Life on other planets and religion

Economics was the core. While the issues you state were contributors, those issues were an added political conversation to enhance the positions of the opposing parties, to gain the needed support of their respective constituency. Without slavery, the South would not have tobacco or cotton, the economic engines of their States. The South pointed to the issues France experienced.

Costs of labor, tariffs, tolls, customs, all controlled by the North, and the inability of the South to compete with the North in business without slavery because of same, was a deal breaker, and the North position was that the South held an unfair advantage because slave labor was impossible to compete against.

The Dredd Scott Decision in 1857 was a catalyst that both the Democrats and the Republicans used to further their economic arguments, and the Democrats expanded the Decision to a Property Rights argument and then, with the advent of the Missouri Compromise, the South saw an expansion of the economic tool as being able to expand slavery, and the economic and political power base of the South and of course the North held the opposite position.

It is not insignificant that Buchanan illegally interfered with SCOTUS Dredd Scott Decision and this tainted the entire argument of the South and rephrased it as a political battle.

That is what my wife told me. I am forced to agree. The consequences of not doing so are scary.

 

slavery just happened to be something states wanted ya see...

 

Different times. Different mindsets. Different standards. You cannot judge the behaviors of past generations based on 21st century standards.

 

a lot of people knew slavery was wrong back then. good decent people. look into it.

 

I’ve read the Federalists Papers, have you?

 

The economic system of Slavery was foisted on the South by the industrial North who needed more raw materials for their factories. After 300 years, it's not something you can end by simply throwing a light switch. Slavery was like Afghanistan is today. It's not "that" slavery ended, but "how" slavery ended.

 

"the north made us have slaves"

 

Correct. Before Jamestown was established, the Patuxet People of Massachusetts were kidnapped and sold as slaves.

To assist you, child, Massachusetts is in the North, and Jamestown VA. is in the South.

 

Actually, it was the British...since we were all British subjects at the time. Slavery was a well established economic system of the day and used extensively by the British in the Caribbean region. African tribes had prisoners they would either kill or sell as slaves. British industrialists needed workers to produce raw materials and slaves were all the African's had to trade. I'm sure the British saw this as a humanitarian enterprise for the most part.

Slaves in the Caribbean worked in horrendous conditions. However, most slaves in the colonies were treated better than non-slaves. If there was dangerous work to be done, the slave owner didn't risk a $10,000 slave...he used an Irishman, instead. It's interesting to note that a great deal of African-Americans today have Irish surnames. While some former slaves adopted the surnames of their masters, many former slaves adopted the surnames of the free people they worked alongside...the Irish.

The first slaves in the Colonies were indentured servants...the same as Benjamin Franklin and every other poor person coming from Europe...and released after seven (7) years of service. Being in a strange land with different climate, language, and culture...African indentured servants found it best to keep working for the same master. The indentured servitude part faded away over time and morphed into straight slavery. Generational slavery only developed because slaves in the colonies were treated so well relative to the rest of the World.

Yes, slavery is bad by today's standards...but it wasn't seen so bad back when everyone had it bad. It was viewed by many as a good and necessary activity...much like welfare is viewed today. You can't judge history without considering what came before. Instead of relitigating the past, why don't we focus on 21st century slavery right here in the United States...the slavery imposed when we don't control our borders and immigration process. While we're at it, let's end the slavery of government "Welfare".

 

Back in 1700's Africa, it was "sell your brother for a buck".

Today in 2000's Chicago, it's "shoot your brother for a buck".

Family values . . . sigh.

 

it was the black man's fault because they stole the slaves to sell. nice one archie bunker

 

Okay smartass, tell me which end of the problem to attack, supply or demand?

To address the drug problem should we be incarcerating the producers or the users?

You can't have it both ways . . . even though you think you can.

 

Who's to blame for 21st century slavery?

 

Whichever they can make a catchy one line meme from. That is the one they will go with.

 

You should read up on the "Triangle Trade". Wealthy British industrialists settled in the north while the poorer farmers migrated south in search of a longer growing season. The North needed raw materials produced by the South and new markets for their goods. African slaves checked both boxes. The North simply said, "We'll buy your goods if you buy our slaves".

The British model...


The American model...

 

why would you incarcerate users? I really expect a more thoughtful reply from you.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This coming from Repeaterboy . . . He who doesn’t even know what a thoughtful reply is.

 

Case in Point

 

how's that ankle meat taste?