VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 21:15:07 10/18/02 Fri
Author: Grumpy˛
Author Host/IP: 155-41.poccpe.cableone.net / 24.116.155.41
Subject: Re: And Catholics were not treated very well
In reply to: Wilbs 's message, "And Catholics were not treated very well" on 19:36:01 10/16/02 Wed

The Anglican churches seem to have been the odds-on favorites of the upper crust in the early days; the only difference was the identity of the boss - King or Pope. :)

Hope your eye is better by now; I know how irritating things like that can be.

It seems to me most likely that the North and the South fought the war for different reasons; the South feared that the North intended to abolish slavery, and the North feared that the South would dismember the nation. Economics was the pivot point from both perspectives. Without the South's cheap agricultural products, the North would have suffered economic losses by having to import more of their food, and by losing a major market for their manufactured goods.

Slavery was, at the time, the linchpin of Southern prosperity; large-scale agricultural production would have been quite a bit more expensive without slave labor. Many historians insist that within a decade or two, though, slavery would have become economically unsustainable through the advent of such devices as the cotton gin and other labor-saving equipment. I think the North would have been content to wait that long had their hand not been forced by the secession of the southern states.

It is my belief that had the South succeeded in breaking away from the North, both would have been crippled and easy prey for the French and British - probably the British would have soon retaken the South, and the North would have starved to death.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-6
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.