115
Imagine if the South had seceded and the Blue States were free of Grey-Red Conservatism : Swingers Discussion 977951051
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsImagine if the South had seceded and the Blue States were free of Grey-Red Conservatism
TOPIC: Imagine if the South had seceded and the Blue States were free of Grey-Red Conservatism
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Start   51 to 60 of 64   End
User Details are only visible to members.
"The US would not have participated in The Great War (WWI) or WWII."

Decem, I would disagree only in that with smaller territories and weakened positions in the Western Hemisphere the North and the South like other nations in Europe would have been seeking political and trade alliances with other powerful nations. Like many in WWI they may have been sucked into the conflicts by treaty agreement regardless of their own desires.

As far as my theories regarding alliances with the South in the twentieth century, there were many prominent and lesser know figures in power throughout the federal government all through WWII who were home grown members of the Klan. Some of them played key roles in not allowing hundreds of thousands of Jews from being rescued from the devil.

Sapph I'm not sure you were quite being fair with Cpl. He and I said essentially the same thing. It's not that all of us don't' recognize slavery as being morally repugnant, but from what I have been taught about the historical perspective of "that" time, slavery was a key part of the South's economic infrastructure.

The advancements in mechanized farming had not progressed much past the Cotton Gin. So the prospects for the South looked bleak from the perspective of the plantation owners who probably were not all visionaries, with regard to how to replace all of their slaves with workers they had to pay. Well, greed being the big green eyed monster that it is, in the end, it's all about the money. So he and I both claim it was about the money i.e. power and resources. (and yes this thread is starting to look more like one about "race baiting")

I'm torn about whether the South could have overcome the scourge of slavery on it's own. They certainly would have been a continuation of a moral struggle between their Christian roots and the green eyed monster. But the clergy in many a denomination, in many a land, have done what they needed to do to survive the politics of the time, in many places around the world.

Changing the cultural perspective of a people doesn't happen overnight. There are many places in the world where cultural perspectives and ancient hatreds continue to smolder and leave a pox on humanity.

Grantham NH
Username hidden
(1470 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Ok I've read and re-read your original posts. Here comes my views:

The south would have continued with slavery with perhaps one or two states eventually abolishing it: Florida for sure. No time zone given on becoming a free state - this is assuming that many of the northern retirees relocated in Florida; the Cubans and south Central Americans migrating to Florida.

The north, with its union movement and strong socialist movement during the early 1900's would mirrored that of Canada and many of the European nations. I don't, however, believe that the north or south would have been taken over by any country. I do believe that Texas would have been part of Mexico and possibly southern California and parts of Arizona as well.

The US would not have participated in The Great War (WWI) or WWII.

Fairfield CA
Username hidden
(575 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
This reminds me of a homework assignment. It's been awhile since I read anything about the Civil War, but as I recollect it, you are right about the position the Republican Party had (formerly known as the Whig Party) and their objective to have the new states enter as free states.

However, you bring in the "what if" scenario. Perhaps, I will give it some thought and respond at a later time.

There was some very interesting posts in here. Thanks to all contributors.

Fairfield CA
Username hidden
(575 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
elc,

Thanks for giving the topic such care and thought...and intriguing speculation, and I can see things happening as you describe.

Yes, the West would be the place where South and North clashed again if Lincoln had let the Confederacy split from the Union. And that clash would have been between Mexico, Native Americans, North and South.

I particularly like the speculation about the South perhaps linking up with Nazism at some point: the Confederacy uniting with another country where White Supremacy became King and Tyrant.

Again, thanks for adding your thoughts to the thread with a real interesting in considering the question.

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Coupleinit4fun: ?The CW was not about slavery OR states rights, it was about economics, plain and simple."

So we've got another sadly deluded Southerner not joining the peas in the pod who can't see an elepant in the room--the issue of slavery--even as the South, by defending it, was shitting all over human rights and provoking not just an economic confict but a moral, religious and political conflict with the North.

The South was trying to protect their economy which was deeply dependent on slavery, so if you want to say the South fought the Civil War to protect the political economy of slavery you have a point.

But you should try reading Jefferson Davis' Message to the Provisional Congress of the Confederate States so you can see in the words of a good old boy--Jeff Davis--just how much the secession was about slavery and the Northern threat to slavery and its extention into new states.

Did you also sleep through history class with Debjack, Perfect Match, and Lucky? You guys take the cake for delusion.

Thanks you are motivating me as a teacher of American culture and history to use quotes from all of you when I teach about the Civil War in class. I will cite them about how various people, raised or educated in ex-slave states, think the Civil War was not about slavery but just about economics, plain and simple.

Couplein4it: Could you please cite me a reputable history textbook or Encylopedia entry or historian who supports your point of view of the Civil War about economics, plain and simple?

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Well this is a fascinating topic.

The North possessed the vast majority of heavy industry with the ever expanding industrial revolution. Financially the going would have been tough for awhile but I think the North would have continued.

There would have been no way to prevent hostilities even if Lincoln had not committed troops to a war effort in 1860. The eventual expansion westward would have turned into a race and the violence between the settlers of both regions would have been augmented by troops from both sides this escalating into the same result, and possibly an even longer and more protracted war.

The war was about money and power. You can make scapegoats out of Lincoln or Davis all you want but they were merely the political figure heads visible to the public eye. Leaders of big industry, agriculture, and the competition for untapped Western resources were behind the whole enchilada.

With a weakened country, more diverse threats from England, Spain, and Mexico would have made various other attempts not just to subjugate the Union but the Confederacy also. Had both sides survived into the Twentieth Century you might have even seen the South under heavy Klan influence even align themselves with the National Socialist of Germany, and attack the North again.

Be careful what you wish for.

Grantham NH
Username hidden
(1470 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"Born in PA?? I didn't know that! Now it makes sense why you're such a cool, sexy swingin' chick."

yes perfect I was born in PA, moved to Louisville when I was young though. Thought I had mentioned that before. I still have family up there mapquested it one day and you are mid way hours wise between me and my family.

PG

Louisville KY
Username hidden
(17547 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Destin:

Historians and scholars and concerned citizens are always asking What If?

What if JFK was not assassinated? What if MLK Jr. was not assassinated? What if Lincoln was not assassinated?

What if Bush had invaded and occupied Iraq with 300,000 soldiers (as some generals recommended) rather than 130,000 as Rumsfeld wanted?

What if we had stayed in Vietname rather than withdrawing?

What if we did not cut and run from the war on poverty?

White men in the South (e.g., South Carolina and Louisiana) are voting for Obama in significantly fewer numbers than white men are voting for Obama in Washington state, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine?

The cool thing is that a significant number of white men are voting for Obama over Clinton in every state, even swing states and Red states.

But it seems that Obama's race/ethnicity is losing him more votes among whites in deep South states than in northern states.

What do you make of this? Do we still see differences between North and South over issues of race and electing or hiring a black man vs a white person?

Is this race baiting? I'd say no. I'd say it looking directly at what is happening in the 2008 election, and I'd say we need to understand the American past to understand what is happening in America today, both in terms of its changes and lack of change regarding the influence of race on our judgment of people.

Yes, results from California show that Latinos and Asian-Americans were more opposed to Obama than white voters. Statistics show that college-educated white citizens are more likely to vote for Obama than those with less than a college education.

So does the voting for Obama show that America is beyond race, or does it show that race still factors into our judgments of people and whether we want them to work for us or lead us?

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
This topic is called RACE BAITING, there are no IF's in the Civil War debate, it is a done deal, over and out. Many more intelligent historians have discussed this topic than you liberals, on a swingers site, who what to change history to meet your communist plans...so give it up, your are irrelevant!

Destin FL
Username hidden
(14562 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
And yet another racially motivated forum!!!!! obsess much?

Saint Louis MO
Username hidden
(12441 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Start   51 to 60 of 64   End
TOPIC: Imagine if the South had seceded and the Blue States were free of Grey-Red Conservatism