Thread 18112561

If the Confederacy won the civil war and the golden circle plan was enacted, how would this country look like today?

>>18112561 (OP)
Sooooo many brown people

>>18112561 (OP)
It would be horrendously corrupt and a shithole, so in other words no different than today

>>18112561 (OP)
Like Brazil but worse

>>18112561 (OP)
Like Empire of Brazil but semi-perfect geographic position.

95% black like south africa

like Haiti

>>18112561 (OP)
There’d be a bunch of Dominicans on /pol/ calling themselves white

>>18114005
But they'd be blonde

>>18112561 (OP)
It would literally be the biggest third world shithole imaginable full of violent mutts and poverty.

>>18112561 (OP)
Why do you need this hypothetical when you live in a world where Brazil already exists?

>>18112561 (OP)
Hell

>>18112561 (OP)
A mulatto shithole like Brazil or worse

>>18112561 (OP)
The constant warfare that this would have required would have led the original states to secede from the CSA.

>>18112561 (OP)
northern brazil

Maryland seceding would have made the USA defensive in stead of offensive
The West would probably be staked out by the Confederacy and the British
Mexico would probably have to have been split between France and the CSA before going over to the Confederacy at some future point

>>18112561 (OP)
This poster's flag is Brazilian on /pol/ btw. He regularly shits up any threads over there with his conspiracy theory copypastas

>>18112561 (OP)
Big Brazil, would liberalize under rainbow nation values in the 60's. Alot of race mixing will ensue resulting in Brazil level of "whiteness" where 85% white and 15% black or otherwise would claim to be solely white
The north would be super white in contrast and would be a super power having united with Canada in the early 20th century. The CSA would be a nominal Latin American country part of the Iberoamerican league

>>18114711
Also would be around 2nd world level like say Portugal and would be the most well of Latam cunt and hold immense sway over their politics as a bilingual state where English and Spanish is mandatory learning like say modern Canada with English and French

>>18112561 (OP)
Horrible narco hellhole

>>18112561 (OP)
It would make muttmerica look like Hyperborea

>>18114717
It would be way more bilingual than that.
Canada is basically an Anglo country with one weird Franco province
This mutt nation would be like 4/5ths Hispanic by 2025. Mexico alone would outnumber every founding Confederate state

>>18113980
This. It would look like Haiti. Maybe with a seasoning of warring states era China.
>>18114092
Pssst, anon, that’s called bleach, it can make people blond.

>>18112582
Civil war was fake

>>18112561 (OP)

Golden Circle was always a comically retarded hairbrained scheme that no one in a position of actual policymaking in the Confederacy took seriously.

Excluding the fact that potential stunts such as invading Cuba would have essentially amounted to a declaration of war against Spain and instantly drawn the ire of the United Kingdom (the preeminent global power at the time), there's the simple fact that the United States of America would still exist and they would presumably immediately make an addendum to the Monroe Doctrine from "Keep all European influence out of the Western Hemisphere" to "Keep all European AND Confederate influence out of the Western Hemisphere".

Even something as seemingly minor as invading Mexico to seize a few towns could become a pretext for war by the United States.

>>18115402
They wanted to ally with France (who backed the idea in order to separate an Anglo state in NA) and hoped their monopoly on cotton and sugar would keep the British on their side. They even planned to make Maximillian of Mexico an emperor to legitimize their state in the eyes of European monarchy. They expected to reclaim the northern states over time. Picrel
>t. Knower

>>18115402
>Golden Circle was always a comically retarded hairbrained scheme that no one in a position of actual policymaking in the Confederacy took seriously.
Also, it is “rumored” that the Buchanan administration was completely made up of KOTGC.

>>18114092
>>18115369
Potential gyaru housewife

>>18112561 (OP)
>>18112582
US would probably be like Haiti and the Dominican republic.

>>18112561 (OP)
>country
>exist
Lol.

>>18112561 (OP)
It would be a Spanish-speaking Catholic country with mainly quite leftist politics with a northern part which would, ironically, have a significant independence movement

>>18112561 (OP)
>>18112582
Lots more blacks too. Southern negrophilic redneck hicks were seething they couldn't breed more negro pets to pick cotton and buck break. Imagine how many more nogs the fuckers would have bred considering how much damage they already did and how much the effects of their negrophilia are still felt to the present day.

>>18112561 (OP)
It would be South Africa tier. Good infrastructure in the cities, a white minority owning all the wealth, a small middle class and cyberpunk for the rest

>>18112561 (OP)
Realistically, I think they would only be able to control Cuba (Havana was to be the capital of the Golden Circle) and parts of Northern Mexico, since the US always wanted to annex Cuba until the Platt Amendment and continued to have strong control over it until the Cuban Revolution, while Northern Mexico bordering Texas, whose lands were poor for plantations, and some of them wanted Maximilian I to be King of the Golden Circle, which would make the entire Mexico part of Golden Circle. In the worst-case scenario, it would be like Haiti, in the best-case scenario, it would be like Brazil, a country that abolished Slavery at the turn of the 19th century, has massive European immigration and semi-industrialization, but remains a shithole because these factors only affect certain regions. They probably would have met their end in WW1 if the Zimmermann telegram had happened in that timeline.

>>18117329
>They probably would have met their end in WW1 if the Zimmermann telegram had happened in that timeline.
Yankee get butt-raped in two fronts conflict.

>>18114666
>third world shitskin comprehension of ideology
Why would white nationalists support a state that was run by a jew who didn't even feel the need to change his name to something less jewish? Do you think we
blindly swear allegiance to the first group who declare niggers inferior just cause?

>>18115402
>Even something as seemingly minor as invading Mexico to seize a few towns could become a pretext for war by the United States.
I find it humorous when retards here think the confederacy would just get away with taking parts of LatAm even if they defeated them militarily. Despite the lack of an "international community", regional order was still kept by the caudillo game. They couldn't navigate local crime, let alone global politics.

>>18115065
I can imagine some weird polarization of society where alot of Hispanics start to identify as solely white creating a splitting of Hispanic society which was present in atleast Mexico till the early 20th century where 30% still identify as Spanish white. I can imagine this creating alot of modern memery where 75% white castizos are crying about white genocide in the CSA because blacks and mestizos were given rights. And this would cause a Anglo-African movement to form a voting block to try and disenfranchise the Hispanic mestizos who would be immigrating en masse to the southern states and quite literally taking der jobs. God this hypothetical state would be such a shitshow that it would be kino af if it were real, i could imagine alot of slop would emerge from it like say modern Brazil that would make even Detroit seem civilized

>>18117368
*Dixie
I imagine he meant the Zimmermann telegram would be directed to Mexico still. The CSA would be a natural British ally as they were reliant on both yankee and British industries buying their raw goods, the USA would also be much more German in character with most anti German sentiments being from the south and New England during OTL, with the south gone, the new English would keep their mouths shut. USA would either be neutral or pro German in this new timeline.

>>18118547
The CSA that actually existed already had much, much lower standards for whiteness than the North did or after reconstruction. The most archetypical example is the Louisiana creoles, this ethnic group was replete with part African people. Yet they were legally white and participant in the Southern aristocracy. This is the ethnic group Beyoncé comes from, if the south won Beyoncé would be officially white.
And this is just the more obvious and visible example than the growing number of clearly mixed Anglo-Southrons claiming whiteness, like Varina Davis.

>>18118566
>most anti German sentiments came from the south(kkk, Woodrow Wilson, evangelism)
>tfw we could have had a German world order if the Union had done what literally any other country would have done and wiped the south out while they had the chance
>or even just deported them all or at the very least prevented them from voting for at least 100 years
Unironically what the fuck were they thinking?

>>18118593
Im aware of the standards of huwiteness in largely black areas, but in OTL we had millions of whites immigrate to the south and millions of blacks leave, had they become independant they would mix alot with Hispanic "whites" and be Argie tier where most "whites" actually have 5-35% nonwhite dna, which is common enough in modern Southern whites but far from the norm

>>18112561 (OP)
The world would be better for reasons unrelated to southron larps

>>18117423
>blindly swear allegiance to the first group who declare niggers inferior
Literally the only thing white nationalists have ever done that wasn't meth and child molestation, so, yeah. Facts don't care about your feelings, snowflake. Melt over it.

>>18112561 (OP)

Why would the Confederacy want Haiti?

>inb4 to enslave le niggers

Haiti had thrown off the shackles of slavery like 50 years before the civil war. If anything, re-enslaving them would have just resulted in their own slaves being introduced to even more whacky revolutionary ideas.

>>18121702
Because this was never a well thought out ideology. It boils down to this.
>dipshit has total power over other people and can laze about doing nothing aside from occasionally commanding these people to do something on pain of beating, maiming, or death while also getting rich off them and sometimes banging them if the fancy struck him
>preserving this setup for as long as possible is the only goal. There is no goal other than keeping this sweet ass gig rolling for as long as possible and at any cost.
With these two concepts laid out, their behavior becomes easier to understand. First? Haiti was poor and poorly armed with little international support and all those black people were just more slaves to add to the fields. Like a whole country of unattended John Deere’s that no one owns. All you have to do is shoot at some of them. Second, Haiti was the boogie man of the American south. The inevitable future that their policies were working to produce. Yet to address this the above posted setup would need to end. So like any cadre of morons when faced with cognitive dissonance? The response becomes DURR SMASH! That’s why. Haiti scared them but they would never abandon the policies that caused Haiti to scare them.

>>18112561 (OP)
the sheer preasure of the central american regions would have force them into abolishing slavery

>>18112561 (OP)
The slaveless poor southern yeomen would probably have to become one of the most Sparta-tier militarised classes in modern history for any kind of greater CSA to be viable. Domestic policy would in large part orbit around the constant policing and occupation of Central America and the British Caribbean.
They’d also probably sooner or later recruit Hispanic non-black Caribenos into the higher ranks of their entrenched caste system regardless of their dubious whiteness. Similar elite culture, extremely racist, culturally and ideologically receptive to slavery.
So, basically, it would be held up by the twin pillars of Cletus from Alabama and Juan from Puerto Rico for the benefit of their rich-slave holding counterparts against the perpetual threats of black people and Mexicans.
The situation already simmering in the CSA of people committing to the pantomime of blatant, obvious Quadroons totally being 100% white would reach a fever pitch of absurdity as they integrate the Caribbean.
It would not surprise me if they adopted some kind of blanqueamiento type ideology, at least for the lower free classes.

>>18122893

Slavery wouldn't have survived long enough to expand.

Really, the Confederate ruling class would have been exceedingly lucky if they could have propped that system up for another 20 years before it wound up being voted out of existence by increasingly disenchanted lower class Southern whites or the country succumbing to a large-scale slave rebellion.

>>18123359
There are more slaves alive today than ever in history, despite being illegal in every country
The idea that slavery is just teleologically fated to end in tandem with modernisation is pure Whig history that collapses on any economic inspection. Fordism would have revolutionised slavery harder than the cotton gin, in fact, that’s basically what major manufacturing countries today do only minus the significant upfront cost of actually buying slaves - so that’s a plus for abolition I guess.

>>18112561 (OP)
Completely dysfunctional state that would undermine everything the South actually wanted. The Confederacy, while mainly on the basis of slavery, also simply believed in the right for the culturally distinct South to pursue its own destiny.

While it may not have been the goal of the slave owners, a lot of the Southern intelligentsia wanted to basically break economic reliance on the North, industrialize at a slower but sustainable rate, and keep a rigid segregation between races. There's a really good book on this called Modernizing a Slave Economy written by a Pollack.

They'd limit immigration, even from Catholic Europe, and maintain a smaller WASP society based on very clear religious values (constitution had seperation of church and state, but also changed "endowed by their creator" to a mention of the Lord.) It would be a weaker backwater state, but a culturally rich one that maintains its traditions.

Now imagine this; they conquer all of Mexico, which will outpopulate it eventually. Cuba or Hispanola could maybe be effective colonies e la Hawaii or the Phillippenes, but all of fucking Central America? They have enougn issue keeping the blacks in check, now they'd be majority Catholic. The mestizos encouraged to move to the slowly industrializing North for jobs as the rest is kept structurally poor. So imagine Southern Texas but all the way across the entire South, and a lot more black people. If it somehow survived, it'd be a shithole, and the U.S. would be a pan-European (probably majority Catholic) state witj a lot of Asians in the West.

Laughable and retarded fucking scenario. Smaller South is more interesting.

>>18123587
>They'd limit immigration, even from Catholic Europe, and maintain a smaller WASP society based on very clear religious values
That’s literally the opposite of the contemporary democrat stance on immigration. The Democrats were the pro-immigration and religiously pluralistic party. It was the Republicans that was full of nativists, in fact the know-nothing party was one of the direct forerunners of the GOP. All the Irish immigrants were voting Democrat, they weren’t voting for Lincoln, it was the New England WASPs that thought they were subhumans who were voting for Lincoln.
Don’t forget that one of the founding Confederate States, Louisiana, was majority Catholic (and also full of Quadroons LARPing as white, which the rest of the south kind of just accepted and would probably also do in places like Cuba).

>>18123523
That’s a weird way to read things. There are more people alive than any time in history and the global population of enslaved people is somewhere between 38-50 million. Added to that, modern slavery is typically highly illegal, or practiced in the most corrupt and backwards parts of the globe. So in that sense the Whig model is dead on since chattel slavery remains reviled and illegal (and more or less not practiced anywhere) and has been replaced by criminal syndicates engaged in human trafficking, countries like North Korea and some parts of the United States using penal labor, and some of the standard Middle East being the Middle East business.

>>18112561 (OP)
It’d go communist during the Cold War

>>18123632
You're right, actually, thank you for calling it out. The Confederacy had a non-negligible amount of German Catholic immigrants in their ranks.

My point was more than the South would maintain a largely Protestant identity solely due to the fact immigration would pivot Northward more than Southward. Even then, I'm not so sure that'd remain the case since the South being anti-industrialization is kind of another historical myth that's fundamentally untrue.

Race will always be an issue for an independent South, so having white Catholics come in from Europe and build a majority over slaves would be generally beneficial.

>>18123654
And yet, despite being illegal, there are still more slaves alive today than ever history. Fact is, free labour is profitable, it always was, always will be, and there will always be a demand for it - legislation only acts as a speed bump on this.
>and more or less not practiced anywhere
In the United States today, despite it being totally illegal, there are approximately 1.1 million slaves. For comparison the Confederate States when it existed had 3.5 million. There are about 1/3rd as many slaves in America today as there was at the absolute peak of legal slavery, despite it now being totally criminalised. And this is not including penal servitude, if it were then this number would be far higher than the historical CSA.
Sorry, but whig history, yet again, bares zero resemblance to reality.
>inb4 America is one of the most backwards and corrupt parts of the globe
Okay, let’s take a European country for example. In Britain today there are approximately 130,000 modern slaves. Before the Somerset case when slavery was ruled non-existent in English law there was never more than 10-15,000 slaves in 18th century Britain. This means there’s about 10x more slaves today in a European country that barely even had domestic slaves in the first place, despite all the legislation against it.

>>18123658
Absolute cold-war L for the USA in that case.
Communist racially egalitarian CSA allied with the USSR is literally Uncle Sam’s worst nightmare. Yankee heads would explode.

>>18123675
The statistic you're using comes from Walk Free, yes? They include child marriage, sex trafficking, and penal labor all as forms of modern slavery.

Chattel slavery is fundamentally at odds with capitalism as an economic system. In the West, you more often than not see illegal immigrants working under the table at market equilibrium wage rather than people being forced around and sold as property.

It's costly as a society to keep such a large population in complete bondage, as opposed to paying people the lowest possible denominator to get them to work. Penal labor is beneficial solely because its expensive to keep people in prison and getting value out of them is important, it also creates a labor force that will do shitty jobs that only desperate immigrants would otherwise.

>>18123675
You’re sort of glossing over the fact that there are more people by far alive today than in the past. Meaning that the per capita rate is a tiny fraction what it once was. Once again, Whig history is demonstrated as accurate in its predictions. You can’t say a drug problem is getting worse when drug use has fallen from 5% to 1%. Not even if your population size grows by an order of magnitude.

>>18123683
> Chattel slavery is fundamentally at odds with capitalism as an economic system.
And what exactly is your reasoning for this?
This was the meme in the early 19th century and then the cotton gin was invented and proved how mistaken it was by making slavery more profitable than ever. Right up until the minute their export economy collapsed from blockade the South was making mindboggling amounts of money on the back of slave labour, despite a sophisticated global economy and burgeoning industrialisation at home. Industrialised agriculture was never going to make slavery unprofitable, every contemporary innovation in agricultural technology proved the opposite, as now suddenly it enabled fewer slaves to yield more value.
Even the contemporary concern by free-soilers that free farmers simply could not economically compete with slave labour belies the myth that slavery was unproductive. It was so productive that the rest of the agricultural economy was critically threatened by it.
Even today, with globalisation markets increasingly tap into (illegal) slave labour. The products on the market in the modern day USA that rely on modern slavery value in hundreds of billions of dollars. Looking at the patterns of global economic growth and industrialisation (or deindustrialisation) you see the exact opposite results of what you would expect from the Whig narrative on slavery, the most rapidly industrialising high-growth economies are riddled with modern day slavery, the countries with the most robust labour protections and high wages are utterly stagnant and unproductive.
The facts speak for themselves, free labour=free money. Which you’d think would be obvious, yet somehow people still fall for the Whig history meme.

>>18123701
Okay, so, if there’s some economic force that renders slavery unsustainable - what exactly is it?
The point is, regardless of whether slaves are 30% or 0.3% of a pop, slavery never ended - it just went underground. The fundamental motivations and potential profits based on it were never eliminated, they’re just counterbalanced by the risks and practical complications of legislation. The fact slavery even needs overwhelming legislation to merely dampen it, and the fact it can never be fully extinguished even in that case, represents a serious flaw in the narrative that its economically fated to extinction.

>>18123709
Stealing other people’s labor dates back to at least the start of agriculture. That we’ve transitioned from the open to the clandestine should be it’s own indicator, but the point is that the drivers of slavery are corruption, instability, poverty, and the lack of enforcement that these things brings. Slavery can’t work on a large/industrial scale because on one end you get slave rebellions, and on the other end you get abolitionist actions. It can work on a smaller scale, criminal level, but as fewer and fewer populations remain deeply impoverished and vulnerable to that kind of exploitation, the opportunities to enslave people diminish. Combined with increased enforcement and better public awareness of the problem and you can see why it’s been trending downwards for some time. The problem with slavery being economically viable is that it relies on society as a whole seeing it as acceptable, and there being sufficient forces at hand to prevent rebellion. That being said, of course it’s still a problem, and will be so for a long time to come. It’s been a scourge since the Neolithic, if not earlier. The enlightenment hasn’t even reached 500 years old yet.

>>18123725
Except here are the things.
1. Slave enforcement would be easier now than it ever was historically. With modern arms, modern surveillance and modern disarmament tyranny is easier and more efficient than ever. This could be applied just as well by slavers as by states, because the fundamental tools work just as well for either. How exactly are slaves with noguns supposed to resist a system of enforcement that have modern arms, modern surveillance and even biometrics working for them?
2. Slavery today is practiced on an industrial scale. Modern markets are full of goods that are reliant on modern slavery, in fact access to slavery is one of the great pull factors of globalisation. Cheaper clothes, cheaper precious metals, cheaper agricultural produce, when the free market has to pick between slavery and fair wages the free market will pick slavery every single time.
> The problem with slavery being economically viable is that it relies on society as a whole seeing it as acceptable
No doubt, slavery is bad, but my point isn’t that it’s morally good. It’s that the narrative that economics select against it and it must inevitably be done away for purely economic reasons is just blatantly untrue, even in face of overwhelming legal and moral pressure slavery always finds a way - because free labour is just that valuable.
A society like the CSA that already had a robust cultural system that completely orbited around slavery and consistently doubled down on justifying it every single time it was challenged could easily sustain slavery long into the future. The predictions that it could only sustain slavery for a few more decades at best are probably wrong, the more likely scenario is it would be wind up being one of those countries like Mauretania that dragged its feet on officially abolishing it well into the late 20th century yet still de facto practices it today on a massive scale.

>>18123739
I think the problem here is that you don’t consider the social element of it to be connected to the economic, and I do. If you remove the social element? Sure it’s viable. As long as you can beat, torture, and kill people who don’t want to work for you, stealing their labor is profitable. The trouble comes from, again, when slavers are so badly outnumbered by their slaves that they can use those numbers to overwhelm them. Haiti there is a prime example in the semi modern era, but there are others and then there’s the economic cost of maintaining what amounts to a standing army just for domestic suppression purposes. After that, there’s the abolition issue. Behaviorally modern humans have empathy. That means it’s harder and harder to be cruel to someone for profit and not have others object to the behavior. To the point that they will absolutely employ violence against the slaver.
>people still enslaved, CSA would keep doing it
Yes. Absolutely. That will continue for some time. It’s just that it becomes less and less prevalent as time goes on. As for the CSA? Assuming they won their independence and did the golden circle plan? At best I would expect them to either abolish the practice, or get it abolished for them post WW2 at the absolute latest. So they’d have kept it for maybe 70-90 years after they were forced to give it up at the longest? I dunno. That gets into speculation about hypothetical demographics that never existed and if the plantation owners could monopolize violence for that long. Or if some other power or group of powers decided to sort them out. Or if it just became some internecine hellscape of suicide attacks and mass execution reprisals.

>>18123762
Except here’s the thing, empathy isn’t a thing modern humans developed, it’s something humans have always had - and it never prevented slave societies on an immense scale.
The peculiar thing about the South isn’t just their practice of slavery, it’s that by the 1860s their entire culture orbited around it. It’s truly mindboggling how much the very atmosphere of culture was instrumentalised to maintain slavery. People did truly believe not just that blacks were lesser, but that slavery was basically doing them a favour, because they simply couldn’t live independent or happy lives without it - and that they were content within it. The white underclass also felt extremely threatened by abolition and were totally against it, because then the freedmen population would be direct competition for them that would intermingle with their communities and drag down their already meagre standard of living through economic competition for jobs and resources.
This is why in my original post I say if the CSA were ever to be viable that the yeoman population would be the absolute backbone of it. The non-elite Southern white population would have to be 100x more militarised than it is even today where about 1/3rd of Georgian males serve in the military. Agriculture, unskilled industrial labour, slaves can do all of that and free men cant really compete. But the military, the police, and private security would then be the bread and butter of the free population, because a slave society would have dire need of all of those, and lots of them. And more to the point if the CSA was going to expand and do golden circle shit it would have to recruit other demographics into this caste to sustain their territory, what Cletus is to Tyrone in Alabama is what Juan would wind up being to Pierre in Hispaniola. Which would mean by no means could it be some kind of wignat country, more like Brazil on steroids.

>>18117268
fact
>>18114452
false

>>18112561 (OP)
This would have never happened. I highly doubt the Confederacy would've stayed out the country too long if they won. More likely they sue for peace and for a more favorable representation in the union.

>>18117268
Southern whites were majority unless you talked about upper class elites

I imagine that Slavery would evolve to something more like Modern Dubai or Qatar where people are on paper free but have work permits that limit where they can work or move, with ownership of said permits being bought, rented or sold between individual industries.

Say you are Cletus and want to start a factory, you build the place, start shipment of raw material, and then to start the operations, you rent out 200 work permits some management firm, whose "workers" are then instructed to move to your factory

>>18117268
There are more well off non-whites nowadays.

>>18123523
>There are more slaves alive today than ever in history, despite being illegal in every country

Not the chattel slavery of the Old South though where slaves were regarded as a valuable commodity. A good field hand would command a price comparable to a car today.

The slaves of today are largely regarded as completely expendable. To be used and disposed of like one would paper towels.

>The idea that slavery is just teleologically fated to end in tandem with modernisation is pure Whig history that collapses on any economic inspection. Fordism would have revolutionised slavery harder than the cotton gin

The only industrialized countries that successfully maintained a slave-based economy for an appreciable length of time have been the Soviet Union, Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, North Korea, and China to a more limited extent. Maybe Qatar if you're stretching it.

>>18123523
I've noticed that when rwers celebrate the classicide of the planters they do so with leftist "eat the rich" talking points, speaking of them in purely material terms, failing to recognize they were real Southern nationalists and slavery was a highly profitable institution meant to perpetuate the South. It's just envy, the same thing that provokes such a powerful inferiority complex in nonwhites.

>>18117263
>>18117268
If slavery or at least segregation remained it wouldn't really matter, the racial hierarchy would become permanent once we understand eugenics and genetics, it would become a fact of life that some people are more intelligent than others as well as inherently criminal and hostile. Black and brown people would actually benefit as the white man imposes his superior values on them.

>>18124585
>The slaves of today are largely regarded as completely expendable. To be used and disposed of like one would paper towels.
Precisely, slavery today is even more competitive than it was back then. The free market found a way to make slaves even cheaper despite abolition.
The least efficient thing about antebellum slavery is how expensive slaves were, which was in large part caused by the British throttling of the transatlantic trade creating a completely closed market.
>The only industrialized countries that successfully maintained a slave-based economy for an appreciable length of time have been the Soviet Union, Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, North Korea, and China to a more limited extent. Maybe Qatar if you're stretching it.
Do you think only the bad guys that inevitably lose and see the light practice slavery?
Pro tip, statistically speaking you’re probably wearing clothes made by slaves right now and slavery was for certain indispensable in harvesting the precious metals used on your shitposting device of choice.
This thread is full people repeating the Whig history meme, yet no one is saying what it actually is that makes free labour so economically undesirable.

>>18121702
Same with me.