Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The different economies that started the civil war
Civil war economy essay
Social, political and economic impacts of the civil war
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The different economies that started the civil war
The CSA as a Nation
If the South had won the Civil War, where might our two countries be today? Would slavery have been phased out, and if so, how soon? Would the South have erected tariffs and immigration quotas? Would Disney World have been located in Florida, and Dollywood in Tennessee? Would there be unified currency for the U.S. and CSA, and would it be any stronger than the Euro?
The Confederate States of America would currently be the world's fourth-largest economic power if the Civil War had turned out differently and the rest of history had gone the same.
That's the conclusion of Demographics Daily, an online newsletter for businesses that released its analysis of economic data pertaining to Alabama and the other 10 states that seceded from the Union.
G. Scott Thomas, editor of Demographics Daily, said he decided that April, the month the Confederacy fell in 1865, would be a good time to do the economics and demographics equivalent of "alternate history" - an increasingly popular genre of literature that imagines what would have happened if key historical events had gone the other way.
But assuming economic development preceded the same, the CSA would have had a gross domestic product of $2.6 trillion in 1999. Only three countries would have had a larger GDP - the United States (shortened to 39 states and the District of Columbia), China and Japan. The CSA would have edged out Germany.
In population, the CSA would rank 12th in the world with 84.3 million residents, based on Demographics Daily's analysis of 2000 population statistics. Texas and Florida alone would have counted for almost 37 million people.
The CSA would be more racially diverse than the USA, Thomas said. Non-Hispanic blacks would account for 19 percent of the CSA but only 9 percent of the United States.
The laws and regulation of the CSA would be different then what laws we have now in the USA. Speaking hypothetically some laws that might be different are driving laws and the, legal age to buy tobacco products would most likely be 13 or 14, the drinking age would be the age that one could start driving so you could smoke at 14 and be drinking by 16. The gun toting laws would also be different one could buy a shotgun at the age of 10 and one could also buy semi-auto hand guns at 12 or maybe 14.
Davis, W. (2002). Look away! A history of the Confederate States of America. New York:
(Page 65) This is ironic because a few years later in 1861 the American Civil War began to determine the survival of
The Civil War, beginning in 1861 and ending in 1865, was a notorious event in American history for many influential reasons. Among them was the war 's conclusive role in determining a united or divided American nation, its efforts to successfully abolish the slavery institution and bring victory to the northern states. This Civil War was first inspired by the unsettling differences that divided the northern and southern states over the power that resided in the hands of the national government to constrain slavery from taking place within the territories. There was only one victor in the Civil War. Due to the lack of resources, plethora of weaknesses, and disorganized leadership the Southern States possessed in comparison to the Northern States,
An even greater advantage of the North was its industrial development. The states that joined the Confederacy produced just seven percent of the nation’s manufactures on the eve of the war. What made the disparity even greater was that little of this was in heavy industry. The only iron foundry of any size in the Confederacy was the Tredegar Iron Works in Richmond, which had long supplied the United States Army. Tr...
The Civil War era divided the United States of America to a point that many Americans did not foresee as plausible throughout the antebellum period. Generating clear divisions in even the closest of homes, the era successfully turned businessmen, farmers, fathers, sons, and even brothers into enemies. Many historians would concur that the Reconstruction Era ushered in a monumental turning point in the nation’s history. The common rhetoric of what the Reconstruction Era was like according to historians is that it was a euphoric era. Those same historians often write about the Reconstruction Era as a time of optimism and prosperity for African Americans. Attempting to illustrate the era in a favorable light, they often emphasize the fact that African Americans had gotten the emancipation that they were fighting for and they were free to create a future for themselves. Jim Downs, author of Sick From Freedom African-American Illness and Suffering during the Civil War and Reconstruction, is not like those historians at all. Downs takes a completely different approach in his book. He asserts that both the Civil War Era and
Sectionalism, slavery and other issues leading up to the Civil War were some of the most disturbing aspects of our history. The years during the Reconstructive Period were also volatile and often violent. However, these were all critical and contributed to the growth and development of today's United States; the strongest and most democratic country in the world.
...uld be different from the North, which was in the south 's perspective taking too much power, where they would never have anti-slavery fanatics. The southern secession had become the start of the Civil War.
America has gone through many hardships and struggles since coming together as a nation involving war and changes in the political system. Many highly regarded leaders in America have come bestowing their own ideas and foundation to provide a better life for “Americans”, but no other war or political change is more infamous than the civil war and reconstruction. Reconstruction started in 1865 and ended in 1877 and still to date one of the most debated issues in American history on whether reconstruction was a failure or success as well as a contest over the memory, meaning, and ending of the war. According to, “Major Problems in American History” David W. Blight of Yale University and Steven Hahn of the University of Pennsylvania take different stances on the meaning of reconstruction, and what caused its demise. David W. Blight argues that reconstruction was a conflict between two solely significant, but incompatible objectives that “vied” for attention both reconciliation and emancipation. On the other hand Steven Hahn argues that former slaves and confederates were willing and prepared to fight for what they believed in “reflecting a long tradition of southern violence that had previously undergirded slavery” Hahn also believes that reconstruction ended when the North grew tired of the 16 year freedom conflict. Although many people are unsure, Hahn’s arguments presents a more favorable appeal from support from his argument oppose to Blight. The inevitable end of reconstruction was the North pulling federal troops from the south allowing white rule to reign again and proving time travel exist as freed Africans in the south again had their civil, political, and economical position oppressed.
Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 2006. Print. "Why Was the Confederacy Defeated?"
Stephen W. Sears’ Landscape Turned Red is an account of political and military plans. Especially General Robert E. Lee’s Maryland Campaign as well as the Battle of Antietam. Sears frames his work around the pending support of Great Britain and France to the Confederate cause due to cotton. Landscape Turned Red covers the battle of Antietam. It offers a vivid account of both armies, the soldiers and officers, and the bloody campaign. It analyzes the impact of Antietam on the Civil War as a whole. Sears' use of diaries, dispatches, and letters recreate the Battle of Antietam. You experience the battle not only from its leaders but also by its soldiers, both Union and Confederate. Sears attempts to examine the tactical moves of both Lee and General George McClellan. He also talks about the foolish decisions that troubled both the Federal and Confederate forces. Sears' use of traits, political pursuits, and tactical preferences, explain the thoughts of many. Some of these include President Lincoln, General Halleck and General McClellan, and their subordinates. Stephen Ward Sears is an American historian specializing in the American Civil War. He is a graduate of Oberlin College and an attendant to a journalism seminar at Radcliffe-Harvard. As an author he has concentrated on the military history of the American Civil War. Such as the battles and leaders of the Army of the Potomac. He was an editor for the Educational Department at American Heritage Publishing Company. American Heritage Publishing two of his ten books.
It is true that the CSA found slavery to be an incredibly important part of their national mission, as evidenced by Alexander Stephens and his speech outlining black slavery as the “cornerstone” of the Confederate government (Stephens). But it was not the reason for secession, nor the sole difference between the Union and Confederacy. The long history of conflict in the Union resulted in what many saw as an unavoidable ending, but what was really a conclusion stemming from a line of precise and certain events which aggravated the relationship between the two parts of the country. The crux of this conflict—the disagreement over slavery—would prove to be the catalyst for the chain of political and social events leading up to the war, but not as the reason for secession.
Even though there still were a few down sides, most of which would have came anyways. Though we will never know, that if Texas had not been annexed, if the Civil war would have still taken place.
Ideological perspective influence how society defines at-risk individuals or groups, and its solution (Graham, Swift, & Delaney, 2012), and the changing societal belief on children brought dramatic changes to development of child welfare policy. From the early 20th century, childhood has become characterized by not only proper guidance and protection of a family, but an increased role of the community and the state in preventing abuse and exploitation. Society also began to consider the well-being of children as the future of a strong nation, and failure as a potential damage to the development of a healthy society. Such beliefs pointed to the need for child welfare policies around the areas of deinstitutionalization, improved health care, and compulsory schooling, along with demise of child labour. In the areas of child labour, for example, although child labour was preferred as it provided a cheaper, more manageable workforce in industrialization era, the changing societal attitude toward child labour brought strict regulation for the demise of child labour. The working condition and the treatment of children in factories were also put into scrutiny to provide safer working environment to those who often had to endure both physical and verbal abuse while working wit...
The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and amongst themselves was extremely vital to the effectiveness of the Northern military forces. Had any one of these factors not been in place the outcome of the war could have been significantly different, and the United States as we know it today could be quite a different place to live.
Many people see history as a set of facts, or as a collection of stories. The reality, however, is that history is a fluid timeline. Each act of an individual or a group has an effect on others. Each moment in history is a building block that, good or bad, contributes to the stability of the next. This can be seen clearly in American history, as there have been several developments since the 1800’s that have played major roles on the growth of the nation.