Political Discussions for "Adults"

SGR · 07-20-2020, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

A mass poisoning of the produce in Chicago with laxatives.

Spinach laced with laxatives? Wow. That would be a serious crap.

Anteater · 07-20-2020, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rostasi

Yes, because we should all learn how to communicate convoluted bullshit in an opaque manner.

Probably, but that wasn't the definition of an open minded audience either.

OccultHawk · 07-20-2020, 12:37 PM

Quote:

I'm sure there were some people who thought "Why don't we just kill 'em?", I don't know about "many people" though.

If it solved a perceived problem people didn’t give a ****.

~~jwb~~ · 07-20-2020, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

A biography I read on Nat Turner made that claim.

What the free labor argument made sense or not it was the main objection of business owners in the north.

Honestly I would think the industrial North benefited directly from the cheap materials produced by the slave economy in the south.

There were economic disputes such as whether newly acquired territories were to be made slave based or paid labor. Obviously the workers (white working class) benefited more from the paid labor system where as a handful of rich plantation owners benefited massively from slavery. Also there were disputes over whether to tariff exports of agricultural goods (largely coming from the south) going to Europe in order to make northern industry more competitive worldwide.

The idea the north would try to ban slavery in the south just because they were jealous of the benefits it provides doesn't make much sense. Why wouldn't they just institute slavery themselves? Way easier than starting a war

Lincoln was a white supremacist, as the vast majority of people back then were. But the fact the slaves fled north is kind of an indication in and of itself that it was still preferable to the south.

OccultHawk · 07-20-2020, 12:52 PM

Quote:

The idea the north would try to ban slavery in the south just because they were jealous of the benefits it provides doesn't make much sense. Why wouldn't they just institute slavery themselves? Way easier than starting a war

Lincoln was a white supremacist, as the vast majority of people back then were. But the fact the slaves fled north is kind of an indication in and of itself that it was still preferable to the south.

The business and factory owners profited more by exploiting immigrants in massive debt cycles and failed mortgages and forcing them to buy horrific food and cheap quality clothing and bedding and so on at insanely jacked up prices. Compared to buying slaves and feeding and housing them and keeping them healthy enough to work and overseeing them the canning industry and all that around it got a better deal with constant influx of fresh labor.

They free labor argument may not have been valid but they made it none the less.

~~jwb~~ · 07-20-2020, 12:59 PM

That still doesn't explain why they would benefit from getting rid of slavery in the south, especially if it was a source of cheap materials for them to use in their factories. Even assuming the premise that it's cheaper to use immigrants than slaves, which I don't necessarily grant either.

Can you cite where this argument was made?

rostasi · 07-20-2020, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

Probably, ... <doesn't matter>

•

OccultHawk · 07-20-2020, 01:26 PM

Quote:

That still doesn't explain why they would benefit from getting rid of slavery in the south

That’s true. It doesn’t.

The Batlord · 07-20-2020, 01:35 PM

I thought it was about representation in Congress. Slaves meant extra representatives for the South but the increasing population of the North under the industrial revolution was throwing the balance out of whack.

~~jwb~~ · 07-20-2020, 01:48 PM

Believe it or not I think there were just people who were opposed to slavery and Lincoln was one of them.

07-20-2020, 12:59 PM	#6886 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	That still doesn't explain why they would benefit from getting rid of slavery in the south, especially if it was a source of cheap materials for them to use in their factories. Even assuming the premise that it's cheaper to use immigrants than slaves, which I don't necessarily grant either. Can you cite where this argument was made?

07-20-2020, 01:48 PM	#6890 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	Believe it or not I think there were just people who were opposed to slavery and Lincoln was one of them.