• rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    There was no point at which the south would have gone “Golly you know, we seem to be farming a whole lot less and industrializing a whole lore more, I guess we should abolish slavery because of that economic change.”

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      The point isn’t that the entrenched slaving elite would have said “Oh gosh gee willikers, I guess it’s time to give up slavery!”, it’s that counter-elites whose power did not rest on slavery, and whose power was often challenged by slavery, would arise, and eradicate slavery in much the same way as it had been eradicated in the North - by the withering of the economic and political pull of slaver elites until they could no longer meaningfully challenge abolitionist control of the legislature - and the same way that it was abolished in most of Europe.

      • militaryintelligence@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        The situation in the US was different. Were slaves being used on vast farms harvesting a single cash crop in Europe? Without knowing the full history of slavery in Europe, besides knowing they abolished it before the industrial revolution, I can guess not. There wasn’t as strong of an incentive in favor as there was in southern states, where cotton thrived.

        Slavery will never become redundant, we must fight for abolishment.