Replies

The writer forgets to mention a few things that could have skewed his data.

1. Free blacks in the south
2. Free blacks who owned slaves in the south
3. Nearly all businesses hired immigrant labor (like the irish) instead of owning slaves for anything except agriculture. Why? - if it was cheaper to own slaves as the author suggests (ps - it wasn’t).
4. I seriously doubt the south had 75% of all American exports. The south was already in decline and the north was already largely industrialized by 1860.

3. Nearly all businesses hired immigrant labor (like the irish) instead of owning slaves for anything except agriculture. Why? - if it was cheaper to own slaves as the author suggests (ps - it wasn’t).

Well, there were a lot of skilled labor jobs done by black slaves that were hired out for temporary periods. I remember something about someone asking why they weren't using slaves loading a riverboat but were using Irish workers instead. The answer was because slaves could get hurt too easily doing that kind of work.

“I seriously doubt the south had 75% of all American exports.”

Not sure about the 75%, but The South produced three quarters of the World Cotton prior to the war and that is a fact. And Cotton was king. It was the oil of the time.

3. Nearly all businesses hired immigrant labor (like the irish) instead of owning slaves for anything except agriculture. Why?

On that, you are wrong. Slaves in the South were hired out by their owners to mines, foundries, mills, shipyards and virtually every industrial activity. Not all slaves were on the plantation.

. Of the four million slaves working in the South in 1860, about one million worked in homes or in industry, construction, mining, lumbering or transportation. The remaining three million worked in agriculture, two million of whom worked in cotton.
Source: http://www.historycentral.com/CivilWar/AMERICA/Economics.html

4. I seriously doubt the south had 75% of all American exports. The south was already in decline and the north was already largely industrialized by 1860.

That was the cotton crop. The US didn't export nearly as much as we imported back then (just like today) and cotton was the 800 pound gorilla of exports. The North had built up their industry, but it was primarily focused on supplying the domestic market. Other than that, the North did export some grain to Europe, but it was very small compared to cotton. Here's a link that shows it graphically

There’s even more to complicate the picture. Indians also owned slaves. There were white slaves, and I’ve read but don’t know if I believe it - Indian slaves.

Even though the Civil War had alot to do with slavery, part of that was slavery the economic institution, not slavery because all blacks should be slaves. Similar to why some want illegal immigration - cheap labor. They don’t care where it comes from either. In some ways the Southern states couldn’t back down on slavery, they knew they’d be hurt badly if it ended. There might have even been loyalists still in the Northeast that would have liked to see America turned back into a British colony - who knows.

Blacks also fought for the Confederacy. Units of border states would at times fight for the ‘wrong’ side. They did that here - some Iowa units fought for the South, and some Missouri for the North. There were many ulterior motives, and each man fought for different reasons. That’s why it was brother against brother.

You can go on and on. It was a far more complex time than this stupid author tries to make it.