You gonna answer my question since I answered yours?
“Market price is not the issue.”
Market price is and was the issue. Had they been offered market value many would have taken it and it would have taken the wind out of the sails of those who stuck with it. That’s how it was done in the UK. Successfully, I might add and years before the States got around to doing it.
“Slave owners were not interested in giving up their property.”
Not for a dime on a dollar.
“You’re overlooking one thing, well two things really. The first is that the slave owners in Britain did not have a choice. The Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 mandated the terms of emancipation and the compensation. There was nothing voluntary about it.”
Compensation was negotiated over a period of years and they found a compromise that was acceptable to both parties. They agreed to shut things down and received payment which was acceptable to them. They were not left with nothing. They were not crushed by the power of the almighty state and Lincoln. They did not lose half a million good men and women.
That is because in the UK - the issue *was* slavery. The issue wasn’t nullification and the conflict between states and the federal government.
“The second thing you’re overlooking is that Britain did not have a large part of their population willing to launch a bloody rebellion to protect their right to own slaves. The U.S. did.”
They also didn’t have a large part of their population willing to vote to crush the economic livelihood of southerners. Again - if it were about slavery why wasn’t it until the 60s that black folks were actually allowed to vote?
Well, it was about “black slavery,” which was the peculiar institution of the South. Slavery did not exist under English law and was instituted in America for indians and blacks. Around 1700, as the indian population melted away.mainly from disease, Africans were brought in to supply the labor. From the start, America had a labor shortage and even the highest birth rate in world history, which occured during the first part of the 18th century, did not make up the shortfall because of the immensity of the task.
You gave your opinion, not an answer. It would have worked because you say it would. Not a single quote from the period supporting your claims.