Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights
Will...if the CSA had won, there would be 2 seperate countries. Not one. The objective of the South was to gain independence, not conquer the North.
|
Ah, but they were expansionist and as soon as they would have won I'm sure it would have been painfully obvious that the land was free for taking. There is a lot of farmland in what's considered the North, not to mention industry was starting to really show that it could be profitable, representing serious economic benefits. The temptation was too great for a new expansionist country. After the US, it's likely that as ratbastid said they would have moved South to Central and possibly South America. The South was by far agrarian. What does an expansionist agrarian government want? More fertile land.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights
The South could easily have won the war, and damn near did, by convincing the Northerners that the price was simply to high, and remove their will to fight. If McClellan had won the 1864 election, or if Lee had defeated Meade at Gettysburg, or if England and France had formally recognized the CSA as an independent country, then South Of The Border would now mean the Mason Dixon Line, and not the Rio Grande. The "North" would have gone on about their business, with no interference from the now formally recognized Confederate States of America.
And slavery was most certainly not "all but gone within decades of the end of the Civil War" in the South. Eli Whitney, and his Cotton Gin, saw to that.
|
Emancipation Proclamation: Jan. 1, 1863
13th Amendment: Dec. 6, 1865
Segregation and mistreatment continue (even to this day), but once illegal slavery dropped off. I mean Plessy v. Fergusun was in 1887 which addressed the issue of segregation.