Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire History Channel: Grant

An American South without slavery. A Scots-Irish population.

Look at the magnificent performance of the at that time largely Scots-Irish populations of Northern Massachusetts, New Hampshire (“Live Free or Die”) and New Hampshire Grant (Vermont) in our own Revolutionary War. Elsewhere the Scots -Irish doing a disproportionate amount of the fighting and I believe bequeathing to us a distinctively American Second Amendment, self-reliant mindset.

A South without the curse of slavery coulda been absolutely frickin’ awesome, was still awesome even with slavery.

OTOH our music might have sucked 🙂

10-4 on the Scots-Irish Birdwatcher ( grew up over in Liberty co, near Liberty,Tx!) Few people realize how many "indentured" Scots-Irish were little more than slaves, and cheaper too! ha Also, few people know that the "Tomahawk" was introduced to the American Indian by...you guessed it, the Scots-Irish! ha ( Rogers Rangers used them alot!) We might still have had Bono and allowed those English guitar players-Clapton, Jimmy Page, Townsend though, ha!

No Coal Black Rose???!!! No Ol’ Zip Coon????!!!!???

Massa in de cold cold ground?????!!

Damn!!! No Ring Ring de Banjo!!!!

Nope, none of that, just Elvis in a barbershop quartet

Um.... IIRC Bono is a Papist... they were the original blood enemies of the Scots-Irish.

I’ll give ya the rest tho, but who woulda been the music heroes for those guys, Vaudeville?

Birdy,

You gonna grace us with your presence this weekend???

Garden fresh ragout saturday night! 😁

With vin rouge.

At least overnight, prob’ly Friday, everybody will be played out by Saturday night 🙂

OK, maybe Saturday

Played out???? Hell we ain’t gonna do anything except eat and maybe drink some wine.

Lincoln mentioned moving the “whole colored race of the slave states into Texas.”

We’ve got the barracks all weekend to ourselves.

You have obviously forgotten that most ever'body on the scene, whether in the year 1813, 1836, 1861 or 1944 was actually an overweight Boomer White guy on meds. Heck, just the trip into town to the Tex-Mex restaurant on 59 through town can be exhausting

My fav post event breakfast spot!

Btw, I’ll throw in a pack of nilgai cutlets to roast as well!

I really appreciate the thought, but I can only do one night.... Friday? or Saturday?

Heck, we got extra clothes, maybe we can work Rog and Rockinbar into this deal also?

I think Rockinbar was gonna drop by for a visit. I’m bringing nilgai anyway. We’ll be there at least two nights.

The South wanted to move slavery into western states not so much as a way of expanding “slave power” but as a safety valve for an expanding population of slaves. That was before irrigation so everything west from a line of about where Dallas is up to the Canadian border and then clear to the Sierras was called The Great American Desert. They knew slave style agriculture wouldn’t work there. But they needed somewhere for those slaves.

And they needed somewhere for those slaves because they were afraid of slave revolts. Santa Domingo where every white person in Haiti down to suckling babies was killed loomed heavily in their minds. The ghost of Nat Turner still roamed. And lest you think this is revisionism, remember John Brown set out to incite exactly that sort of slave rebellion with backing from wealthy New Englanders and to the cheers of hundreds of editorials in northern newspapers.

The idea that blacks and whites could live together as more or less equals in significant numbers wasn’t even thought to be a realistic option in any of the Northern states before the war. So southerners can’t be blamed for thinking that the four million black people contain within the borders of the slave states were a ticking time bomb. They needed places to spread them out.

Compared to everywhere else, American slavery was pretty benign. The slave trade was outlawed in 1808 and yet, the slave population increased. They weren’t worked to death and they were cared for in old age. If the South had been as bad as most places in the Western Hemisphere slavery would have been sort of a self solving solution. Fifty years after the importation of new ones was outlawed, there wouldn’t have been more than a handful left.

There existed quite a brisk trade in slave smuggling along the southwestern borderland/ gulf coast. Lots of folks (famous names) got rich or richer at that game.

That it wouldn’t have kept up with the attrition you speak of Joebob is another debate. Who knows? But it was pretty sucessful for a number of decades.

It wasn’t enough to keep up with attrition. Slaves were well kept and cared for because they were a valuable commodity. A commodity made more valuable because of a restriction in supply caused by the 1808 ban on the slave trade. It’s kind of a paradox. The slave population was increasing, but not as fast as it would have had the slave trade been allowed and supply could keep up with demand. That artificial shortage, of course, made slaves even more valuable and tied up even more capital in them. Which of course, made them even more important to the system and made people even less likely to support emancipation. And AT THE SAME TIME the increasing number of slaves overall was becoming a problem that caused southerners to stay awake at night and worry about slave revolts.

[
Only 2% (more or less) of Southerners owned slaves..[/quote]

That is true, but in a lot of counties, that 2% was their cousin.

Birdwatcher, even in 1830, I rather doubt those frugal Yankees would agree to the federal government paying off the slave owners.