Specifically during the colonial era- could the Eastern Seaboard colonies have had demographics closer to the overwhelmingly black populations of the Caribbean(+90% on many islands), or at the very least Brazil(close to 50%). I understand they weren't far short of that in some of the Southern colonies, but in the USA overall the black population has been <20% since the founding.
You can probably get some of the way there by positing an increased number of slaves imported during the colonial era, but that'll only get you so far- at it's peak, the African-derived population was ~20%, which if my math is right means you'd need the number of imported slaves to be 4 times the OTL number just to reach 50-50 at that point. Although if the cotton gin had been invented earlier, then that might incite a boom in slave importation that would get you some of the way there...
But we also need the white settlement on the Eastern Seaboard to be substantially curtailed. The Plymouth colony came close to failing OTL... if it had, and with a few more drastic failures in New England, perhaps the British/Puritans would become discouraged with settling New England and focus on the more obviously lucrative Southern and Caribbean. If this is coupled with the Dutch retaining control of New Amsterdam, and continuing their limited focus on the fur trade, then the OTL Northern colonies might remain heavily underpopulated for a few more decades, much like French Quebec.
But it's hard to imagine that remaining a permanent state of affairs- the Northern colonies are simply too suitable for heavy settlement. Any ideas on how to more permanently curb the white population in the North? I do wonder if the aristocratic planter-based agricultural model that existed in Virginia might have been viable further North- at least as far North as Southern Pennsylvania/New Jersey...
One complicating factor is that, once the Cotton Gin was invented, the overwhelming profitability of cotton production in the South siphoned away slaves attached to less profitable ventures further North. Perhaps if we a posit a world in which the slave trade had not been banned, either by an American government(assuming one even exists) or by London's parliament- and perhaps an earlier invention of the cotton gin would be sufficient for that, in so far as the slave owners/traders would be wealthier and therefore more politically powerful while the abolitionist movement was still in it's infancy. In this case, the supply of slaves may be overwhelming enough to saturate the cotton plantation, and so less-profitable-but-still-profitable Northern slavery might not be priced out of the slave market?
You can probably get some of the way there by positing an increased number of slaves imported during the colonial era, but that'll only get you so far- at it's peak, the African-derived population was ~20%, which if my math is right means you'd need the number of imported slaves to be 4 times the OTL number just to reach 50-50 at that point. Although if the cotton gin had been invented earlier, then that might incite a boom in slave importation that would get you some of the way there...
But we also need the white settlement on the Eastern Seaboard to be substantially curtailed. The Plymouth colony came close to failing OTL... if it had, and with a few more drastic failures in New England, perhaps the British/Puritans would become discouraged with settling New England and focus on the more obviously lucrative Southern and Caribbean. If this is coupled with the Dutch retaining control of New Amsterdam, and continuing their limited focus on the fur trade, then the OTL Northern colonies might remain heavily underpopulated for a few more decades, much like French Quebec.
But it's hard to imagine that remaining a permanent state of affairs- the Northern colonies are simply too suitable for heavy settlement. Any ideas on how to more permanently curb the white population in the North? I do wonder if the aristocratic planter-based agricultural model that existed in Virginia might have been viable further North- at least as far North as Southern Pennsylvania/New Jersey...
One complicating factor is that, once the Cotton Gin was invented, the overwhelming profitability of cotton production in the South siphoned away slaves attached to less profitable ventures further North. Perhaps if we a posit a world in which the slave trade had not been banned, either by an American government(assuming one even exists) or by London's parliament- and perhaps an earlier invention of the cotton gin would be sufficient for that, in so far as the slave owners/traders would be wealthier and therefore more politically powerful while the abolitionist movement was still in it's infancy. In this case, the supply of slaves may be overwhelming enough to saturate the cotton plantation, and so less-profitable-but-still-profitable Northern slavery might not be priced out of the slave market?
Last edited: