Imagine this scenario. Britain maintains the American colonies and increasingly dominate the Caribbean, potentially grabbing more French and Spanish sugar islands. When the international slave trade is banned circa 1808, slaves can still be sold from Virginia to Jamaica/Guadeloupe/etc.
Given that sugar plantations were far more profitable than cotton plantations, doesn't this mean that Caribbean slavery expands far more, and Deep South slavery expands far less? This seems to have major ramifications:
1) The Deep South mainly depends on indentured white servants, and the planters don't make quite as much money. More whites buy up smaller patches of land to work as free farmers. These societies are far less attached to slavery in their identity.
2) There is a much bigger West Indian lobby that tries to bribe politicians to back slavery. On the other hand, more of the slaver interests are based on islands that are easy for the Royal Navy to defeat in a rebellion.
Given that sugar plantations were far more profitable than cotton plantations, doesn't this mean that Caribbean slavery expands far more, and Deep South slavery expands far less? This seems to have major ramifications:
1) The Deep South mainly depends on indentured white servants, and the planters don't make quite as much money. More whites buy up smaller patches of land to work as free farmers. These societies are far less attached to slavery in their identity.
2) There is a much bigger West Indian lobby that tries to bribe politicians to back slavery. On the other hand, more of the slaver interests are based on islands that are easy for the Royal Navy to defeat in a rebellion.