. And that this might have been unworkable on the scale needed in the US.
I’m not saying slavery would have lasted to well into the 20th century so don’t fucking twist. But it wasn’t anywhere close to being dead in 1860. Shit in Brazil it lasted till 1888.
It was on it’s way out. Not just cotton picking machines. The industrial revolution was starting. The distaste for slavery was growing rapidly. You probably think child labor laws ended child labor....
Wouldn’t the cost to the treasury been preferable to a brutal war. The most costly and deadly in our history?
Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
Technology was ending it rapidly. Are you suggesting that without Lincoln slavery Wouk seems still exist ? England ended it 3 decades sooner. It was on its last legs.
The emancipation proclamation had no authority in the south.
What are you talking about relating to technology? Cotton was still picked by hand for like 100 years after the civil war. The southern sharecropping system in much of the 20th century didn’t look much different from slavery in terms of how the crop was planted and harvested.
Additionally, you yourself in another thread implied to immense cost involved to the British treasury in emancipating just a few Caribbean slaves. And that this might have been unworkable on the scale needed in the US.
I’m not saying slavery would have lasted to well into the 20th century so don’t fucking twist. But it wasn’t anywhere close to being dead in 1860. Shit in Brazil it lasted till 1888.
It was on it’s way out. Not just cotton picking machines. The industrial revolution was starting. The distaste for slavery was growing rapidly. You probably think child labor laws ended child labor....
Wouldn’t the cost to the treasury been preferable to a brutal war. The most costly and deadly in our history?
Of course the cost to the treasury would have far more preferable than the war but that’s with the benefit of hindsight. Distaste for slavey was growing but not that much. Shit a hell of a lot of northern congress members voted against the 13th Ammendment even in 1865.
Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
Technology was ending it rapidly. Are you suggesting that without Lincoln slavery Wouk seems still exist ? England ended it 3 decades sooner. It was on its last legs.
The emancipation proclamation had no authority in the south.
What are you talking about relating to technology? Cotton was still picked by hand for like 100 years after the civil war. The southern sharecropping system in much of the 20th century didn’t look much different from slavery in terms of how the crop was planted and harvested.
Additionally, you yourself in another thread implied to immense cost involved to the British treasury in emancipating just a few Caribbean slaves. And that this might have been unworkable on the scale needed in the US.
I’m not saying slavery would have lasted to well into the 20th century so don’t fucking twist. But it wasn’t anywhere close to being dead in 1860. Shit in Brazil it lasted till 1888.
It was on it’s way out. Not just cotton picking machines. The industrial revolution was starting. The distaste for slavery was growing rapidly. You probably think child labor laws ended child labor....
Wouldn’t the cost to the treasury been preferable to a brutal war. The most costly and deadly in our history?
Of course the cost to the treasury would have far more preferable than the war but that’s with the benefit of hindsight. Distaste for slavey was growing but not that much. Shit a hell of a lot of northern congress members voted against the 13th Ammendment even in 1865.
Sounds like the Democrats and HondoBros voting against the civil rights act of 1964.
Violating a person’s natural rights is never ok. Ever. Under any circumstances
The South never gave Lincoln a chance even though he made a point of not interfering in slavery status quo. Damone s argument is defective. For one thing, slavery was not being eclipsed at all ...the South wanted to keep it going west!
The South never gave Lincoln a chance even though he made a point of not interfering in slavery status quo. Damone s argument is defective. For one thing, slavery was not being eclipsed at all ...the South wanted to keep it going west!
Huh? Lincoln and the Republican Party only wanted to stop spread of slavery and had no plans to eliminate where it already existed. He even said he would have kept slavery to preserve the Union. And they still seceded in spite of this and then proceeded to start the war by firing on federal property. So what makes you think it was on the way out in 1860?
Technology was ending it rapidly. Are you suggesting that without Lincoln slavery Wouk seems still exist ? England ended it 3 decades sooner. It was on its last legs.
The emancipation proclamation had no authority in the south.
What are you talking about relating to technology? Cotton was still picked by hand for like 100 years after the civil war. The southern sharecropping system in much of the 20th century didn’t look much different from slavery in terms of how the crop was planted and harvested.
Additionally, you yourself in another thread implied to immense cost involved to the British treasury in emancipating just a few Caribbean slaves. And that this might have been unworkable on the scale needed in the US.
I’m not saying slavery would have lasted to well into the 20th century so don’t fucking twist. But it wasn’t anywhere close to being dead in 1860. Shit in Brazil it lasted till 1888.
It was on it’s way out. Not just cotton picking machines. The industrial revolution was starting. The distaste for slavery was growing rapidly. You probably think child labor laws ended child labor....
Wouldn’t the cost to the treasury been preferable to a brutal war. The most costly and deadly in our history?
Of course the cost to the treasury would have far more preferable than the war but that’s with the benefit of hindsight. Distaste for slavey was growing but not that much. Shit a hell of a lot of northern congress members voted against the 13th Ammendment even in 1865.
Just like today, the NYC Dems of Tammany Hall hated the blacks and voted against Lincoln. The Irish didn’t want the competition for low skilled jobs from the freed slaves.
Timothy Egan has a good book called The Immortal Irishman that goes into great detail on immigration, the Irish and their role in the draft riots among other things.
Comments
The emancipation proclamation had no authority in the south.
Additionally, you yourself in another thread implied to immense cost involved to the British treasury in emancipating just a few Caribbean slaves. And that this might have been unworkable on the scale needed in the US.
I’m not saying slavery would have lasted to well into the 20th century so don’t fucking twist. But it wasn’t anywhere close to being dead in 1860. Shit in Brazil it lasted till 1888.
Honest Abe checkmated the moral high ground by bringing the Union wholly against slavery and in line with British public sentiment had they been forced to choose sides. It effectively took the Brits out of the picture for the remainder of the war.
Wouldn’t the cost to the treasury been preferable to a brutal war. The most costly and deadly in our history?
Violating a person’s natural rights is never ok. Ever. Under any circumstances
Timothy Egan has a good book called The Immortal Irishman that goes into great detail on immigration, the Irish and their role in the draft riots among other things.
All anyone needs to know.
Sorry. New phone.