RoysCabin
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure why you're ignoring some major aspects of the antebellum US, including the fact that slaves were present in the north for the founding and the construction of a great deal of it. In the decade before the war, cotton exports literally accounted for over half of US exports and income in foreign trade; additionally, the northern industrial machine you mention was built on slavery, itself, because the entire system was predicated on cultivating and harvesting raw materials (cotton) from the south and then shipping them to the refineries (factories) in the north, which built the northeast textile empire. I'm also not sure why you're ignoring the financial power generated by the slave trading industry, with its introduction after the Constitution's banning of the international slave trade in the early 1800s; there was no greater commodity in terms of sheer monetary value at that point in US history than black bodies, that's in the historical record.This is mostly untrue. The North beat the South by wide margins in everything from railroad mileage to value of exports. The only advantage the South has was in quantity of cotton and tobacco. The North still produces half the corn and the majority of the wheats and oats even though a smaller percent of the population was engaged in agriculture. The efficiency was due to mechanization. The fact was that the Northern economy was more efficient because it did not rely on slavery. The South was destroyed after the war. It is simply untrue that American wealth was built off slavery.
Highly, highly recommend the book The Half Has Never Been Told for more detail on this, it's fantastic. Here's an interview with its author: https://www.nhpr.org/post/without-slavery-would-us-be-leading-economic-power#stream/0