More opposition to slavery in the South after 1830

In OTL there was very little visible opposition to slavery amongst Southern whites. Yet it is clear that numbers of poorer folk felt that slavery was unfair competition. I cannot believe that some more establisment people were not at least a bit embarassed by "the peculiar institution".

I have the impression that a slave revolt, Nat Turner's I think, called for- or was alleged to have called for- the killing of all whites other than Quakers.

I believe that this hardened attitudes.

Could there have been any cooperation between Hill country whites and resisting slaves?
 
Well, you're right that many Southern whites were less than thrilled about slavery, and less thrilled still to be engaged in what many said was a "rich man's war, but a poor man's fight."

That said, I don't think the concept of racial equality was nearly well rooted enough for Hill country whites to assist with an organized slave revolt. They may not have liked slavery, but I think they liked the idea of assisting blacks even less.

Most Southerners fought the Civil War not in defense of slavery, but simply because they perceived the North as invaders in their homeland. But I don't see a likely scenario where they would have assisted any kind of slave revolt.
 
There are many PODs you could start with. Off the top of my head...
Have you given any thought to the presence of the Melungeons? This group is evidence that at least a certain minority in the Appalachians didn't care much about race. If you could work to integrate their community more that would go a long way to fostering tolerance.
There's also the Secong Great Awakening, which had significant presence in Appalachia. If the movement was perhaps a bit more organized, influence from the Northern preachers could have more directly developed in Appalachia.
More virulent hill country uprisings (like the Whiskey Rebellion) in the early days of the country would be another good place to start; create a 'culture of rebellion' so to speak.
I don't see economic reasons being a significant factor though. Breaking the law and risking the ire of powerful landowners because it might affect the macro-economic climate in your favor years down the line doesn't seem like proper logic for a farmer.
 
Somehow I doubt that had Nat Turner's Rebellion actually broken out that there would be rampaging slaves running about actually stopping to ask a white family if they were Quakers first before they killed them.

There was a Southern abolitionalist movement but it given quite a bad rap by the radical Northern abolitionalist movements. Its pretty much guilt by barest association. Its possible that had Northern abolitionalists had not been so rabid and threatening to Southrons that things may have gone differently.

As phunwin mentions the South didn't fight the war to protect slavery, and Lincoln didn't begin the war to end it either. There are a host of interconnecting 'sparks' that set the powder keg afire.
 
There was a Southern abolitionalist movement but it given quite a bad rap by the radical Northern abolitionalist movements. Its pretty much guilt by barest association. Its possible that had Northern abolitionalists had not been so rabid and threatening to Southrons that things may have gone differently.

Unfortunately, a lot of southerners, at least slaveowning ones, considered any mention of the barest possibility of ending slavery as "rabid and threatening". John Quincy Adams fought an unsuccessful battle for years just to get the right to read petitions expressing a wish to see the end of slavery in the US House of Representatives.

Some northern abolitionists were very negative about southerners in general, which didn't help, but at least a few of them were actually from the south and had been driven out. William Lloyd Garrison, who was considered the most extreme of northern abolitionists, was almost as quick to criticize his fellow northerners over their acquiescence in slavery and racism as he was to criticize southerners. He also opposed the Union war effort during the Civil War because he was a pacifist.
 
Top