05-03-15, 11:36 AM
|
#3
|
Gefallen Engel U-666
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: On a tilted, overheated, overpopulated spinning mudball on Collision course with Andromeda Galaxy
Posts: 30,150
Downloads: 24
Uploads: 0
|
3/5 done in 1776 the other 2/5 in 1860
Quote:
What the hell? A Brit doing a US Civil War AAR...and playing as the Confederacy? This can only lead to disaster!
Probably...yes...but I figure it will be an interesting disaster to play through, as well as trying to broaden my knowledge of the events of the civil war in the meantime
|
A Brit should play a Civil War game; Required reading is A World on Fire the best book on Britain's crucial role in the American Civil War. The smoldering matchlock-fuse got lit at the very beginning as the Forefathers left this to the next generation: Only the Southern states had large numbers of slaves. Counting them as part of the population would greatly increase the South’s political power, but it would also mean paying higher taxes. This was a price the Southern states were willing to pay. They argued in favor of counting slaves. Northern states disagreed. The delegates compromised. Each slave would count as three-fifths of a person.
Following this compromise, another controversy erupted: What should be done about the slave trade, the importing of new slaves into the United States? Ten states had already outlawed it. Many delegates heatedly denounced it. But the three states that allowed it — Georgia and the two Carolinas — threatened to leave the convention if the trade were banned. A special committee worked out another compromise: Congress would have the power to ban the slave trade, but not until 1800. The convention voted to extend the date to 1808.
A final major issue involving slavery confronted the delegates. Southern states wanted other states to return escaped slaves. The Articles of Confederation had not guaranteed this. But when Congress adopted the Northwest Ordinance, it a clause promising that slaves who escaped to the Northwest Territories would be returned to their owners. The delegates placed a similar fugitive slave clause in the Constitution. This was part of a deal with New England states. In exchange for the fugitive slave clause, the New England states got concessions on shipping and trade." Time bomb ticking... no "freedom for all" political theory ever works with 3/5 of a person IMHO A revisit of the Haitian overthrow of Napoleon and our acquisition of the Louisiana Purchase is practically a blueprint of the coming conflagration.
|
|
|