How Long Do You Think Slavery Would've Lasted Had the Civil War Gone the Other Way

[kingblaze84]

Mass slavery definitely would have ended but not due to slave revolts. All slave revolts in America failed so I don't see where you guys are getting the historical precedence for your speculations on the southern insistution of slavery being totally abolished.

Economic forces would have made slavery too expensive and wasteful so it would have ended anyway. Why feed and house a field slave when you can just buy a tractor??? But had the csa won I wouldn't put it pass the confederates, after the civil war they would simply have culled the slave population reducing it's population to a more manageable level.

Also depending on when the csa wins the war, the damage to their infrastructure could have been negligible.

You are probably right that the Confederacy would have cut down its slave population to make it a more manageable amount, after all the soldiers they lost in the Civil War, they would have had no choice. It's why I think slavery would have still had a good run there, till the 1880s or 1890s. Probably 1890s.

 

[The_Jackal]

I dont think it would have lasted too much longer. Maybe 1920 1930s. Segregation though is a better question.

 

[StillFaggyAF]

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldn't happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight. by the end of the Civil War, plantation output damn near stopped with slaves abandoning and leaving. by the 1870s, the first northern/western migration waves had started

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

 

[zzombie]

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

 

[Stiff]

I dont think it would have lasted too much longer. Maybe 1920 1930s. Segregation though is a better question.

Lol to the 1920s or 30s isn't much longer to you?

If Apartheid could last until the 90s in South Africa I could see Jim Crow easily going just as long in an independent Confederate States of America

I think if the CSA would have survived that it would have also slowed the freeing of Africa from colonialism as well…if I'm not mistaken the USA was beginning to put pressure on UK and France to free it's colonies. A USA divided wouldn't have had as much strength to impose its wills/values on the European countries.

 

[IgboNegro]

Probably until the 1920s at the latest, I think other western powers would influence the CSA to abolish slavery; most western powers had no slavery by the early 1900s.

 

[Will Munny]

its crazy how all these rednecks become civil war experts now that the flag is getting taken down in SC.

 

[StillFaggyAF]

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

 

[zzombie]

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

The csa would not have given a fuck truthfully these people wanted slavery period And we're willing to die for it.

It was the central value of the whole society.

You think a little pressure from the u.k would mean something to these people but I doubt it. If anything they would have increased economic ties with other slave holding nations.

 

[StillFaggyAF]

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

The csa would not have given a fuck truthfully these people wanted slavery period And we're willing to die for it.

It was the central value of the whole society.

You think a little pressure from the u.k would mean something to these people but I doubt it. If anything they would have increased economic ties with other slave holding nations.

UK pressured all the nations in Africa and N and S America to end the slave trade and abolish slavery. why would the CSA be any different?

 

[zzombie]

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

The csa would not have given a fuck truthfully these people wanted slavery period And we're willing to die for it.

It was the central value of the whole society.

You think a little pressure from the u.k would mean something to these people but I doubt it. If anything they would have increased economic ties with other slave holding nations.

UK pressured all the nations in Africa and N and S America to end the slave trade and abolish slavery. why would the CSA be any different?

Go read what the people who created the csa said about slavery and you will understand. Under no circumstances would the csa have given into pressure from the UK to end slavery.

The nations that bowed to pressure from the u.k weren't willing to die to keep slavery alive. The confederates however were more than willing to do so

 

[Stiff]

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

The csa would not have given a fuck truthfully these people wanted slavery period And we're willing to die for it.

It was the central value of the whole society.

You think a little pressure from the u.k would mean something to these people but I doubt it. If anything they would have increased economic ties with other slave holding nations.

UK pressured all the nations in Africa and N and S America to end the slave trade and abolish slavery. why would the CSA be any different?

Go read what the people who created the csa said about slavery and you will understand. Under no circumstances would the csa have given into pressure from the UK to end slavery.

The nations that bowed to pressure from the u.k weren't willing to die to keep slavery alive. The confederates however were more than willing to do so

Cosign this and also there's a difference between slavery being phased out because it's no longer as profitable…and it being ABOLISHED.

 

[zzombie]

Economic sanctions don't work now they probably wouldn't have worked in the 1800's either.

 

[StillFaggyAF]

Economic sanctions don't work now they probably wouldn't have worked in the 1800's either.

So how do you think CSA would survive as country? their whole economy is based on cotton

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

The csa would not have given a fuck truthfully these people wanted slavery period And we're willing to die for it.

It was the central value of the whole society.

You think a little pressure from the u.k would mean something to these people but I doubt it. If anything they would have increased economic ties with other slave holding nations.

UK pressured all the nations in Africa and N and S America to end the slave trade and abolish slavery. why would the CSA be any different?

Go read what the people who created the csa said about slavery and you will understand. Under no circumstances would the csa have given into pressure from the UK to end slavery.

The nations that bowed to pressure from the u.k weren't willing to die to keep slavery alive. The confederates however were more than willing to do so

 

[lilteencreole]

I do not think it would of last for much longer. First of all, there was the increasing industrialization of the economy in the United States/Europe where they were getting their resources not agriculturally but from factories. It was starting to make it's dependency (slavery) obsolete and no longer needed for that region when low wage workers was a more cheaper and efficient way of keeping up with the fastly advancing economy.

 

[zzombie]

Economic sanctions don't work now they probably wouldn't have worked in the 1800's either.

So how do you think CSA would survive as country? their whole economy is based on cotton

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

The csa would not have given a fuck truthfully these people wanted slavery period And we're willing to die for it.

It was the central value of the whole society.

You think a little pressure from the u.k would mean something to these people but I doubt it. If anything they would have increased economic ties with other slave holding nations.

UK pressured all the nations in Africa and N and S America to end the slave trade and abolish slavery. why would the CSA be any different?

Go read what the people who created the csa said about slavery and you will understand. Under no circumstances would the csa have given into pressure from the UK to end slavery.

The nations that bowed to pressure from the u.k weren't willing to die to keep slavery alive. The confederates however were more than willing to do so

the csa would eventually have had to stop or reduce farm slavery for the economic reasons i already explained. the csa produced more than cotton they produced all sorts of agricultural products

the csa would eventually have industrialized and they would have spread west at this point farm slavery/mass slavery would have continued but every year as technology became better slavery would have been reduced until eventually most slaves would have been some kind of house slave/service slave

 

[StillFaggyAF]

Economic sanctions don't work now they probably wouldn't have worked in the 1800's either.

So how do you think CSA would survive as country? their whole economy is based on cotton

people love to forget that during the civil war, slaves rose up en masse. blacks didn't just toil on the plantations while whitey fought yankees

And after slavery ended many slaves still wanted to serve their masters.

not the majority. you really think the slaves in the South would be the only slave population to not rise up (which they did during the Civil War) ?

it does not have to be the majority a tiny minority is all that would be needed for slavery to continue well pass it's economic efficiency. remember the premise of the thread. As the csa continued they would have had no choice but to free most of the slaves anyway but a total abolishment would have taken decades

there was really never a chance for the Confederate states but to go along with the premise, well the only way CSA would have been able to successfully win and survive would have been with the support of the UK where slavery ended in the 1830s. UK would have pressured them to end slavery. and even if they didn't, the CSA wouldn't be able to (and couldn't IRL) stop the flow of slaves walking over into the North, even if the CSA and USA had some agreement to repatriate fugitive slaves, the North American continent is vast and there were many unclaimed territories that former slaves could go to. also, something like 30-50% of the South was slaves at the time so if 30-50% are in revolt, i don't see how the institution of slavery would have survived even if a large minority still wanted to be slaves (which they didn't). The CSA was in shambles during and after the war and would have to fight an insurgency by slaves

In addition, slaves could have organized and gotten support from outside nations (US, Latin American/Caribbean countries, possibly France etc)

I just don't see a case where the CSA survives unless it became a protectorate/proxy state of the UK and if that was the case it would end slavery too

I think you are underestimating how much these people wanted there slaves. If the csa had won at Gettysburg or Manassas as the confederates they called it , then the csa could very well have survived. Brazil continued slavery for a long time after it ended in both the UK and America I see NO reason why the csa would have bowed to pressure from the UK. Especially after fighting a bloody war to keep their slaves.

Frankly any slave revolt in the United states was doomed to failure. Geographical America is not like Haiti, Jamaica or Brazil there's no jungle mountains to hide in and the only nation willing to help would have been Haiti. where are the slaves in the getting the guns,bullets, and medicine from.

I don't have any faith in France or the UK helping slaves and blacks running to the west would surely die being in unfamiliar territory surrounded by native people who also didn't necessarily like us or want us on their land.

the Appalachian Mountains run through the south and have long been a hiding spot for slaves and natives fleeing whites

i think your estimate of slavery ending in 1930s and your opinion that slave revolts wouldnt happen (they did) in the US is very pessimistic ,frankly i think you underestimate the American slave population or think they were all scared coons that sat on the plantations while the South fought the North. remember in the US, there was barely any manumission or a free black/colored population like in the Caribbean/South America so blacks would have no chance but to fight.

and its almost 100% likely the UK would pressure the South to give up slavery within a decade because a) popular opinion b)chattel slavery was becoming archaic; slavery provided too much competition to the British cotton industry

The appalachian mountains provided an escape route to the north, but for a successful slave revolt to be sustained into a full blow rebellion the geography of the place has to be able to provide substance for a population while under pressure.

For example my ancestors in jamaica and the communities of escaped slaves in places like brazil were able to be successful only because the places where we hid also allowed for us to live there and have a some what stable population. Appalachia snows and the land is not as fruitful nor is it as easy to hide in when compared to a mountainous jungle in brazil, jamaica or suriname.

i never said slave revolts would not happen within north america, they did happen and pretty much they all failed, so if the csa won i am sure there would have been more revolts but they would have failed because they had a track record of failure. The uk would not have pressured the csa at all they did not pressure brazil or france and french slavery persisted in some of their colonies after the civil war in america had been finished. And even if the uk pressured the csa i doubt the confederates would have given a fuck.

these people really really wanted their slaves and they had plans to expand it into mexico and other areas of southern america. these people were not going to just let go of slavery because of pressure from england
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

but the thing is the UK DID pressure France and them....France reinstated slavery in the French colonies by 1802/1803 but ended it by 1848. all independent Latin American nations (except Brazil) had also ended slavery too before the civil war

there's also the Chinese/Indian/Javanese indentured servitude trade that began around this time

and like i said, the only way CSA would be able to survive is with the recognition and help of UK and other Euro nations...they had no allies in the Western Hemisphere

The csa would not have given a fuck truthfully these people wanted slavery period And we're willing to die for it.

It was the central value of the whole society.

You think a little pressure from the u.k would mean something to these people but I doubt it. If anything they would have increased economic ties with other slave holding nations.

UK pressured all the nations in Africa and N and S America to end the slave trade and abolish slavery. why would the CSA be any different?

Go read what the people who created the csa said about slavery and you will understand. Under no circumstances would the csa have given into pressure from the UK to end slavery.

The nations that bowed to pressure from the u.k weren't willing to die to keep slavery alive. The confederates however were more than willing to do so

the csa would eventually have had to stop or reduce farm slavery for the economic reasons i already explained. the csa produced more than cotton they produced all sorts of agricultural products

the csa would eventually have industrialized and they would have spread west at this point farm slavery/mass slavery would have continued but every year as technology became better slavery would have been reduced until eventually most slaves would have been some kind of house slave/service slave

CSA was completely dependant on cotton exports for money. thats like saying pre-Castro Cuba wasn't dependent on sugar cmon

 

[zzombie]

@AggyAF

the south made and sold more than just cotton, cotton was just there major export and in any case after the war both the north and south would have been economically fucked up. I doubt the north would have refused to buy southern goods nor would they have wanted to buy the more expensive produce coming from the european powers. and depending on how the war ended they would have had no choice in the matter they would have had to buy southern products.

 

[The_Jackal]

I dont think it would have lasted too much longer. Maybe 1920 1930s. Segregation though is a better question.

Lol to the 1920s or 30s isn't much longer to you?

If Apartheid could last until the 90s in South Africa I could see Jim Crow easily going just as long in an independent Confederate States of America

I think if the CSA would have survived that it would have also slowed the freeing of Africa from colonialism as well…if I'm not mistaken the USA was beginning to put pressure on UK and France to free it's colonies. A USA divided wouldn't have had as much strength to impose its wills/values on the European countries.

It is longer but I'm just saying as far as the grand scale of things that it wouldn't be that longer. And lol us wasn't putting no pressure on the uk. UK was already in that process and had been outlawed slavery/segregation specifically England.

 

[king hassan]

Who knows there was black folks enslaved in Mississippi until the 1970s. I mean think about our parents generation.

But the Geechee were fighting and getting other enslaved to fight back so who knows.

Huh

They would trick people in those small cities back into slavery, more like chatel slavery