"There were several gangs of negroes at work in the corn & cotton fields along the road yesterday, and I thanked God they were not in Illinois. Candidly, I'd rather see them and a whole crop of grindstones dumped into the Gulf..."
-Charles Willis IL Solider 6/19/1862

I don't understand. They fought to free the slaves but hated them? Then why fight to free them? Were they stupid?

>>17777128 (OP)
>Were they stupid?
yes

>>17777128 (OP)
They had to free the slaves to win the war.

>>17777787
If this is what victory looks like show me them losing

>>17777128 (OP)
I was just pondering this. Why didnt the union repatriait africans back to africa after the civil war? Why didnt the south just give in to industrialization and get rid of the african population instead of starting a deadly war?

>>17777929
>Why didnt the south just give in to industrialization and get rid of the african population instead of starting a deadly war?
Dude just radically alter your entire economic and social system while funding ours btw we're also importing our much morally superior form of labor desperate starving immigrants that we will pay 1¢.
As for the first part, that was not going to happen after 1862 since Abe needed black bodies for his armies

>>17777955
The prescence of africans led to so much internal strife. The south felt so strongly about it that they created an entire system of exclusion. It doesnt seem reasonable to me that there was no political capital over the course of two centuries to send the african population back to their origin which would have solved the issue once and for all.

>>17777974
Are you talking about Jim Crow? Cause that shit started in the North

>>17777929
>Why didnt the south just give in to industrialization
They were industrialising even before the war, just slower, but the experiences of running slave factories showed that the RoI is better it's just that initial capital was higher.
>But muh economists said...
Economists pretend a slave staffed factory doesn't work but a sweatshop in Bangladesh does and is something totally different even after acknowledging that the sweatshop had their employees effectively living in it and pays them with food rations. It helps to have a historian's understanding of what was the position of slaves in pre-modern and pre-christian societies because they stripped it down to the core - slaves were just talking objects to people back in the times. As such a slave plantation is capital intensive form of farming, just like a mechanised factory is a capital intensive form of craftsmanship. Slave-staffed mechanised factory is an ultra capital intensive form of craftsmanship, the later start can be explained by the need of greater capital accumulation to make such investments possible.

>>17777929
>>Why didn't the South give in to industrialization
The South was the third or fourth most industrialized place in the world at the time--- the North was more industrial, yes, but still overwhelmingly agricultural. The framing of the war as agricultural vs industrial is just plain wrong.

>Why didn't the Union repatriate slaves
The biggest support for repatriation came from the South or the Southern settled parts of the Lower Midwest e.g Illinois, Indiana, Ohio---there was some support in the Mid-Atlantic too. But the North didn't want to give up the money t do it, and the South didn't have the money to do it on its own. New Englanders also would have thrown a absolute hissy fit.

>>17778185
Its because the South was run by jews.

>>17778189
The Union won. If they were hekkin basederinoo proto-natsocs like you bookcat braindead retards think, the blacks would have been deported; the South had no say in anything.

Keep coping, unionchud.

>>17777128 (OP)
Yeah

>>17777128 (OP)
I'm always surprised when non-Americans realize most of us can't stand niggers