It's hard to say what would have happened if Davis and his team had had their way, but the future for systems of bound labor wasn't bleak or questionable. Of course, from our point of view, it's absurd to think that slavery would have lasted into the 20th century, but things didn't look that way at the time.
In the late 18th century, British courts had already ruled that slaves coming to Britain would become free. Pennsylvania, as I said, had already begun the process of emancipation, as had Massachusetts. It would take much time, but it was possible to view slavery as a relic of the past that would be discarded.
Virginians were beginning to be discontented with the tobacco plantation system and the state might have outgrown slavery, if the prospects for cotton growing in new lands to the South and West hadn't emerged.
Later wars for independence in South America brought freedom for the slaves. In retrospect it's surprising that North America, so much more devoted to individual liberty and self-government didn't pave the way in regard to slavery as well.
I don't know what they say, but I say it was on the way out eventually. Not only was the social pressure building, but so were the circumstances that would create mechanical replacements. I think it would have continued for probably another generation, but after that I think it would wane rapidly.
Was that worth the lives of 750,000 people? Wouldn't matter anyway, the real goal of the North was economic dominance, their invasion had pretty much nothing to do with slavery, and everything to do with collecting money and smashing challenges to their economic ascendency.
for your beloved plantation masters
Here you go again, making accusations which ought to be beneath your dignity and intellect.
Later wars for independence in South America brought freedom for the slaves. In retrospect it's surprising that North America, so much more devoted to individual liberty and self-government didn't pave the way in regard to slavery as well.
Abolition was set into motion by Jefferson's cleverly worded Declaration. Had he not put the words "All men are created equal" (A specifically Christian teaching) into it, Slavery would have persisted at least a generation longer in all of the states.
Massachusetts would have been deprived of the verbiage which the Liberal activists courts used to overturn existing law at the time, and the entire movement would have been set back decades if not longer.
In 1776, no one was intending to make a social statement about slavery. That it was seen in that light was a double entendre consequence of what they wanted said about themselves.
In 1776, the founders would have all agreed that all Englishmen were created equal, but they would have probably come to blows had anyone suggested that this meant the Slaves were equal to them. Whether Jefferson was just incredibly clever or just lucky is still not readily apparent, but there can be no denying that his choice of words was the spark that began the Abolition movement in the USA. (And which is also what screwed up "Natural Born Citizen.")
But focusing on Slavery in the context of the Civil War is a red herring. The willingness of the North to adopt the Corwin amendment, and statements by Lincoln himself indicate that they would have completely tolerated slavery so long as they could maintain that economic control of the Money stream emanating from the South.
Money was the meat of the war. "Slavery" was a side dish.
I’m sure you’ve seen the mockumentary “C.S.A.: The Confederate States of America”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exnwTWfFRM8
It does a pretty good job of illustrating what would have happened if jeff davis had defied every law of probability and prevailed in the WBTS.
I’m also reminded of “The Man In The High Castle” for another take on “alternate history”. Though not about a confederate win in the WBTS it nonetheless captures the flavor of what it would be like in contemporary America under a confederate regime.