It's a mixed bag because if we did split into two or more countries a lot of people in the shittier half would instantly lose any semblance of civil rights That was what was at stake the first time they "suggested" splitting uphttps://twitter.com/benjanun_s/status/1323846771265556480 …
-
-
A lot of people trying to imagine a better timeline without the Civil War say "How about the North lets the South secede but adopts a standing offer of freedom for any slaves who escape across the border to undermine their economy"
-
1) Well that's awfully nice of you, I'm sure the whole reason slavery persisted in the first place was enslaved people just weren't motivated enough to try to escape it Not like mounting paranoia from slaveowners about escapes en masse would have any consequences for them
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Worth noting that the South (The US, really) was the largest and most powerful slave society on the planet by 1845 or so. The effect on the world economy was not insignificant.
-
And North and South depended on each other, Southern bravado notwithstanding. They were Saudi Arabia of cotton -- an entire economy based on an extractive resource. Thing was, they didn't realize they weren't the only source.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.