No slavery

What would happen if the world never purchased slaves, leaving Africans on their own continent?  How would America be different now with no influx of slaves?

The South would probably be more intelligent and the Republicans never would have come to power by exploiting the religious beliefs of rednecks.

Negligible. The driving force behind economies since the 18th century has been technology not unskilled labour, it is only recently in 1st world countries with most of the workforce being educated that there has been a demand for unskilled labourers.

America would have a lower crime rate than Switzerland if there were no niggers here.

For that to be possible, you would have to make it so that the Old World never traded with Africa... ever. Either that, or you'd have to stop all the chaos in Africa, which gave way to all the wars in which POWs were taken and sold as slaves.

So your question is: what if niggers weren't black?

>>3
Keep pretending all those crops for FOOD and FABRIC would have been harvested by means of 18th Century genetic engineering so that the plants would have walked out of the fields on their own.  MORON.

>>6
Look up the names James Watt and Eli Whitney, and get back to us, okay, kid?

>>7
Did the cotton heads separate from the stalks, jump out of the fields, and then jump into the cotton gin ... all under their own power?  MORON.

Today, it might surprise you -- "you" being "a desk-driving yuppie piece of SHIT who has no idea about how much labor it takes to support his society" -- that all manner of crops in the USA are STILL PICKED BY HAND.  (Tomatoes, apples, etc.)  Like, DARRRRR, you stupid bunghole!  Did you actually think Watt & Whitney solved all labor requirements in the fields?

The history of agriculture is very much a history of the intensive use of Human labor.  Mechanization and chemicals have remarkably reduced that in the West, but we're talking about people proposing that the South could have just avoided the use of slave labor in order to exploit the rich and all-year seasons of that region.  BULLSHIT.  In the late 1700s to early 1800s, Human labor WAS THE SOLUTION for agriculture.  Horses can't pick cotton, either, shitmeat!

There were plenty of Irish, Italians and Chinese

>>8
And this thread is specifically about the institution of chattel slavery.  See >>1.  Do try to keep up.

Mechanization meant slavery was on the way out from the moment the steam engine appeared.  Slavery could not have endured in any Western nation into the Twentieth Century because the machines made it uneconomical.

HURF DURF COTTON DOESN'T WEAVE ITSELF INTO CLOTH HURF DURF U R TEH STUPAD

We would be more racist due to a lack of "tolerate everyone" propaganda

There have been many studies done by economists about the economic impact of slavery and colonialism. From what I've heard from students and professors the impact isn't as large as is made out to be.

>>10
Like, DAARRRRRRR, you cumcake!  The imposition of WAGE slavery meant that CHATTEL slavery was on the way out.  Wage slavery socialized costs much better than before.  Industrial machines could be used EQUALLY with both types of labor, you dumbfuck.

As for keeping up, you'd failed to notice that this thread went into another direction.  You're wrong again.  It was proposed that the south would have done just fine without slavery.  That proposal is DEAD wrong, and was what was being discussed at the moment.

I guess they don't make you Liberal Arts fags read the ENTIRE text these days, eh?  Oooh!  Too many words!  You cliff-noted your way through college and now you expect to do the same through life itself.  DUMBO!

tl;dr

HURF DURF GAYWAD HURF DURF WORKIN FOR MONEY AND CHATTEL SLAVERY IZ EXACTLY TEH SAMES AMIRITE GUISE? HURF DURF U R TEH STUPAD HURF DURF I LIKE TO TALK ABOUT BODILY FLUIDS HURF DURF

Does that about cover it?

Would you mind terribly going back to Disney.com and letting the grownups talk, Junior?

>>14
I'm still LOLing that you thought that without slavery the South would have "gengineered" cotton plants to self-harvest, or something.  MEGALOL!  MASSIVE LOLS AT THE GAYF!

>>15
tl;dr

So, did I predict his non-answer correctly?  Amirite, guise?

>>16
see
>>13
and lrn2read for a fucking change, gayfing lord

You know, I'm still slappin' my knee with MEGAYUKS about how you suckfags imagined that the South was going to genetically engineer cotton plants that PICKED THEMSELVES.  Man, I just can't get over that one.  I mean, with the current state of so-called public education in the USA, I can see people believing that the South would have somehow dispensed with slavery from the get-go due to magical Liberalism fairy dust being sprinkled in the mal-educated minds.  But the sad fact is that slavery throughout the world was entirely necessary for all manner of labor performed by structured societies.  Only wage slavery and industrialization put chattel slavery largely to the side.

Wait until the full effect of oil depletion hits the world.  You suckfags will be back workin' as chattel slaves for your Jewish overlords in DUE COURSE.  No need to hide their supremacy then.  No more of that Liberalism BULLSHIT either.  You work for the lords, or you fucking DIE.  That's the real truth of Humanity!

COTTON PLANTS THAT PICKED THEMSELVES.  Gawd, I'm STILL howling over that one.  What DOOFUSES you "classically educated" turds are!  The collegiate Liberals have COMPLETELY BRAINWASHED you into thinking Humanity is some wonderful species filled with sweetness and light.  Haw haw!

In times of hardship democracies pick on the rich, take any historical example. You're the moron for suggesting that people somehow resign themselves to slavery - I think humanity deserves more credit than that. Peasantry only exists in theocracies "DOOFUS"

>>18
>>19

you know they could have been PAID, right

>>21
Don't interrupt FailCream while he's trolling.  In one thread he calls other posters "racist" and issues death threats, in others he advises whites to avoid minority areas, in another he thumps his Internet-tough-guy chest and claims to be "confronting DA JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS."

The only thing that's constant is that he thinks he's really, really, really entertaining, and on this point he appears to be a majority of one.

Back on track, how would American attitudes be different towards race?

>>23
More European, I think.  There is nothing like exposure to niggers when it comes to creating "racism."

Lots of Swedes who have never seen a nigger except on television, lots of wealthy American Whites who have led the most sheltered lives Mommy and Daddy could buy for them, genuinely, sincerely believe the reruns of the Cosby Show are an accurate representation of reality.

They're not.