Replies

If all slaves had been counted the same as others, the Democrat slaveholding south would have been predominant in the Congress from the beginning, Actually, there would have been no union because the Northern states would not have permitted themselves to be dominated by the Southern states.

In 1787, the vast majority of states were slave states including most of the Northern states. There was a debate in the constitutional convention on the topic of slavery, which I have read. The representatives of the Northern states realized that without tolerating slavery, there would be no Union, and they would all be retaken by the British.

The Southern states weren't all that eager to break from England in the first place, and were it not for the work of the Swamp fox, they probably would have remained loyal to the Crown.

If the two sides had split in 1787 and somehow avoided being retaken by the British, it would have likely avoided the horrors and destruction of the Civil War.

"The Southern states weren't all that eager to break from England in the first place."

I saw this when you initially posted it a month ago, but I keep thinking about it.

I've been reluctant myself to bring it up on numerous occasions over the years because I don't believe most people know this.

On the surface, this piece of information seems quite innocuous. "so they didn't want to break with England, so what? That's meaningless!" However this is quite harmful to the 1619 project ideology because of all that it portends.