As long as its economy revolved around slavery, yes. Evil.
2006-09-26 14:05:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Is it evil for one person to OWN another? I was born in Mississippi, saw the abuses of the 50s and 60s. Three young civil rights workers were killed in 1964 just a few miles from our old home place. The evil was continuing even though they lost the war. What do you think life would have been like for not only slaves but any one if the confederacy had won? They were bad enough and they lost! Were there Christians in the old south? Surely. But the system was evil, and those who practiced it were evil. We don't like to think of our founding fathers as evil, but look how many were slave owners! This nation was conceived in partial liberty, Lincoln didn't have it exactly correct.
2006-09-26 21:22:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Tom 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think that the CSA would have been able to survive as it was...something had to give which is why the war happened to begin with. Slavery's need was declining, even before the civil war and the industrial revolution was about to take place which switched America's chief business from agrarian to industry (sure some would say that this was a result of increased wartime production in the North, its like the who came first, the chicken or the egg? debate...). The South would have been forced to switch from an almost 100% agrarian society to an industrialized one in order to survive, and I believe that a switch like that would have destablized their slave society too much. The handwriting was on the wall for the antebellum south.
2006-09-26 22:40:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by james p 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Ironically, one of the main motivations for succession was the perceived loss of control by southern politicians to northern politicians. This means, in simple terms, that the Confederates thought that the North, and their politicians, was to evil too have influence in the government.
People who think that the Civil War was exclusively about slavery are misinformed. The Emancipation Proclimation was made in response to the succession, and was not a motivating factor. It was an effort by Lincoln to destabilize the economy of the Confederacy and use the freed slave as Union sympathizers. In fact, slavery was still legally practiced in some northern states for a year after Lincoln's Emancipation Proclimation.
The differences between the North and South were actually more along the lines of the current rift between Liberals and Conservatives, then about good vs. evil. It was differences of opinions, but no clear-cut "evil."
2006-09-26 21:15:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by Worst Answer Ever 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
The CSA would have survived because it would have been a springboard for European involvement in America. Slavery would certainly have disappeared by 1900 - it was on the way out everywhere else. It's possible the South would be a happier place today as a result.
2006-09-28 15:49:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. The fact Lincoln didn't think slavery was evil is seen in the fact the Emancipation Proclamation outlawed slavery ONLY in the CSA, not the North.
2006-09-26 23:39:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by manabovetime 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, not at all. They would have realized over time, as with many other countries, that many of their practiced were morally wrong, and they would have righted their wrongs. It would be inevitable that they would eventually join back, as the Southern stated had an industrial economy far inferior to that of the north, and would need an economy that revolved around more than agriculture. They would be without many luxiaries if they had not gotten them from the North.
(7th grade history pays off!)
2006-09-26 21:16:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by Zoë 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
no because there would still be people fighting to get out. not only that lincoln would never allow a seperated nation, new presidents would do the same there could not be a seperate nation. either the confederates completely rule the US (which i doubt since they have so little man power and money) or it would have just taken longer for the union to win the war
2006-09-26 22:28:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by gets flamed 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
As long as England still needed there cotton they wouldn't need factories like the north so they could have stayed seperate. I don't think the union and confederacy would have remained enemies like USA and iraq right now, but there would have been grudges.
2006-09-26 21:09:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by Mike C 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that they would not have been fundamentally evil, but only a little misguided. They would have become weak and eventually had to join back into the stronger founded Union.
2006-09-26 23:57:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by The Giant 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, why would you think that ? What about the other states that came into being after 1865...would they be part of the USA or CSA ? My point is your question is without merit.
2006-09-26 21:20:38
·
answer #11
·
answered by no nickname 6
·
0⤊
1⤋