re: #305 Romantic Heretic

This is why I believe that even if the South had won, the Confederacy was still doomed. Any nation founded on the idea of, “If I don’t wanna, I don’t haveta!” cannot last very long.

The first time, say, Louisiana and Mississippi have a disagreement and the Confederacy decides one way or another or tries to compromise, one or both states will give the Confederacy the finger and take off on their own.

Within twenty years of the end of the war the Confederacy would have resembled Somalia. The North could then walk in and pick up the pieces. Or just let them stew. Running the South in a case like that might be more problem than it’s worth.

As long as you ignore the moral question of slavery, there’s a case to make that slavery was doomed economically. To take one example, Virginia was, by 1860, barely break-even in its GDP — and that was solely because of the profits of selling slaves. It appeared likely that by 1870 Virginia would be running at a loss. North and South Carolina were already at that point of running losses.

Of course the case stands on the assumption that these forefathers of the Tea Party would recognize the source of their economic woes and act to eliminate slavery themselves, and not try to legislate action to restore their profitability at the expense of the north. (Do I really need to point out the sarcasm in that statement?)