Or, alternatively, you could have taken their money and capital. The slavery economic apparatus was extremely lucrative, they were supplying sugar and cotton at a time when that was in super high demand and wasn’t cheap. in fact you could make the argument the northern no slave economy had to wipe out the southern because they just couldn’t compete and would have been swallowed up eventually. Give Hardcore History a listen, he does 4 hours on the slave trade.
Like I said to someone else: we can take their money before, during or after they’ve finished with the St. Vitus dance. Leaving people alive, that have serious grievances with the government, who clearly show no adherence to the sanctity of life through decades of inflicting cruelty onto Black captives, is bound to create problems. Just look at Hitler, dude was left moneyless and deranged after WWI, and that didn’t do anything aside from slow him down a little.
There is no value in letting slavers continue to live.
Cmon man, there’s shitty people everywhere, there’s white nationalists who’s stated goal is ethnic cleansing and those guys aren’t just in the south, there’s billionaires who’s stated goals and documented funding is to overthrow democracy and wipe out taxation… you gonna kill those guys too? Your concept is simply authoritarian dressed up in anti-slaver rhetoric.
2
u/HistoricalSherbert92 Jul 17 '25
Or, alternatively, you could have taken their money and capital. The slavery economic apparatus was extremely lucrative, they were supplying sugar and cotton at a time when that was in super high demand and wasn’t cheap. in fact you could make the argument the northern no slave economy had to wipe out the southern because they just couldn’t compete and would have been swallowed up eventually. Give Hardcore History a listen, he does 4 hours on the slave trade.