One thing I wonder is if NASCAR fans would all be waving the regular U.S. flag?
2006-09-15 01:33:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Steve 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have pondered that question before. I do think the travesty of slavery would have ended regardless of the out come, probably not as soon as it did then.
I think the confederate states and the union would have made more of a compromise instead of the confederate states taking total control over the US government.
The government of the U.S. would have pretty much have to trade states rights in order to get the confederate states to rejoin the U.S. I think the U.S. may have had to buy the freedom of slaves, more like lump sum payment then subsidies to pay the freed slaves a wage for their work, that's just a theory.
I think people would be nicer, more polite, and more honorable in the USA. The downside would be that I doubt we would have the internet to answer questions such as these.
2006-09-15 01:46:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by dlobryan1 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm English and I know that the Southern States wanted to stay separate from the expanding North. They had the economic wealth and culture and as far as they were concerned the class.
They regarded the urban North as being full of immigrants and didn't want to share with them.
So if the South had won I would think that you would have ended up with two separate countries.
The unification allowed the States to industrialise and expand economically into the super power it is today
2006-09-15 01:40:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Bohemian 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I doubt much would be different. We would probably be more closely allied with Britain and have to give them more aid then we already do. Of course the slaves would be gone. Your British answer shows the kind of thinking, or non-thinking that that race of people do. Slavery would not have been economically viable after about 1880 anyway. The economic regions of the US would have been about the same, due to the geography and demography. It is doubtful that the Northern industrial organizations and trade unions would have been able to help destroy American industry. And I really doubt if there would have been sheep grazing on the white house lawn, constantly. FDR did that, did you know? And he is from New York.
2006-09-15 01:37:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've often wondered the same thing. This is my Idea.
#1 Lincoln wouldn't have been shot.
There would not be 48 contiguous states, There would be a freedom of joining or not joining a union or a confederacy.
There probably would no longer be slavery, I think it would have eventually withered away.
I don't think there would be as much inner city crime, and drug addiction.
The USA would not be the most powerful nation in the world, we would probably be more or less similar to England or Canada, socially and economically.
2006-09-15 01:54:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by battle-ax 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think it would be inevitable that the north and south would be united. I am sure slavery would have lasted well into the 20th century and possibly right now we would be in a civil rights movement...I just think that humans eventually wake up to what they are doing...plus there is far too much gain to be had by being united.
2006-09-15 01:40:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by chavito 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Just imagine any thing. May be other countries get developed more than US particularly britan. May be we have moved on moon twice because of scientific developement in US. Any thing may happen. A single step may cause many (drastic) changes in the path we are taking. Just imagine!
2006-09-15 01:30:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Turtledove writes a complete series on the subject. Try him out.
2006-09-15 01:51:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by lundstroms2004 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
slavery substitute into by no potential the reason for the civil war ....it later grew to become a reason to proceed the combat for the North whether it substitute into no longer the preliminary reason, it substitute into approximately states rights and the impending invasion of the north on and against the unfastened will of the southerners whom have been in basic terms protecting their homelands . Slavery later grew to become the reason for the north in basic terms after Shilo substitute into fought and Lincoln gave the Emancipation Proclimation in 1863. as much as now as an effect of a different physique of recommendations, you could try that one out on an option historic past author....too many consequences. Northerners did no longer choose the class exclusions brought about via the draft rules of 1863 and for that reason the long island draft riots ...the comparable person-friendly ingredient got here approximately contained in the south too, merely no actual riots as in NYC. Boarder states have been in essence "buffer zones" for the two North and South, they have been neither allied with the two foe in spite of the indisputable fact that they might have favored one factor or the different whether it substitute into relatively left to the guy scuffling with guy to choose for his factor as many did yet maximum of those states had no actual militia instruments, merely boys in gray or blue who fought for the factor that they had the main attachment too. The fed govt purpose substitute into to no longer alienate those reported with huge occupation armies yet tochronic via them to the deep south, they have been a potential to an bring about basic terms (Maryland is an impressive occasion because it substitute into too close to to bathe. DC and alter into fought over better than maximum others and it remained unswerving to the north in spite of the indisputable fact that it had a larger share of slaveholders than KY or TN. WV wasnt even a state till 1863 whilst it broke faraway from VA...) i've got confidence that some no longer maximum confederates knew early on that their reason substitute into lost after 1862 and later in July of sixty 3 and that it substitute into futile to pass on whether desertion substitute into no longer that a lot of a controversy as you could mean or a minimum of the checklist doesnt prepare it (from what i be attentive to).
2016-09-30 23:47:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by haslinger 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well I'm British, so suspect you would still have slaves cotton plantations, and if not slaves you would have them working for a pittance of a wage, there would have been no civil rights, but as a Briton I can only speculate.
2006-09-15 01:32:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by charliecat 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
We could have the same caliber of border clashes we see throughout the world and WWII may have been completely different
2006-09-15 01:32:19
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋