Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (38675)	5/31/1999 12:01:00 AM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

>because they wanted to protect the right to hold slaves.< I think that was the story told by the winners. I wonder what our history books would say if the CSA had won their bid. I believe that in due time slavery would have been abolished even in the deep South. The Industrial Revolution was under way. Owning and managing slaves would have been uneconomical quite soon, and this would have bootstrapped into the growing egalitarian sentiment. Heck, I can even imagine that true racial equality of stature and opportunity might have come more quickly if the South hadn't held onto the mythos of the defeated underdog for so long! The USA and CSA would undoubtedly have become close economic partners ... someone better at history can spin the story further. :-) But both the Union and the Confederacy were fighting for something very basic. Self-determination for the South. National continuity for the North. Both about equally big stakes. The slave thing was a catalyst, not the actual propellant. Jmho We need Jfred. He knows this stuff backward and forward.