[OneWingedShark]

You should try it yourself. Slavery would have continued for decades had the South won. It's what they were fighting for. There wasn't an alternative available. Their society was completely dependent on it.

Perhaps, but the question that really remains is was a civil war necessary to end slavery? Or could it have ben handled in a way that would not have destroyed the States/Republic?
England's history points to 'no', because they got rid of it in the legislature. Could we have done similar, without something like the 14th Amendment? Probably, I would submit that the following amendment would have ended slavery fairly quickly (given the technological advances going on), w/o bloodshed, and without subjugation of the states:
"Recognizing that all men are born with inherent dignity, no person shall be born into slavery nor shall anyone be denied citizenship on their parent's slavery."

In fact, such an amendment would likely have prevented Roe v. Wade -- which is nothing more than the USSC saying "we can invalidate any state-law[s] we want".

[0.E.O]

England's history points to 'no', because they got rid of it in the legislature.

England didn't have a section of their country willing to launch a bloody war to defend slavery. The U.S. did.

I would submit that the following amendment would have ended slavery fairly quickly (given the technological advances going on), w/o bloodshed, and without subjugation of the states...

In the first place it would have taken 46 non-slave states to pass such an amendment. None of the slave states would have voted for it because the concept was against everything they stood for. In the second place, there were no technological advances to replace slavery. Commercial cotton harvesters were 80 years away, pesticides even further.

In fact, such an amendment would likely have prevented Roe v. Wade -- which is nothing more than the USSC saying "we can invalidate any state-law[s] we want".

Doubtful, but since such an amendment had zero chance of adoption then we'll never really know.

[donmeaker]

Certainly the northern states did away with slavery without a civil war. New Jersey had all of 18 remaining slaves in 1860, under the name of ‘apprentice’. All younger slaves served a time as an apprentice before gaining their freedom. The older slaves were converted to permanent apprentices.

By contrast, free blacks in North Carolina were able to vote until 1835. In the deep south, blacks were losing rights, because of the legal system run by white slave owners.

The reason why the civil war was necessary was because the southern slave owners wanted one so.