Did the free market and industrialization end American slavery? (regular, revolution, solutions)

[TheWiseWino]

Originally Posted by soUlwounD

When people have to do 2-4 job to live I would not say slavery in america would not exist.

I would say that your argument reduces actual slavery to nothing more than a bad day at the office.

[GregW]

When the coercion of starvation is removed from the economy then a real market in labor and wages can exist. Until then the need to work for someone else provides an advantage to the job suppliers over the job consumers. The is in no way shape or form a free market and never has been and never will.

[Old Gringo]

Nope.

A little fracas that lasted from 1861 to 1865 settled it.

Kinda surprising that you didn't know that.

[1973PINTO]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

Nope.

A little fracas that lasted from 1861 to 1865 settled it.

Kinda surprising that you didn't know that.

and it ended in the south in 1863 with the emancipation proclamation but it only ended in the north in 1865 with the 13th amendment yet the whole war was about slavery so the north says ..

[Old Gringo]

Originally Posted by HOSS429

and it ended in the south in 1863 with the emancipation proclamation

Oh! So you assume that the 1863 emancipation proclamation forced southern slave owners to free their slaves. You'll have to back that up.

but it only ended in the north in 1865 with the 13th amendment yet the whole war was about slavery so the north says ..

So history states clearly and plainly. As the secessionist states proclaimed in their declarations.

The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States

[Skydive Outlaw]

Originally Posted by HOSS429

and it ended in the south in 1863 with the emancipation proclamation but it only ended in the north in 1865 with the 13th amendment yet the whole war was about slavery so the north says ..

Exactly. Lincoln 'freed' the slaves in the south with the emancipation proclamation while allowing slaves to still be owned I the north because he was hoping in 1863 that slaves in the south would then revolt, start getting violent and cause general chaos which would result in southern troops having to stop a slave insurrection instead of focusing on fighting the existing war that was in progress.

[1973PINTO]

slavery was not brought into the discussion until it was clear that the north was losing the battle and the support of the northern citizens ..the first two years we kicked your butts .. you were ready to quit then the slave card was played ....

[Old Gringo]

Originally Posted by HOSS429

slavery was not brought into the discussion until it was clear that the north was losing the battle and the support of the northern citizens ..the first two years we kicked your butts .. you were ready to quit then the slave card was played ....

In their secession declarations at the very start of the rebellion, each of the traitorous states prominently mention maintaining slavery as their prime issue.

The Reasons for Secession

And who's ahead in the early stages of any war counts about 0.1% as much as who's ahead at the end.

[TheWiseWino]

Originally Posted by Skydive Outlaw

Exactly. Lincoln 'freed' the slaves in the south with the emancipation proclamation while allowing slaves to still be owned I the north because he was hoping in 1863 that slaves in the south would then revolt, start getting violent and cause general chaos which would result in southern troops having to stop a slave insurrection instead of focusing on fighting the existing war that was in progress.

Say what?

In the "north" slavery had been abolished by the start of the Civil War.

[Skydive Outlaw]

Originally Posted by high iron

They wanted their slaves. .

Just like the American colonies wanted their slaves.

The US civil war was a war won by a tyrannical federal government that 'freed slaves' and enslaved free men that were trying to leave a union, just as the colonies broke ties with England.