• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    18
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    But they didn’t just go to war to stop it, they burned the south to the ground.

    Do that to CA and you’re shooting yourself in the foot as the US

    Destroying your most important ports and where more than 50% of your agriculture nationwide comes from is not a good idea

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        10
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Was it really? I was under the impression that they mostly were agricultural, while the north had all the light and heavy industries… (sorry, I’m not american)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          You are correct. It heavily contributed to their loss. Without international support, or the industries to leverage that support they were isolated, poor and out of manpower.

          If Union leadership was better in the beginning we would have seen them rolled much faster.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 days ago

          This was RIGHT before the industrial revolution in America. The timing of industrialization going north because the south was utterly burned to the ground was a massive shock that is still felt today. They couldn’t switch to industrialization in time

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        44 days ago

        A huge reason the south lost was because they were NOT an economic powerhouse…

        Much like today.

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ
      link
      fedilink
      24 days ago

      Which is exactly why they would burn it to the ground. The federal government would never let California, let alone any state, secede peacfully. They can’t risk losing those resources and would destroy them before allowing them to be competition.