A teacher hangs a BLM flag at a school named for a Confederate general. Now she's under investigation

[Jezcoe]

@PurpnGold

@WuWei

Your strawman. But mostly “discredited sneaky”.

Dis you?

@WuWei

Slavery was geographical, not partisan.

“Slavery” included the benefits from it. Even if you were talking about the human side of it… there were slaves in northern states and the fugitive slave act made sure the north was involved in returning property

Plus, slave labor produced 75% of the world’s cotton by the 1830’s. It was 50% of the US’s export market.

Without that slave labor you don’t have all of that cotton. Without all of that cotton you don’t have the rapid industrialization of the Northeast. Without the rapid industrialization of the Northeast you don’t get massive infrastructure into westward expansion.

The decades before the Civil War saw the US move from an agrarian backwater to a real industrial power.

None of that would have happened without cotton.

Cotton relied on slave labor.

[Oldandtired]

What in the world does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

[Ben_Natuf]

what benefit did slavery provide after the war?

[Jezcoe]

@Ben_Natuf

what benefit did slavery provide after the war?

What a strange question.

If we are going to go into Reconstruction and it’s failure I will admit that I am not as well versed.

The war didn’t erase the wealth that was built up by slave labor.

It is childish to say that there was an equation that was balanced by a war that was fought to keep the Union together with the result of being a final answer to the slavery question but saw the lives of the newly freed slaves not improve all that much.

[zantax]

@Ben_Natuf

what benefit did slavery provide after the war?

What benefit did it provide prior to the war? Slavery is a poor economic choice. More wealth would have been generated by paying labor to produce cotton. Choosing slave labor over free labor is precisely why the south lost, why they were too poor to win.

[WuWei]

@Jezcoe

The war didn’t erase the wealth that was built up by slave labor.

Too broad.

[Jezcoe]

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

The war didn’t erase the wealth that was built up by slave labor.

Too broad.

Explain

[WuWei]

@Jezcoe

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

The war didn’t erase the wealth that was built up by slave labor.

Too broad.

Explain

It erased a lot of it in the south.

[PurpnGold]

@zantax

What benefit did it provide prior to the war? Slavery is a poor economic choice. More wealth would have been generated by paying labor to produce cotton. Choosing slave labor over free labor is precisely why the south lost, why they were too poor to win.

Slavery made the USA and economic power and it showed no signs of slowing down leading up to the civil war.

[PurpnGold]

@WuWei

It erased a lot of it in the south.

It lowered income, not wealth. Those same former slaves often had to go back to the plantation but this time to make a tiny bit of money, instead of nothing.

[Jezcoe]

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

The war didn’t erase the wealth that was built up by slave labor.

Too broad.

Explain

It erased a lot of it in the south.

And it erased a lot of wealth in the North. A ton of capital on Wall Street was tied to slavery.

My response is boohoo.

What it didn’t erase was the previous decades and the enormous growth that the country saw. The US would not have grown like it did nor would have industrialized like it did without cotton, and cotton relied on slavery.

The abuse of that labor pool continued into post Reconstruction with sharecropping arrangements.

[WuWei]

I’m not talking about former slaves.

[WuWei]

@Jezcoe

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

The war didn’t erase the wealth that was built up by slave labor.

Too broad.

Explain

It erased a lot of it in the south.

And it erased a lot of wealth in the North. A ton of capital on Wall Street was tied to slavery.

My response is boohoo.

What it didn’t erase was the previous decades and the enormous growth that the country saw. The US would not have grown like it did nor would have industrialized like it did without cotton, and cotton relied on slavery.

The abuse of that labor pool continued into post Reconstruction with sharecropping arrangements.

I will agree with that.

[PurpnGold]

@WuWei

I’m not talking about former slaves.

You missed my point. Plantation owners traded slave labor for paid labor.

[Jezcoe]

@PurpnGold

@WuWei

I’m not talking about former slaves.

You missed my point. Plantation owners traded slave labor for paid labor.

Slave labor for barely paid labor.

[WuWei]

@PurpnGold

@WuWei

I’m not talking about former slaves.

You missed my point. Plantation owners traded slave labor for paid labor.

And land was confiscated. Taxes levied forcing the selling of more land.

[zantax]

@PurpnGold

@zantax

What benefit did it provide prior to the war? Slavery is a poor economic choice. More wealth would have been generated by paying labor to produce cotton. Choosing slave labor over free labor is precisely why the south lost, why they were too poor to win.

Slavery made the USA and economic power and it showed no signs of slowing down leading up to the civil war.

No, slavery held us back economically. Do you really want to argue slavery is a better system than paid labor for generating wealth? I don’t think slaves were very good consumers.

[WuWei]

@zantax

@PurpnGold

@zantax

What benefit did it provide prior to the war? Slavery is a poor economic choice. More wealth would have been generated by paying labor to produce cotton. Choosing slave labor over free labor is precisely why the south lost, why they were too poor to win.

Slavery made the USA and economic power and it showed no signs of slowing down leading up to the civil war.

No, slavery held us back economically. Do you really want to argue slavery is a better system than paid labor for generating wealth? I don’t think slaves were very good consumers.

That’s silly.

[zantax]

@WuWei

@zantax

@PurpnGold

@zantax

What benefit did it provide prior to the war? Slavery is a poor economic choice. More wealth would have been generated by paying labor to produce cotton. Choosing slave labor over free labor is precisely why the south lost, why they were too poor to win.

Slavery made the USA and economic power and it showed no signs of slowing down leading up to the civil war.

No, slavery held us back economically. Do you really want to argue slavery is a better system than paid labor for generating wealth? I don’t think slaves were very good consumers.

That’s silly.

Is it? Slavery was an enormous waste of human capital. How many potential black Edison, Fords and Franklins died as slaves?

[zantax]

It always amuses me when people start extolling the economic superiority of slavery, in 2021 no less.