VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date:
Mon, 7 May 2012 16:30:02 -0400
Reply-To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Craig Kilby <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
Lyle,

I think there is little doubt slavery would have come to end. The more interesting question is how is how and when. Wold the American Colonization Society have deported hundreds of thousands of former slaves to Liberia? How would that have impacted Liberia? (They were jubilantly expecting an infusion of 100,000 former slaves based on Mr. Lincoln's first proposals in this regard....but then again that is not the question).

How would this have affected American social dynamics? Civil Rights? Desegregation?

Fascinating to play "What If"

Craig Kilby

P.S. You should have known this thread would have been hijacked when you hit the send button!

On May 7, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Lyle E. Browning wrote:

> ALRIGHT YOU LOT,
> 
> Stop hijacking my original post's intent;) I'm not concerned with why people fought. That they did is evident. 
> 
> What I am concerned with is whether the mechanization of farming would have resulted in the destruction of slavery. If you look at the census figs, some 70-90% of the population at any given time were on farms until the 20th century. Now it's about 3%. If that trajectory had followed WITHOUT the intervention of the Civil War, slavery would, in my view, have become superfluous. Slaveowners bought and used people because until the second agricultural revolution that brought animal power and towed equipment into the picture, they were all that they had. And due to the peculiarities of some of the southern crops, intensive hand labor was needed. But if you progressively add equipment that paid for itself quickly, did more per day and did it more efficiently and with less cost than slaves could do it, it seems to me that even the dimmest person would at some point see that keeping all those folks housed, fed and supervised, not to mention the social issues raised by bondage, would make no economic sense.
> 
> So can you please respond to that thesis and turn your considerable guns upon it rather than the usual arguments;)
> 
> Lyle Browning

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US