The Civil War was not about slavery but cotton profits

>>3209729
ah i see so the south wasnt racist after all they were only misunderstood and victimized
they had to do slavery even though they didn't want to

>>3209729
>In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
>Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
http://archive.is/wXdeC
>The material prosperity of the North was greatly dependent on the Federal Government; that of the the South not at all. In the first years of the Republic the navigating, commercial, and manufacturing interests of the North began to seek profit and aggrandizement at the expense of the agricultural interests.
http://archive.is/8mz7d

>>3209745
3 northern states banned blacks free or slave from settling in them. Other states actually required blacks to post bond if they wanted to be there. The North had slavery too but gave up on it by 1808 when the international slave trade was banned under federal law. Northern soil isn't very good for cotton cultivation like Southern soil is, hence why slavery in the North wasn't to the extent it ever was in the South. They didn't care about the slaves at all. A shitload of them died soon after being freed from starvation and disease.
http://archive.is/eKRgQ

>>3209763
those damn greedy northerners forced those poor southerners into owning slaves, why its like the southerners wee practically slaves themselves!
when will the families of the southerners finally get reparations for this injustice

>>3209729
>the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was because the south kneecapped their own economy by making it reliant on shitty cash crops and strangling the ability of industry to spring up by having a non paid workforce
at last i truely see

>>3209792
Damn right! Slavery was good for the negroes. Their labor was superior to free white labor in the North. They got free food, housing, and healthcare in exchange for picking cotton. They didn't have to worry about money.
Read Times on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery. It's the redpill on slavery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_on_the_Cross

The South would've been fucked when Industrialization happens, no matter how you cut this pie it always ends up with the South having a bunch of niggers around with nothing to do and their economy down the shitter.

That being said, I also have a very difficult times feeling any type of sympathy for the South, they couldn't pick their own Goddamn cotton now could they?

>>3209806
It's a myth that slavery was dying desu.
Read The Economics of Slavery in the Antebellum South by American economists Alfred H. Conrad and John R. Meyer, which caused a firestorm of controversy with its claim, based on statistical data, that slavery, being economically efficient and highly profitable for slaves owners, would not have ended in the absence of the U.S. Civil War

>>3209812
haha yeah those lazy good for nothing niggers were treated too well by those kindhearted southerners if you ask me

>>3209822
Northern industry was fueled by cotton fampai. And niggers had a use picking cotton as both slaves and sharecroppers. Industrialization was what caused them to become the way they are today as it overhauled the economy along with the rise of gibmedats and race baiting politicians.
See: >>3209823

>>3209836
unironically yes

>>3209849
thanks for the source Anoninski, was there a way to avoid all the shit race relations we see today though?

>>3209855
yeah i agree, im glad OP is standing up to our race's historic oppression and correcting the record

>>3209862
Only way would be to go back in time and kill the Northern capitalists orchestrating opposition to slavery if they didn't get to profit directly off cotton in addition to their industrial assets as explained in the OP.

>>3209849
>Northern industry was fueled by cotton fampai.
Only textile industry, you stupid nigger.

>>3209888
Which was the biggest industry in the North at the time and by far the most profitable and was especially important for trade with other countries. Ever heard of cotton diplomacy? The Confederacy tried to use cotton as a bargaining chip in getting other countries into aiding them in the war.