>tfw finally took the southern pill after years of hating

>pure Aryan
>import millions of sub-Saharan Africans and then have children with them

If the south is the "only pure American culture," that makes America pretty shitty, since the south is unambiguously the worst part of America by just about any objective measure. Fortunately, that's nonsense.

>>2608242
>pure American
Spooky

>>2608281
have you ever been there though? "the south sucks" meme is just that, a meme perpetuated by the media

>>2608242
It's true American culture had always been retarded

File: 1490647915150.jpg (36KB, 612x667px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 612x667px

>>2608242
>civil war was about racism and not tariffs that would benefit industrial north and harm agrarian south
It's like a shit test for brainlets

If your culture is about using a race of people as farm equipment you deserve to have it burned down.

>>2608313
Why did the North want to cripple the South economically? I don't understand that.

No wonder the South fucking split

>>2608331
so judaism with their whole goyim = cattle thing

>>2608292
>have you ever been there though?

Yes, sadly. It's not just a meme; it really is shitty.

>>2608331
nearly every culture was like this until the 19th century

>>2608292
This
IDK why, but everyone is friendly when I visit.

If he was saying it's shitty economically, that doesn't reflect culture.

>>2608335
>Why did the North want to cripple the South economically?

They didn't, obviously. Dixieboos are delusional.

>>2608242
Southern culture is derived from rural English, Scottish, and Irish culture.

>>2608346
>everyone is friendly

You mean polite, i.e. fake friendly.

>>2608350
>implying abolitionists didn't want to cripple the slave industry and by extension the South

>>2608340
where the fuck are you going that it's shitty

>>2608360
Not just that, my extended family over there has a big meet up every other week, while I have the same family in San Jose and we never meet like that. Not only politeness, I've noticed people are quicker to strike up meaningful conversation.

>>2608370

I see my extended family all the time and we live in New York.

>>2608242
I live in the south and I love it besides the Protestantism

>>2608383
Fair enough. An anecdote can be dismissed by one.

>>2608387
t. holy apostolic cuck

>>2608404
Can you really get mad at me for preferring this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyV01zXuW-A

instead of this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fyPQsizgmk

>>2608416
catholic mass doesn't activate my almonds enough honestly

>>2608425
There are some boring Catholic homilies and some interesting Protestant ones but at the end of the day, the presence of the body and blood of Christ are at every Catholic mass and absent from every Protestant service.

>>2608416
Where can you actually go into a catholic church and find this kind of Gregorian chanting stuff anymore? I was raised Catholic and went to mass every Sunday but we never had any of this cool shit.

I would unironically start going to church again if there was some kind of cool chanting involved like in this video

>>2608445
Google for traditional latin masses in your area. I live in a hick town and there's a Catholic parish that serves the TLM every Sunday night. It's the most beautiful building in the whole town too

>>2608335
Protectionism in the north to develop their industry against competitive british goods. Southerners wanted them down to be able to sell their cotton.
>Dallas Tariff 1816 (high import/tax on transactions with britain)
>1828 abomination tariff
>1830 &32 black tariffs and nullification crisis
>1833 compromise tariff (back to 20%)
>1842 tariff (north raises it back to 40% in some states, average nationwide is 32%)
>1845 walker tariff (reduced to 25%, inventory based with extra luxury tax on specific goods)
>1857 tariff (reduction to 20% - panic of 1857 in the north as glibal markets connect & autocorrect themselves)
>1861 morrill tariff (tariff raised back to abovd 33% on average)
Civil War kicks in the same year.

>>2608350
HEAVY TARIFFS BECAUSE WE'RE UNCOMPETITIVE AND WANT TO STOP THE FLOW OF EUROPEAN GOODS IS JUST A MEME BRO

>>2608458
>go to traditional latin mass
>can't understand a word

SHEEEEET

>>2608458
none near me

might as well KMS

>>2608465
the missals have latin on one side and the english translation on the other ya doof

>>2608465
>he isn't fluent in Latin, Ancient Greek, French, Arabic, Mandarin, Hindi, and Ghetto

every human that has ever lived is in fact retarded

>>2608472
>tfw no gizoogle mass


Deliver us, Lord, we pray, from every last muthafuckin evil,
graciously grant peace up in our days,
that, by tha help of yo' mercy,
we may be always free from sin
and safe from all distress,
as we await tha pimped hope
and tha comin of our Savior, Jizzy Christ.

>>2608242
but forreal I love soul food, college football, and the weather and the /comfyness/

>>2608470
>negroes speak english
lhmao

>>2608255
this. I mean so many people in the south have non-european genes it's hilarious

>>2608242
I am not even trying to hate on the South, but if your only argument for why it is a good place is that it is the most "American" then you don't really have an argument. You are just saying that the poorest sections of country are the most real because immigrants move where the jobs are.

>>2608490
>culture means nothing goyim

File: 1476876799982.jpg (94KB, 826x700px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 826x700px

>>2608242
It's too late. the culture of southern hospitality is dying. The youth reject it and only the rich have the privilege of living in all white neighborhoods these days. All the quaint little middle class towns are experiencing white flight and the crime is going up. People don't trust their neighbors like they used to. You used to see dozens of kids playing outside on any given day, they hardly come outside anymore. People everywhere are more jaded and guarded, they're acting like yankees. They're losing their accents. Everywhere is becoming like everywhere else and there's no stopping it. Please don't prolong our suffering any more. Just pull the plug and knock down the rest of the confederate statues. This land is dead.

There's several reasons for the civil war that isn't slavery but problem is that all those reasons would disappear if there wasn't any slavery.

by antebellum slave-worked cotton plantations was the only agricultural economy that wasn't completely overtaken by industrialization so without it the south would simply be absorbed into the industrial economy (kinda like what happened after the civil war) so laws that benefit industrial economy over agriculture (like tariffs) wouldn't be an issue.

autism over what is slave and what is a free state created factionalism between the two sides leading to the north-south dynamic and all the bullshit compromises and issues on which state the trains will run through leading to shit like the Kansas-Nebraska act.

all of this just to keep slavery in a country that constantly is all about "muh freedoms"

>>2608242
>respecting shitty values
>respecting shitty faith
>respecting shitty culture
>respecting shitty traditions

>>2608255
It's says American you dink

good
heres some music

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24oBuuuWkXc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RKtIgkMBQ4&list=RD24oBuuuWkXc&index=12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKih6b7IssA&index=19&list=RD24oBuuuWkXc


(1/2)
Anyway yeah any you're right and any perceptive and culturally aware person should have noticed this. Also incidentally the north's victory was a genuine missed opportunity for the inclusion of the african-american culture into the american nationality, and further, the american nationality as a thing that actually exists in a sincere form. Not necessarily because the north won, but because of what the north (the US) represents. The justification for the US' government was a new, radical post-enlightenment experiment, and one can easily follow those founding values through to the logical conclusion and you get today, this entity whose "culture" is as you say influenced by mass european immigration assimilating together into a blob and diluting any original deep culture there ever was. It's inclusive of everybody and speaking of "american culture" is almost a taboo because you immediately get someone who mentions the immigration and the founding fathers and so on and so forth. We're open now not only to europe but to earth. Indians, chinese, africans, everybody comes here and contributes just a little more to the cultural greyness; and then of course there's the chicano cultures, which are just a product of living here and growing accustomed to english, they've long since lost their mexicanity and any cultural elements there are superficial, just like cultural elements of most of "white america".

>>2608681
(2/2)
If we were allowed to be more selective, if we had this thing that we could speak of called american nationality, then we could selectively include other cultures. African-americans are a true nationality, influenced by the anglo-american protestant settler culture and therefrom they got their accents, religion, etc. That settler culture doesn't exist anymore, except, as you've noted, in some parts of the south. It's not considered any more "truly" american than some ashkenzai-descended person from long island who generally fits into the vague "white america" or just "american". If it did exist and was the legitimate culture of the country, we might be able to have included native americans as well as blacks into the nation in a sincere way. It's just that the US is in such a horrible position of political and ideological dominance in the world that it represents far more than itself; it represents this epoch, the age of globalization. It committed cultural suicide by its very inception. Very sad shit.

File: dont_cry_pupperino.jpg (34KB, 330x218px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 330x218px

>>2608242
tfw you're from the south but everyone disagrees cause you're from florida

>>2608242
>lived in Alabama whole life
>it sucks

the south sucks. the nature is pretty though.

>>2608366
not him but i've been to four of them
florida is just awful
north carolina's scenery is comfy as fuck but the politics are hilariously bad
hated almost every inch of texas
virginia is pretty nice save for a few areas

Fake News. Southern culture comes from the Celtic fringe area of Europe, an insecure, low educated, high risk taking culture.

Really the only people who had success in the South either came from the North or were trained by people who came from the North.

The idea that its this bastion of pure Americanism is not only false, but should be offensive.

>white skin
>Blue eyes
>Muscular body
>Freedom builder
>Not retarded

>>2608242
Southern culture is heavily influenced by Spanish settlers and later French ones. The whole cowboy shit is basically Iberian cattle herder culture.

>>2608346
something interesting is in Florida, the closer you get to a population center, the bitchier people get

Like people in Starke or Palatka (which are both aesthetically beautiful) are 100000x nicer and friendlier than people in Orlando or Tampa, even Gainsville is a bitch haven because of the university there, the non student citizens though are lovely

>>2608716
Yeah that's called an honor culture. I'm not even southern and I find it offensive that effete cosmopolitan dilettantes feel entitled to spout faggot shit like your post because they know they won't get smacked in the mouth anymore.

>>2608242
patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel

>>2608691
I vote that flordia get it's own yankee dixie classification, thefuckingworste

>>2608716
>european migrants of the 16th-17th-18th century were still influenced by celtic culture
KYS

>>2608255
this

>>2608416
>le wrong generation XD

kill yourself

>>2608573
>so without it the south would simply be absorbed into the industrial economy (kinda like what happened after the civil war) so laws that benefit industrial economy over agriculture (like tariffs) wouldn't be an issue.

The southern economy was strong before the war. They accounted for nearly 60% of all american exports. The south was industrializing, just not at the pace of the north for various reasons. The idea that the existence of slavery hampers industrialization is nonsense, if anything it was hurt by the southern climate and northern competition.

>>2608701
I used to believe this meme too, then I moved to the north and holy shit. The amount of white trash up there is about the same but they don't have the whole rustic hillbilly aesthetic. It's hard to explain how terrible they are.

>oligarchial aristocracy high society based upon romanticised 18th century Europe
>uniquely American culture
Fuck off. Dixiefags were dirty Euroboos.

>>2608313
Nah Cletus. It was just about Slavery.

>>2609640
>what is the corwin amendment

>>2608759
ocala/gainesville here

File: 71a+zogN0YL[1].jpg (248KB, 1200x1800px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1200x1800px

With the exponential increase in technology and automation I think the wage economy is dying out. Maybe we should start studying the old south for ideas on how the future might end up. I ordered pic related on amazon a couple days ago.

>tfw 30 years from now I will be out on my veranda wearing a linen suit and sipping a mint julep while watching my automations harvest my crops

>>2609630
>Dixiefags
>Euroboos

meanwhile every northern city street is lined with irish and italian flags.

>>2608713
>visited the least Southern states in the South
>hates them
Not helping your case. Also before you cry that they are the south

>Florida
Only Rural North Florida is actually Southern. The rest of Florida is either Nueva Cuba or snowbirds. Urban Florida, in general, is a cesspool of nothingness.

>NoCa
Overrun by carpet baggers looking to get into industry as a good chunk of rust belt industry moved there. The politics you're complaining about is a result of conflict between Southerners and Carpet Baggers.

>Texas
They aren't South, they aren't West. They're just Texas. Texas is Texas.

>Virginia
Virginia has shifted considerably from it's Southern roots. Between the Navy and D.C. colonists, Virginia can be rightly counted out of anything Southern in the modern day.

Modern South is:

>Core states
Alabama
Mississippi
Louisiana
Rural Georgia
SCAR
Tennessee

>Periphery
Urban Georgia
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Kentucky
South Virginia
Rural North Florida
Missouri

>>2609696
Not him but
>the true south consists of the poorest, most crime-riddled region of America that peforms worst than other states from using up the federal budget to the STD epidemic

>>2609710
>remove niggers from the stats
>everything goes to average
Thanks for playing.

>>2608713
>NC politics are hilariously bad

NC is one of the fastest growing economies in the country. How is that bad politics? unless you're upset you can't wear a dress in a woman's bathroom.

>>2609711
So the deep south is a nigger colony.
Don't see how that suggests that it is still anything other than the shittiest part of America

>>2608569
The south is shit, the northern transplants are bringing actual civilization to this hellhole.

File: 1490789526169.jpg (8KB, 222x225px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 222x225px

>>2609640
Debunk this >>2608464

protip
>you literally cant

>be so butthurt about slavery that you secede
>North does nothing
>Attack a bunch of Union soldiers and storm a Union fort
>Invade Union territory along the border
>Union crushes you in war, gets you to stop being such cunts
>call it the War of Northern Aggression

Are Leeaboos the most delusional people on the planet?

File: 1486242820142.jpg (48KB, 290x332px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 290x332px

>>2609748
>Putting up tariffs on a hostile nation means you're trying to cripple the South economically

File: 1491096966219.gif (1MB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x300px

>>2609759
>britain is a hostile nation after ghent 1812

also
>The Tariff of 1816 (also known as the Dallas tariff) is notable as the first tariff passed by Congress with an explicit function of protecting U.S. manufactured items from overseas competition. Prior to the War of 1812, tariffs had primarily served to raise revenues to operate the national government. Another unique aspect of the tariff was the strong support it received from Northern states.
I'm sorry actual history doesn't make your self-righteousness as easily justifiable as before.

>>2609778
>britain is a hostile nation after ghent 1812
>Leeaboos will deny this obvious fact

>Look they raised a tariff to protect industry, obviously they were doing it to keep da Dixie man down!

With this understanding of economics, no wonder the South had no industry

>>2609746
>ohio
>bringing civilization anywhere

>>2609751
>North does nothing
>Invade Union territory along the border

are you memeing or do you actually believe this?

File: 1490880205910.png (345KB, 498x568px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 498x568px

>>2609793
>nuffin to do with muh uncompetitive north
>it's about da ebil brits xDDDDD

Here is more info
1816 tariff:
>Northern efforts to establish permanent protection in 1820, after tensions with Great Britain had eased, provoked a backlash among Southern legislators. The South consistently opposed protective tariffs during the remainder of the ante bellum period

1828
>Industries in the northern United States were being driven out of business by low-priced imported goods; the major goal of the tariff was to protect these industries by taxing those goods. The South, however, was harmed directly by having to pay higher prices on goods the region did not produce, and indirectly because reducing the exportation of British goods to the U.S. made it difficult for the British to pay for the cotton they imported from the South

1842 tariff
>In the summer of 1842 representatives from the northeastern manufacturing states began feeling electoral pressures for a tariff hike before the elections that fall and abandoned Clay's land disbursement program.

Walker tariff & 1857 Tarriffs
>In 1846 the Democrats enacted the Walker Tariff, cutting tariff rates substantially. The Democrats cut rates even further in the Tariff of 1857, which was highly favorable to the South.

1861 morrill tariff
The Panic of 1857 led to calls for protectionist tariff revision. Well-known economist Henry C. Carey blamed the Panic on the Tariff of 1857. His opinion was widely circulated in the high tariff (or "protectionist") media.
>It was the twelfth of seventeen planks in the platform of the incoming Republican Party, which had not yet been inaugurated, and it appealed to industrialists and factory workers as a way to foster rapid industrial growth

But yeah sure, it had nothing to do with the struggling industrial north.

>>2608437
Pretty sure protestants and Catholics have bread and wine bro

>>2608242
>Pure American
>Willingly left the American Union like pussies when they didn't get what they wanted.

someone post that meme image of religiousness in the south, education in the south, teen pregnancy in the south, etc

File: 979c6d1911a9427fef34a76ab26d8752.jpg (45KB, 378x562px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 378x562px

>>2609569
>The south was industrializing, just not at the pace of the north for various reasons

>>2609943
>le meme nigger
Should have picked cotton harder.

>>2609943
how is this an argument? some slave with a skin condition?

>>2609986
>skin condition
Anon...

>>2609826
>tfw live in ohio
>people talk shit about us all the time and I have no idea why

>>2609838
>it had nothing to do with the struggling industrial north.
Nobody said it didn´t. The claim was "Why did the North want to cripple the South economically? They didn´t." The argument was that the US put up tariffs simply to protect its infant industry, not because it wanted to cripple the Southern economy. Read the fucking thread before you post.

>>2609986
>skin condition

Is this bait?

>>2608360
>People were nice to me and followed social norms, and I was unable or unwilling to reciprocate these social niceties back to them, so eventually they got tired off my shit and it's all their fault

If any part of the country could be considered to have spawned "american culture" w/e the fuck that means it would probably be California, especially the southern part of the state.

>>2610046
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keloid

There's a reason that single picture shows up every time slavery is mentioned. He just had a weird skin reaction to a whipping, most don't look like that. It was the 19th century ffs, every child under 18 was being whipped.

>>2610036
Of course it wasn't intentional per se, but it was the effective result when two halves of the country are ruining diametrically opposed models of economy. Intent is all well and good but 45years of tariffs did piss off the south to the point they wanted to secede to preserve their economy.

Slavery was a godsend to the northern industrialists because it made propaganda against the south quite easy (and rightly so, it was a disgusting model).

>read the fucking thread
I have, I posted early saying it was a common oversimplification of the civil war to narrow it down to "muh fight against racism and slavery". The reality for the south wanting to split was not that, it was mainly to protect their cotton/agrarian economy.

We know this because if it was just about slavery, then the 1861 Corwin Agreement would have resolved the crisis. Truth is the corwin agreement would have done nothing to alleviate the tariffs that had been crippling the south's exports abroad for 45 years, therefore it was rejected. North would have had to lift the tariffs to prevent the war and that was not acceptable to the northern industrialists.

>>2610034
because every yankee transplant is from ohio and I wouldn't consider it anymore "civilized" than the south.

>>2610116
>but it was the effective result when two halves of the country are ruining diametrically opposed models of economy.
True, but that wasn't the original argument.

> The reality for the south wanting to split was not that, it was mainly to protect their cotton/agrarian economy.

If the Republican party with its platform of principles, the main feature of which is the abolition of slavery and, therefore, the destruction of the South, carries the country at the next Presidential election, shall we remain in the Union, or form a separate Confederacy? This is the great, grave issue. It is not who shall be President, it is not which party shall rule – it is a question of political and social existence.
—Alfred P. Aldrich

Our people have come to this on the question of slavery.
—Laurence Massillon Keitt, South Carolina secession debates

...increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery ...
—Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina, (December 24, 1860)

We prefer, however, our system of industry, by which labor and capital are identified in interest, and capital, therefore, protects labor–by which our population doubles every twenty years–by which starvation is unknown, and abundance crowns the land–by which order is preserved by unpaid police, and the most fertile regions of the world, where the white man cannot labor, are brought into usefulness by the labor of the African, and the whole world is blessed by our own productions. ... We ask you to join us, in forming a Confederacy of Slaveholding States.
—Convention of South Carolina, Address of the people of South Carolina to the people of the Slaveholding States, (December 25, 1860)

Yeah sure buddy.

File: 68ae59c91bf5c79c408b7e50fa314469ec6e6257ca7d975c24a116dc4561c5e6.jpg (22KB, 255x255px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 255x255px

>>2608479

>Jizzy Christ.

>>2610034
Because Ohio is a shithole thats basically West Pennsylvania

>>2610134
>True, but that wasn't the original argument.
See >>2608313
>civil war was about racism and not tariffs that would benefit industrial north and harm agrarian south
where does this say any of this was intentional? All it states is that the true underlying causes of the war were economic, and to dumb it down to "MUH RACISM" or "MUH FREEDUMBZ" to explain away the casus belli is top tier revisionism.

>...increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery ...
No fucking shit, the south was a slavery-backed agrarian economy. Obviously the opposition states (aka the northern states) were non-slaveholding states.

>—Alfred P. Aldrich Quote
Same shit as above really, the north did want to push the south away from its model so it would have no choice but to back their industrialism.

All your quotes are just quotes. As I said, if it was truly about protecting slavery alone then the Corwin Amendment of 1861 would have been accepted and solved the issue. Four random quotes are not enough to dismiss later proposed legislation which directly contradicts your argument.

Protecting slavery was not enough. It's the tariffs which were too much a threat to their economy and had been for 45years of continuous damage to the southern economy in the hopes of propping up the north.

And if the "muh noble, forward thinking north who stands against slavery n shieeet" argument is true, then why were they propose a law that would permit and protect slavery in order to appease the pro-secessionist southerners? Really makes your think, doesn't it.

that cotton ain't gonna pick itself

>>2608255
>those children turn out to be BBC ubermensch's even more superior than their cousins in Africa
U mad whiteboi?

File: IMG_0742.jpg (33KB, 207x346px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 207x346px

>>2608242
>Not imported from anywhere

Someday you'll have to accept that the south got the niggers of the Celtic fringe and passed their shit culture onto black slaves and they passed it down and down onto the blacks today.

File: 1485906268068.jpg (93KB, 614x998px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 614x998px

>>2610256
>tfw you are mulatto and can never be a true black supremacist
>tfw you will always be in brown or chocolate limbo
>tfw you can still play basketball or sell mixtapes so it's still kinda okay

>>2608242
The south sucks because you retards brought niggers and spics here. You don't see the north doing that shit.

File: 134895496.jpg (88KB, 1229x773px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1229x773px

>>2610273
>>2610273
Technically you only brought about 350-450k.

http://www.slavevoyages.org/assessment/estimates

>>2608569
>the culture of southern hospitality is dying
Southern hospitality died 150 years ago.

>>2609696
you have a point with VA, but that really only applies to NoVa.

once you go south of fredericksburg, it's pretty dixie.

>>2609746
You can't even breed to sustain that civilization you inferior utopianist degenerate

>>2610309
Hence South VA considered Southern periphery rather than core.

>>2608464
This is correct.

Also enjoy the dixiepill OP, just realize that you can never go back to the blissfull ignorance of CNN.

>>2608761
It's actually a shame culture. Honor is about how you act when people aren't watching. Southern "honor" culture is about publicly defending yourself against perceived slights, lest anyone should think you weak or cowardly. Basically if anyone shames you, you get retribution to pay the shame back. That's not honor, that's just being an insecure violent dick.

>>2609943
what is this photo supposed to prove I don't get it. can you refute OP with facts or not?

File: image.jpg (65KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 500x500px

>realizing that the south is generally superior to the rest of the united states but that from a big picture standpoint the united states is a cultural shithole and a blight on humanity and it should just die already

File: 36c67cf603670d027a5a2ed3b04f81a6.png (143KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 600x600px

>>2609890
>the union get hijacked by unamrican bastards
>real america use their right to secede and create a new state that is more like how the founding fathers pictured america
>this is treason somehow

>>2608242
I don't think the south sucks exactly, but I have no fondness for fundamentalist religion or revisionism over a war fought to keep slaves. The fondness for firearms, booze and sluts is nice though.

For every statue of a Confederate general, there a bigger statue of General Sherman next to it

>>2608464
can you explain this tarriff thing more

why would those tarrifs piss off the south

>>2611541
>british manufacturing produced goods cheaper the their american counterparts
>used to ship their goods to america then buy american agriculture products from the profits they just made to take back home
>north is butthurt their shit isnt getting sold
>want to put up trade tariffs (fixed taxed on foreign goods coming into the country) to encourage americans to buy american
>south is like "wtf we need foreign money to buy our cotton take those tariffs down"

>>2611880
so why didnt the north just buy the cotton

fucking pricks

>>2611930
They did buy the cotton. Enough that cotton smuggling to the north was a thing during the war, but the south produced cotton on a global scale for all the European markets and had quite a bit more than the north could use.

>>2611930
Because the US was literally the best cotton producers in the world at that time, therefore the US market alone was not enough to support the size of their industry and the south was worried Britain & France would eventually start getting their cotton from Asia instead if the trade barrier persisted (which is exactly what happened in the end post-war)

>>2609748
It was about slavery you fucking racist cismale!1!!11!

>totally debunked t. shlomo shekelstein-goldberg

>>2608569
>The good old days meme
Why do people always do this?

>>2608242
Go bait somewhere else

>>2608569
This. Western culture in general is a dying bread.

>>2611354
Gee anon, where does the constitution guarantee the right for states to secede?

They should have realized that they were Cavaliers and built a true royalist society.

>>2608242
All four are correct, I am not going to glorify my "culture" of farming, being stubborn and greedy, and illiterate just because it's mine. There is room for improvement - a lot of it, too.

>>2608242
That was the most retarded text I have ever read in my life. You think you grew up? Well, your mental state fits a 14 year old.

>>2612210
this

>>2608487
>>2609409
>>2608255
I'd expect there to be more Mullatos in the South than elsewhere in the United States, but I can't imagine it being that large.
Living in the very South (Texas), there were plenty of Mestizos (half Anglo half Mexican) because, let's face it, Hispanics don't have NEARLY the negative social implications as blacks do.

Marrying a black man or woman and having children with them means you'll likely be dealing them a bad lot in life as they have to either fight against the racial stereotypes that the black community has earned for themselves or just embrace those stereotypes, which is bad.

TL;DR I didn't see interracial marriage almost ever, and I'm pretty sure it's just yank slander.

>>2611397
Maybe in your fever dreams yank

>>2608713
>florida is just awful
Lost it's southern culture a while back. You won't even hear "y'all" outside of the very northern part
>north carolina's scenery is comfy as fuck but the politics are hilariously bad
It's very black IIRC, never been there myself
>hated almost every inch of texas
:^(
>virginia is pretty nice save for a few areas
This is true

I'd recommend Missouri, Arkansas, the Appalachians, and the northwestern coastline of Florida for some true natural beauty, and then visit some mom and pop restaurants for some cuisine.

>>2608716
Scotch-Irish may have had Celtic influence, but they were Anglo, not Celtic my man

>>2608716
>Really the only people who had success in the South either came from the North or were trained by people who came from the North.
That's a fucking lie and you know it, George Washington was a Virginian, remember

>>2612192
Gee anon, where does the constitution say that you are allowed to interferer in state legislation?

File: image.png (639KB, 700x776px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 700x776px

>>2609713
It's being invaded by shitbag New Englanders who want to exploit our growth while "fighting for NC" by promoting cancerous NeoLiberal politics and doing their best to undermine and destroy our native culture at every turn.

Yankees are a cancer and need to be stripped of their voting rights in our state, if not outright purged.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q--iGgtRn8

>>2612389
George Washington was a colossal fuck up that needed to suck off French so that his rebellion would not had been wiped off from the face of the earth by brits.

>>2612514
North Carolina is already the most gerrymandered state in the country.

If you're so fucking smart, why can't you get people to vote the way you want?

>>2612826
>hates George Washington
At last the yank reveals his true colors

>>2612355
>TL;DR I didn't see interracial marriage almost ever
Who said they'd be married? Southerners just raise black cuckspawn while claiming to hate niggers

>>2608744
True rancheros were real but most American cowboys were black, also native american. French culture only persisted in Louisiana, east Texas, and parts of Alabama.
But the rancher culture is only really true of Texas, which isn't really part of the deep south, most of the south was agrarian.

>>2608242
I grew up in Texas. It's weird because people here consider themselves southern but not before Texan. Texan is our main identity.

Also I feel Texas was kind of forced into the the civil war. Geographically, economically, and culturally we couldn't in good conscience side with the north. Even Sam Houston, our George Washington, was against the war, but was shut out by rich slave-owners (pretty much the only people with money at the time). I live in an urban area and I don't really see anyone looking back fondly on civil war generals. Also the population is increasing rapidly here and most contemporary residents don't have any family or history connection to civil war times, most people could care less.

Also about all the crime and poverty in the south, can you really blame them? Blacks have always had a bad lot since being slaves and never getting reparations, and also there's just not a lot of industry or jobs here historically. That's changing now but living here wasn't always easy, despite the region's natural beauty.

Also it's no contest but the south has the most beautiful women.

>>2612942
Just curious why do Texans feel like they were forced into the civil war.

File: IMG_9502.png (660KB, 600x473px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 600x473px

>>2608242
This is now a Union thread.

>The history of slavery in Texas began slowly, as the Spanish did not rely on it for labor during their years of control. The use of slavery expanded in the mid-nineteenth century as British-American settlers from the Southeastern United States crossed the Mississippi River and brought slaves with them. Although the Spanish colonists had held some slaves, they did not succeed in creating a sustainable agricultural economy in the entirety of New Spain, including Texas, Mexico, Central America, and other former Spanish territories in the American Southwest.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_Texas

>>2610232
>No fucking shit, the south was a slavery-backed agrarian economy.
And nobody had a problem with the latter. The only issue that the North objected to was slavery.

>Obviously the opposition states (aka the northern states) were non-slaveholding states.
Except for, you know, the ones that were slaveholding states, such as Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, and Delaware.

>All your quotes are just quotes.
Wow, really?

> if it was truly about protecting slavery alone then the Corwin Amendment of 1861 would have been accepted and solved the issue.
And many slaveholding states, such as Maryland, Kentucky, and most of Virginia did. However, many of the States didn't believe that this would be enough to prevent the more powerful North from taking up the issue of abolition again.

>Four random quotes are not enough to dismiss later proposed legislation which directly contradicts your argument.
>random quotes
It's the SC Declaration of Secession, made specifically to explain the reasons for seceding with the Union. And the institution of Slavery is named as the main reason.

>Protecting slavery was not enough.
The South Carolinians seem to think otherwise.

>It's the tariffs which were too much a threat to their economy and had been for 45years of continuous damage to the southern economy in the hopes of propping up the north.
Oh yes, clearly a tariff which had been steadily going down for the last 15 years was much more damaging to the economy than a regulation that would remove the entire labor force from their jobs. Clearly.

>And if the "muh noble, forward thinking north who stands against slavery n shieeet" argument is true, then why were they propose a law that would permit and protect slavery in order to appease the pro-secessionist southerners?
Because they didn't want half the country to secede and start a civil war, you fucking retard. It's called compromise.
But guess who walked out of the Union before the legislation was passed?

>>2608242

except the south was all french and creol and hillbilly and wasnt realy ''all-american'' in the sense that the north was since the north, having won the war and becoming basicaly america IS what all america is about, a centralised plutocratic corporate state with masses of cheap labor getting sucked in from all around the world

one more reason to be butthurt about the acw

>>2612848
It's not about how they vote, so much as it's about who votes.

People who were not born here and do not understand or care about us threaten to hijack our government and institutions by buying votes from minorities.

>>2612398
Read Texas v. White and quit crying you fucking johnny reb

>>2608744
>cowboys are around texas and west of it.

hicks and rednecks think they're cowboys, but we all know they ain't. stay in the south where you and your cousins belong cletus.

also southern culture is an extension of spanish and french manorial systems from long ago.

>>2612398
14th Amendment and the Supremacy Clause.

>>2612848
NC was gerrymandered by the federal liberals to fit their racial quotas.

>>2613054
>All your quotes are just quotes.
>Wow, really?
Point is the only evidence you provided to make your case were 4 quotes from debates and conventions, whereas I presented 8 tariffs and one pseudo-amendment which had REAL legal impacts. Get better material.

>such as Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, and Delaware.
Nice of you to post border states between north & south like Missouri who did a lot of back and forth before picking a side during a civil war. Point still stands the main opposition were the northern industrialist state. Stop playing semantics you fuck.

>Oh yes, clearly a tariff which had been steadily going down for the last 15 years
There was STILL a high tariff in force you moron, if if it was temporarily toned down. And it was turned all the way back to 11 with the Morrill tariff. It's nice to see you dancing circles around the direct quotes of northern economists of the times who were advocating constantly for higher tariffs during that 1845-1861 period. So I'll post some examples again.

>The Panic of 1857 led to calls for protectionist tariff revision. Well-known economist Henry C. Carey blamed the Panic on the Tariff of 1857. His opinion was widely circulated in the high tariff (or "protectionist") media.
and
>The date of this passage at arms was January 14, 1860. In view of the tremendous issues that were then shaping themselves, Carey's answer, a week later, seems somewhat plaintive : " In this state and Jersey, the tariff is the one and almost the only question."

>The South Carolinians seem to think otherwise.
SC was just one state amongst many which seceded.

(1/2)

>>2614644
>Because they didn't want half the country to secede and start a civil war, you fucking retard. It's called compromise.
So clearly slavery was not such a big deal to republicans after all. I mean, you can't claim they fought the civil war because of it if it was something they were willing to give away prior to it.

>But guess who walked out of the Union before the legislation was passed?
BUT IT WAS PASSED YOU MORON. And they didn't walk out, the 7 states who already declared their intention to secede simply had their representatives not vote on it while it was proposed. The whole thing fell through during the breakout of the war. Not that the diplomats didn't push for it or that it was not going to take effect. Even Lincoln wrote to the states governors to present the amendment.

Clearly slavery itself was not the ONLY cause, stop being an obtuse twat. Do you know it was on the SAME DAY, the 2nd of march 1861, that BOTH the corwin amendment AND the morill tariff were passed? It was basically the republican government giving the south a cookie while raping them at the exact same time.

I am not saying slavery was not part of the civil war debate, obviously the south needed its slave labour to remain competitive. But both the abolitionists and northern industrialists teamed up to economically harm King Cotton. That's an undeniable fact. I fully agree slavery is disgusting and had to fucking go, but that's both you and I indulging in presentism to look at the past.

In reality in 1861 and the decades before, the north was struggling economically, it wanted to put up trades barriers to force americans customers to pick their products instead and that fucked the south big time, leading to cries for various forms of stronger state control. First in 1828-1832 with the nullification crisis, and later with with cessation when nullification efforts proved fruitless.

(2/2)

File: 1489774103474.png (951KB, 1032x1114px) Image search: [Google]

951KB, 1032x1114px

>>2614648
It's too fucking simplistic to larp and say it was all about muh freedumbz and Lincoln himself originally wanted to ship the blacks all the way back to africa rather than keeping them here. What the fuck was Liberia if not the brainchild of the republicans?

Dixieboos pretend it was muh state oppreshun, and northfags pretend it was MUH FREEDUM. In reality, it was mostly trade-related with a little bit of BOTH on the side, and then the winner wrote history. It's simple as that.

(3/2)

>>2614655
*proto-republicans, I will clarify.
Since I know some autists will ignore the fact the american colonization society was spearheaded by federalist party members and democrat-republican party members (both which later fused to form the republican party) and even Henry fucking Clay ( who was definitely a republican).

>>2608242
>kek

>>2608242
American ""culture""

File: culture-and-economics.png (12KB, 405x274px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 405x274px

>>2609569
>The southern economy was strong before the war.
No, the southern economy was weak and getting weaker, down from its peak around the revolutionary period. The reason their exports were so high was because cotton was the single largest and most important industry of its time and it dominated the southern economy.

Wealth disparities, labor imbalances, and lack of access to credit were all gimping the south's economy. Why invest in labor saving devices when you had access to free labor?

>>2616745
>Why invest in labor saving devices when you had access to free labor?
To increase throughput, you know, like they actually did with things like plows and the cotton gin.

File: map-slave-growth1.jpg (4MB, 1395x1967px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1395x1967px

>>2616974
Funny you should mention the cotton gin, since it is a perfect example of how a technology can be appropriated to screw over a labor force, and how liberation is a choice that society makes, not something that inevitably comes on its own due to technological advancement.

Before the cotton gin extracting the seeds from cotton was a time-consuming, laborious process, and simply not worth the pay out for slaves to be doing. Eli Whitney's engine made it effortless and the perfect mindless activity for slaves to be doing, because it let even a single slave produce large amounts of seedless cotton by himself.

Before the cotton gin, slavery was declining because housing and feeding slaves is expensive, and because the economy was gradually becoming dominated by avowedly free states who were reaping the benefits of a society build around free labor, and had been doing so since revolutionary times.

After the cotton gin slavery became extremely profitable, and cotton became such an important crop that it dominated the southern economy, and virtually every working man in the south aside from a small pool of professionals and trade craftsmen was either employed in the task of transporting and maintaining slaves or in policing the ones which currently exist. A random working bloke was six times more likely to be an engineer in the north than in the south.

Before the cotton gin, the number of slaves being imported from Africa was declining. After the cotton gin, the number of slaves being imported exploded. Even if you're the kind of person who's a flat out unironic unapologetic racist you have to admit that there would be far, far fewer niggers in the United States today had it not been for the antebellum cotton barons importing them in vast quantities after the cotton gin made it possible for them to line their pockets at a long term cost to the health of the United States.

>>2608313
>people fought and died for tariffs
>what are the abolitionists
You southern morons probably never even read the speeches of Lincoln vs Douglas. Basically ALL they talk about is slavery. Everything going on during then was about SLAVES, it was the overwhelming issue of the day. You bring up fucking tariffs one more time you are the brainlet.

File: Slavepopulations.png (20KB, 721x337px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 721x337px

>>2618785
>muh cotton gin meme

Slavery was not declining before the cotton gin, nor did it explode because of it. Slavery grew consistently with the white population and hovered around 30% of the south's population.

>Before the cotton gin, the number of slaves being imported from Africa was declining. After the cotton gin, the number of slaves being imported exploded.

The slave trade ended in 1808 and the vast majority of slaves were imported before the revolution. The slave population grew for the same reason the white population grew, increased standard of living and food supply.

File: southerncotton.png (206KB, 510x920px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 510x920px

>>2616745
>Wealth disparities, labor imbalances, and lack of access to credit were all gimping the south's economy.

post some proof. none of those statistics you posted proved that the south had a bad economy, only that it wasn't as industrialized as the north, but that was expected due to the climate.

File: slave-population.jpg (57KB, 513x572px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 513x572px

>>2619220
https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/cotton-gin-patent
>While it was true that the cotton gin reduced the labor of removing seeds, it did not reduce the need for slaves to grow and pick the cotton. In fact, the opposite occurred. Cotton growing became so profitable for the planters that it greatly increased their demand for both land and slave labor. In 1790 there were six slave states; in 1860 there were 15. From 1790 until Congress banned the importation of slaves from Africa in 1808, Southerners imported 80,000 Africans. By 1860 approximately one in three Southerners was a slave.

>Because of the cotton gin, slaves now labored on ever-larger plantations where work was more regimented and relentless. As large plantations spread into the Southwest, the price of slaves and land inhibited the growth of cities and industries. In the 1850s seven-eighths of all immigrants settled in the North, where they found 72% of the nation's manufacturing capacity. The growth of the "peculiar institution" was affecting many aspects of Southern life.

You're right about the slave trade being banned in 1808, I'll give you that, but what remains indisputable is the fact that the cotton gin profoundly changed the face of the southern economy. In states without cotton the population of slaves fell to zero
http://www.civilwar.org/resources/civil-war-history-how-the.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/
> Faster processing of cotton with the gin meant it was profitable for landowners to establish previously-unthinkably large cotton plantations across the south. But harvesting cotton remained a very labor-intensive undertaking. Thus, bigger cotton farms meant the need for more slaves. The slave population in the United States increased nearly five-fold in the first half of the 19th Century, and by 1860, the South provided about two-thirds of the world’s cotton supply. Southern wealth had become reliant on this one crop and thus was completely dependent on slave-labor.

File: Cotton_20Production_201820-1860.0.jpg (2MB, 1243x1948px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1243x1948px

>>2619238
http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/economic-impact-slavery-south
>Although on even footing with Northern progress prior to 1815, industrialization in the South lagged behind that of the North afterward, with only 20 percent of the nation's manufacturers being located in the Southern states. Not coincidentally, wages were lower in the South as well, with per capita income in 1860 measured at $103 in the South, compared with $141 in the North (Kolchin 1993, p. 175). Southern industry did not develop as rapidly as that of the North for a number of reasons, including a lack of investment capital, well-trained managers, and up-to-date technology, and the absence of reliable transportation. Most entrepreneurial start-ups were funded by plantation owner's funds, not the conglomerates of shareholders found in the North. In addition, plantation owners often had difficulty hiring expert managers, who were in short supply nationally, and were frequently deterred by the South's withering climate; thus, they had to pay a premium to convince managers to come south. Furthermore, because of insufficient knowledge and capital, entrepreneurs were not necessarily able to use the most efficient methods that would allow them to create goods that could compete well in the North and abroad. Finally, the slow pace of railroad construction, which was not well funded by state and local governments, made for inefficient—thus costly—transportation routes. The businesses that had the most success in marketing their products in the North were located in the border states.

Plenty of places in the U.S has fertile soil, including in the north. The south fucked itself by investing in slaves and cotton instead of factory and free labor.

>>2619444
why would per capita income prove lower wages among free labor? 30% of the population was enslaved and thus had zero income yet would still count towards capita population.

>>2619444
>cotton production in Virginia disappears

wut?

>>2608313
>>2618805


Just going to point other that there was a good deal more going on then what was in the speeches of Lincoln vs Douglas and the issue of north v south predated either of their political careers.

Also in Texas the main Issue that carried Texas to Leave the Union was a view that the union had felled to protect Texas against Indian raids. That was the second largest reason Texas join the Union in the first place. Of the voting records left the communities that voted most in favor of secession were made of first generation German and Hungarian immigrates that were just to the west of Austin. Those people were not pro slavery and viewed it very poorly.


Slavery may of been the largest issue at hand but it was far from the only issue at hand.

>>2619958
Virginia had the second least acreage and third least production of cotton in the slave states. It did produce cotton, but only ahead of Kentucky and Indian Territory. Soil had degraded so badly from tobacco that plantations couldn't realistically function and their economy bottoming out meant a lot of people fled Virginia into the Black Belt or North into industry.

>>2608242
That's the most accurate image of this meme I've seen yet, OP.
t. Bostonian, would turncoat in a second

File: 1489367527960.jpg (108KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 720x720px

>>2608242
Antebellum Southern culture was just European, agrarian feudalism transplanted to America. The aristocratic plantation owners were the nobility, the poor whites were the yeomen and the black slaves were the peasantry. It's the North that was truly uniquely American.

>>2608242
More like threw up.

>>2608242
(((Bible)))belt

>>2611942
>tfw never knew this
always assumed it was mu4 5lavery

File: Confederate declarations of secession.jpg (59KB, 700x430px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 700x430px

>>2620602
>Also in Texas the main Issue that carried Texas to Leave the Union was a view that the union had felled to protect Texas against Indian raids.

No, that was just a distraction issue

http://www.lsjunction.com/docs/secesson.htm
>Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquillity and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?

In the first paragraph they are talking about slavery, and that's what they spend most of the document discussing, with only passing mention of Indian and Mexican raids. They specifically discuss the topic of slavery for over half of the document.

>>2608255
This

File: stares-motherfuckerly-8628143.png (116KB, 500x522px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 500x522px

>>2608242
>pure american
>no other influences

why do u think this

>>2611942
>which is exactly what happened in the end post-war
No, it isn't. The colonies could only supplement. Over 80% of Europe's cotton came from the United States, even at peak colonialism. Even in Britain, with cotton producers like Egypt, Tanganyika and India, they never could break themselves away from American cotton. King Cotton never really died. He just fell into the shadows under more prestigious trade goods.