DBWI Slavery In america

in 1670 the british west indies were worried that demand for slaves in british north america would cause the price of slaves to go up, and successfully lobbied Parlament to ban slavery in the north american colionies to perserve Britians sugar industry.

This destroyed slavery as a force in colional america and when the coliones finally broke away from great britan this tradition of being a nation free of slavery continued.

But what if this didn't happen what would happen if america had slaves?
 
in 1670 the british west indies were worried that demand for slaves in british north america would cause the price of slaves to go up, and successfully lobbied Parlament to ban slavery in the north american colionies to perserve Britians sugar industry.

This destroyed slavery as a force in colional america and when the coliones finally broke away from great britan this tradition of being a nation free of slavery continued.

But what if this didn't happen what would happen if america had slaves?

It’s be a nightmare for the would-be slaves. I mean, we just need to look at how the West Indies treated them and imagine that even worse up here.

Furthermore, given the different approaches to business, the South would rely on them more than the North. That could’ve led to open conflict.

When the slave trade ended and such, a lot of them fled here to the US or Mexico for opportunity and contributed a lot. A lot of that would be slowed down if slavery was here in the US.
 
Furthermore, given the different approaches to business, the South would rely on them more than the North. That could’ve led to open conflict.

Where would that line be, though? We know in our timeline that the cheap access to plentiful food, natural mineral resources, ease of transport, ect. make the Great Lakes region the natural economic and population heartland of the U.S, even if it got its start in waterfalls of New England. Duluth and Pittsburgh are the steelmaking capitals of the world, while I don't think the Minneapolis and Detroit milling industries need any defending. Still, once you get south of the Chowann the country's as rural and poor as the Great American Deseret, barring the direct Mississippi basis. Would slavery have allowed cash crops to develop in the region, giving some kind of economic incentive to settle in those steaming, insect infested swamplands, rough woods, and rocky mountains as opposed to the richer and easier to traverse lands further north?

Such a "South" probably only exists east of the Mississippi river basin (Which is far too attached to the economy of the Upper Mississippi river basin to risk conflict or, likely, hold its own culture) south of Virginia east of the Appalachians, and south of the coal fields in Trans-Appalachia, not to mention have to deal with the culturally distinct states of Cherokee and Orleans smack dab at their core and the vital mouth of the Mississippi. It could never successfully compete with the rest of the Union.
 
Where would that line be, though? We know in our timeline that the cheap access to plentiful food, natural mineral resources, ease of transport, ect. make the Great Lakes region the natural economic and population heartland of the U.S, even if it got its start in waterfalls of New England. Duluth and Pittsburgh are the steelmaking capitals of the world, while I don't think the Minneapolis and Detroit milling industries need any defending. Still, once you get south of the Chowann the country's as rural and poor as the Great American Deseret, barring the direct Mississippi basis. Would slavery have allowed cash crops to develop in the region, giving some kind of economic incentive to settle in those steaming, insect infested swamplands, rough woods, and rocky mountains as opposed to the richer and easier to traverse lands further north?

Such a "South" probably only exists east of the Mississippi river basin (Which is far too attached to the economy of the Upper Mississippi river basin to risk conflict or, likely, hold its own culture) south of Virginia east of the Appalachians, and south of the coal fields in Trans-Appalachia, not to mention have to deal with the culturally distinct states of Cherokee and Orleans smack dab at their core and the vital mouth of the Mississippi. It could never successfully compete with the rest of the Union.

Definitely though I'm grateful the New Whig Party got them to pass the tax benefits for renewable energy sources since mineral-based businesses are pretty finite.

I'm guessing that cash crops and such would've grown there. Hell, cotton became a pretty big deal when the cotton gin was invented so I figure the slaveswould've been picking that up in Georgia. I mean, slave labor has been used to accomplish enormous tasks trhough sheer force alone. Then again, given how slavery was being treated in the 1850s and 1860s, the South being so depdneable on it might've forced conflicts if not full-out civil war. Yes, it's drastic, but there was tough times there for them and the main reason it wasn't as bad was because of the freed slaves from the Caribbean helping to bring business here.

Granted, the Liberia project was a hilarious backfire. As a refresher, bascially a way for the US to send freedman of the Caribbean and Mexico to Africa, but most assimilated there or stayed in the Americas and instead alot of Liberians went to here. Granted, this does help in the long run since alot fo African nations are now investing in our south as part of the new African century.
 

Schnozzberry

Gone Fishin'
Donor
It’s be a nightmare for the would-be slaves. I mean, we just need to look at how the West Indies treated them and imagine that even worse up here.
I don't see how the slave system could be worse, they would just be farming tobacco, indigo, or some other cash crop, yeah? Sugar farming in the Indies was just a nightmare, about the only thing I can think of that would be worse would be a South American mining style for slavery. I can't see slavery lasting in the USA until after the Mexican-American war and America get's access to the gold and silver mines in the west, it only lasted into the 1830s for Britain.

An agrarian based slave system would almost certainly force an earlier settlement into the Ohio Valley and the more fertile regions in the east would probably be bought out from the poorer farmers in mass. The American colonies would become a series of plantations with a far sharper divide between rich and poor.

When the USA gains independence, assuming slavery doesn't botch this, slavery is just too un-republican for a America similar to OTL to form. The simple nature of republicanism is the reason why none of the republics in the whole of the America's had legal slavery and only the monarchies and colonial governments that tolerated it. The USA would need to be some kind of monarchy like Brazil for slavery to survive. But I doubt there would even be an American Revolution ITTL. The rich elite would be too dependent on Britain to maintain control, the poor whites wouldn't support a revolution coming from the elites, and they lack the power to create an independence movement on their own. The most likely event would be a slave rebellion that would break America away from Britain, like a far larger Baptist War or something.
 
Definitely though I'm grateful the New Whig Party got them to pass the tax benefits for renewable energy sources since mineral-based businesses are pretty finite.

I'm guessing that cash crops and such would've grown there. Hell, cotton became a pretty big deal when the cotton gin was invented so I figure the slaveswould've been picking that up in Georgia. I mean, slave labor has been used to accomplish enormous tasks trhough sheer force alone. Then again, given how slavery was being treated in the 1850s and 1860s, the South being so depdneable on it might've forced conflicts if not full-out civil war. Yes, it's drastic, but there was tough times there for them and the main reason it wasn't as bad was because of the freed slaves from the Caribbean helping to bring business here.

Granted, the Liberia project was a hilarious backfire. As a refresher, bascially a way for the US to send freedman of the Caribbean and Mexico to Africa, but most assimilated there or stayed in the Americas and instead alot of Liberians went to here. Granted, this does help in the long run since alot fo African nations are now investing in our south as part of the new African century.

You won't hear any complaint from me on that front, but you can't deny the importance it played in jump-starting the region's settlement and economy. Especially if we're talking about the 1800's, in which we're not exactly dealing with environmentalist concerns yet. I mean, my hometown was BUILT on Minnesota and Superior timbering, and now Hinkley is one of the top biodiesal production centers in North America.

Eh, Cotton might be a bit hard to pull off. The Ottomans and their Hindustani clients already had a pretty tight grip on the trade, and Egyptian and Indian cotton was of a higher grade than the Sea Cotton that they tried in the Carribean. Indigo, on the other hand, had a promising future alongside other crops they could convert into dye for the wool industry. Tobacco too had shown some real promise, especially in the colonial days....

I'm sorry, its just a little weird imagining large plantations instead of a bunch of small towns and freeholds filling up the area. Huge swaths like that I've always thought more suitable for the aristocratic cultures of the Frenchies and Ottomans, not our own egalitarian republic.
 
You won't hear any complaint from me on that front, but you can't deny the importance it played in jump-starting the region's settlement and economy. Especially if we're talking about the 1800's, in which we're not exactly dealing with environmentalist concerns yet. I mean, my hometown was BUILT on Minnesota and Superior timbering, and now Hinkley is one of the top biodiesal production centers in North America.

Eh, Cotton might be a bit hard to pull off. The Ottomans and their Hindustani clients already had a pretty tight grip on the trade, and Egyptian and Indian cotton was of a higher grade than the Sea Cotton that they tried in the Carribean. Indigo, on the other hand, had a promising future alongside other crops they could convert into dye for the wool industry. Tobacco too had shown some real promise, especially in the colonial days....

I'm sorry, its just a little weird imagining large plantations instead of a bunch of small towns and freeholds filling up the area. Huge swaths like that I've always thought more suitable for the aristocratic cultures of the Frenchies and Ottomans, not our own egalitarian republic.

I’m not gonna deny it, though it was still good to see them donate more to help the native Americans.

Some of the rural areas down South were almost like modernized peasant towns. Hell, especially if you read some of the books about life back then. The South has always been conservative (well, was, that Christian socialist movement is helping them out a lot) so I figure that if slavery was legal, wealthy landowners would make their way here and influence all the policies.

Our founder, George Washington himself made notes on how some of distant family were with his slaves and how he pictured potential plantations as a thought experiment
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
in 1670 the british west indies were worried that demand for slaves in british north america would cause the price of slaves to go up, and successfully lobbied Parlament to ban slavery in the north american colionies to perserve Britians sugar industry.

This destroyed slavery as a force in colional america and when the coliones finally broke away from great britan this tradition of being a nation free of slavery continued.

But what if this didn't happen what would happen if america had slaves?

OOC: could the English Caribbean colonies have had that kind of pull in parliament by 1670? And how long could they keep slavery banned on the mainland if they thought it in their interests? Could "efficiencies" and growth in the slave trade make the Caribbean elites not care about supply and relax their pressures.
 
Top