>5 years before the events of Lord of the Rings, the Confederate States of America, c. 1861, drops into existence between Gondor and Mordor
What happens?
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
KYS
Traditional Games?
They encounter a pregnant teenage girl who speaks only German & Yiddish.
shouldn't she speak dutch
damn, Mordor got another ally
FPBP
Frodo walked a distance about twice the size length of England. The portion of Middle-Earth we see is closer in size to Western Europe than just England.
That said, the width of the CSA WAS roughly comparable to that distance, because the US is stupid big.
>FPBP
>on a post which isn't first
moron.
Fricking moronic, nigs are orcs and the old south was a holdout of the landed gentry. The closest thing to antebellum culture in LOTR is the shire. Hobbits are basically confederates without slavery.
>closest thing to antebellum culture in LOTR is the shire. Hobbits are basically confederates without slavery.
It's the English countryside you absolute fricking buffoon
And the Confederacy was an English supremacist culture created by the descendents of the Cavaliers. Half the reason I like the Hobbit so much is because all the shire culture reminds me of my childhood.
Slavery is the reason why the American South doesn't resemble the English countryside in most areas. Instead of landing the white Christian Europeans and creating mutually beneficial farming communities, economic and social power was centralized in the hands of the slaveowning upper class and the economic benefits of market competition couldn't reach the free whites.
This is also a large part of why the Confederates lost the War.
You are celebrating the aesthetic value of a practice that doomed the culture practicing it. Gud jorb.
Hobbits don't roll coal or spend 8 years crying about how the Thain is secretly a Melkor-worshipping Orc in disguise who was also actually born in Bree
>confederates
>without slavery
Anon.
What's the issue? The "Confederacy" was just the Southern nation-state, and their secession was due to the unthinkable prospect of having to treat a Yankee president, supported only by Yankees in the election, as an equal in dignity, rather than continuing with the trend of having every interaction with any Yankee whatsoever be "I-shit-and-you-eat." The Confederacy with a different form of economic organization is still really recognizably the Confederacy; the first Deadlands absolutely had it right.
(Side note, "it was about slavery" is somehow an even more offensive revision than "it was about states' rights." All the Yankees that died were not doing it to empower one group of Southerners at the expense of another and thereby choose a better and more rightful Southern master -- they were doing it to be rid of Southern masters entirely.)
Do you unironically think Southerners just never wanted to be in the Union in the first place and were somehow coerced into joining the Revolutionary colonies against their own economic interests, or are you operating on so many levels of irony that I can't parse your tard logic?
>The Confederacy with a different form of economic organization is still really recognizably the Confederacy;
Except it's not because Slavery is an Inalienable Right in the Southern Constitution or Declaration of Secession, I forget which.
A right they didn't feel the need to declare at any point until it became immediately politically expedient to justify secession, and one they had no problems with implicitly signing away when they signed a Declaration of Independence that held that all men were self-evidently equal before God and endowed with a right to Liberty supreme over property rights.
>and one they had no problems with implicitly signing away when they signed a Declaration of Independence that held that all men were self-evidently equal before God and endowed with a right to Liberty supreme over property rights.
They didn't consider slaves to be "men" in that document.
I know. I'm pointing out the moronation and hypocrisy of Southerners, not defending them for being good boys.
Have you never lived around Black folk before? Genuine question.
Yea my neighbor Steve is a black guy.
Have you ever not been a hateful little cretin?
Yes, and then I stopped believing in your cult. Black folk SUCK and no one fricking likes being around them. Not even delusional cultists like you whose cognitive dissonance is so strong that you have to use violence to force other people to live with them.
If he had, he'd understand.
Yup...
I've lived around christianized, well assimilated Black folk and they aren't a problem.
Slavery is why there is such a large population of unassimilated, unchistianized Black folk in this country.
Your ancestors loved living with Black folk so much they denied white Americans of economic opportunity so they could have more Black folk.
You are a clown.
I hear enough about the Lost Cause from my fricking grandparents, I don't need to hear this traitor shit on a website about Afghani dog breeding.
>"it was about slavery" is somehow an even more offensive revision than "it was about states' rights."
They unambiguously stated that it was about slavery multiple times in their own words at the time of secession and in the lead-up to secession. There is in fact no way the traitors could have been plainer about their reasons and intentions.
>The "Confederacy" was just the Southern nation-state
Area of rebellion. A nation-state requires a number of things, the chiefest of which is international recognition as a nation-state, since without that recognition they can’t do anything a nation-state needs to do. No nation ever recognized the Confederacy as anything other than an area in rebellion, and in fact Lincoln made it plain that doing so would mean war with the United States.
>All the Yankees that died were not doing it to empower one group of Southerners at the expense of another
Even Northern propaganda at the time disagrees with this. “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” and “Union Dixie” were both written during the civil war and both make express mention of slavery and a desire to end it (“As He died to make men holy, let us fight to make them free” for the former; “in Dixie’s land where men are chattel, Union boys will win their battles” for the latter).
No, more likely it would have been an honor duel.
It's funny how this debate is as old as the Civil War itself and still gets traction.
Grant's correct in the image obviously.
“Debate” is far too generous; it’s a denial of objective fact. Someone saying that the civil war wasn’t about slavery is like someone standing outside in the middle of a torrential downpour saying “it’s not raining”.
It's so weird seeing people who actually pretend to care about Black folk
I mean, it’s not terribly surprising. More or less since the end of the war, the Southern identity has been one of performative victimhood. The “War of Northern Aggression”, the obsession with martyrdom, and so on. And, in the absence of actual oppression directed against them, it becomes necessary to invent it: now that slavery is agreed to be bad, it can’t be why they were fighting—they were fighting for their RIGHTS.
Oh, we have direct evidence from their own mouths that it was about slavery? Well, then, the North had to have economically manipulated them into being reliant on Northern markets and the use of slaves to meet those demands!
Oh, we have evidence that the South was doing quite well, with economic growth outside of what the North purchased? Well, the entire reason the North was pushing the war must have been to maintain its hegemony! Slavery was just a pretext!
Oh, we have direct evidence from their own mouths that it was about liberating slaves? Well…
And on and on and on. They have a pathological need to position themselves as the underdogs fighting for liberty. Because, despite placing so much emphasis on being fine, church-going folks, they completely misunderstood the messages about humility: it’s about admitting that you can be, and have been, wrong. Humility is NOT a competition to see who can stick their claim of being the most humbled.
Holy cringe
Did you just call Otto von Bismarck “cringe”?
No, the poster I responded to and Grant more generally. Imagine simping for Black folk so hard that you reorient your entire national myth to be about how you killed half your countrymen just to give them a better life. Unimaginably cringe.
Bismarck didn’t seem to think so. So now I guess you’re faced with a conundrum: do you call Bismarck cringe, or do you admit that perhaps you’re wrong?
I'll call Bismarck cringe, I only hesitated previously because I don't know much about him. This is neither your 10th grade history class nor reddit, I don't give a shit about maintaining any particular historical canon. Now go back to jerking off to wakanda.
>I don't give a shit about maintaining any particular historical canon
You pretty obviously are heavily invested in the Lost Cause myth, seeing as this:
>Imagine simping for Black folk so hard that you reorient your entire national myth to be about how you killed half your countrymen just to give them a better life
Is pure fabrication on your part.
>You pretty obviously are heavily invested in the Lost Cause myth
Maybe, maybe not. I just hate yanisraelites, liars, Black folk, and the federal government. (Hi glowBlack folk) I don't deny that Black person worship (ie ending slavery) is why the North illicitly used force to try and prevent secession and start the Civil War.
>pure fabrication
That's what the image you posted said: That the entire north felt attacked by the institution of slavery. They identified with the oppression of Black folk so deeply that they felt as if it was a threat to their entire nation. The poor poor innocent suffering Black folk were so dear to homosexual Lincoln and his homosexual cohorts that he had to turn the US into the centralized dystopia that it is today, all to ensure that Black folk are worshipped and free to do as they will.
Go ahead and report my post for racism, homosexual. You have my permission.
Typical southerner.
Not even southerners are like this anymore. He just has internet brainworms.
I've met people like him in real life. t. southerner
Cry harder Black personlovers
I don't play videogames so I have no idea what this means
I admire you.
>Says others love Black folk
>I must import and breed Black folk
>Go ahead and report my post for racism, homosexual. You have my permission.
I’ve never reported a post on Ganker in my life and, frankly, you’re not interesting enough for me to break that trend.
holy leaded pipes anon
you’re moronic as shit
I won't scatter your sorrow to the heartless sea. I will always be with you. Plant your roots in me. I won't see you end as ashes. You're a diamond.
Yeah, the glowies are here. For the thread? Nah. They don't give a shit. They're here because individuals on their Pizza Party list are posting.
Contortionists around the world should be sent to study under dipshits like you
Mexico invades the rest of north america.
It won't fit in that space
They all suffer from some disease and die like the unwashed morons they are
The orcs are enslaved, gondor becomes prosperous, a caste of bored people living in absolute comfort start to pity the orcs, they start creating a revolt to free them and 150 years later the whole area becomes gay and gondorians take a knee when they see an orc.
You need to go back.
We all do.
to Africa?
Should have just stayed out of it and let Aragorn carry out the orc genocide.
The Tolkien estate sues you for breach of copyright. They don't like fanfiction shitting up their setting.
>They don't like fanfiction shitting up their setting.
Rings of power exists, shadow of mordor exists.
Christopher is dead, anything goes now if you have the money to pay for it.
>They don't like fanfiction shitting up their setting.
Is that why there's so much of it, some successfully spun up into own franchises?
Bro the CSA is like 5 times the size of middle earth.
It's not a continent, it's the size of England.
92101529
>what hap..
(You) first anon, and be detailed about your game
well they'd still have to get the ring and throw it into mt doom but the csa has guns and tanks so Sauron would have a much harder time conquering the world
>implying the CSA would be on the side of the Free Peoples
Also, reminder that 90% of humanity was on Sauron's side
they're Christian so why would they worship Sauron?
I’ll answer that question with another question: who in the CSA has anything remotely resembling the power to resist the Ring’s temptations? Keep in mind that these are the same people who were so arrogant that they believed that the personally-killed-the-Atlantic-slave-trade British would rather have cotton than grain and that they could beat the Union despite being outclassed by them in every measurable way. Arrogance and pride are the Confederacy’s staple crops, and the Ring would find them to be fertile soil.
>who in the CSA has anything remotely resembling the power to resist the Ring’s temptations?
Well, technically speaking, in their own time, they did violently resist the industrialized, centralized government of the Union that wanted to take away their peaceful, agrarian way of life from them...
...so they're basically just tall-hobbits.
>...so they're basically just tall-hobbits.
And even Hobbits couldn’t destroy the Ring or resist its temptations forever. And as well, keep in mind the circumstances of the Confederacy here: the Mississippi and most if not all of its basin (their main interstate trade routes!) are necessarily dried up for the most part, as is every one of their foreign buyers of cotton, and indeed even the Union that was their internal buyer of cotton. Their economy is completely shot now.
Fertile ground for Sauron and the Ring indeed.
You’re missing the point. Their entire economy centered on trading cotton. This is why the Union established a blockade with its navy, why the CSA was desperate for Britain and France (with their stronger navies) to break that blockade. The US already destroyed the traitors’ economy with a mere blockade that was possible if difficult to circumvent.
But now there is no blockade, but also no export market. No one in Middle-earth particularly wants or needs southern cotton and even if they did they don’t have the money or the infrastructure to buy it in quantities that are worth a damn.
The CSA is about to enter into a period of economic hardship that’ll make the depression look like a mere rainy day.
Fertile ground for Sauron and the Ring.
>The CSA is about to enter into a period of economic hardship that’ll make the depression look like a mere rainy day.
Economic depressions hit harder in industrialized nations where the exchange of money is critical. In feudal and slave-reliant societies like that of Gondor and the Confederacy, while there might be a famine for a year as they switch to a different type of crop, in the end it's not like they're going to collapse.
Dammit, Cecily, slow down on those social reforms.
Anon we’re talking about an entire major sector of their economy literally disappearing overnight *even as* they also lose their main means for interstate transport of goods due to rivers drying up in a matter of days due to their Northern-based origin points no longer existing. Which, speaking of, we haven’t yet even discussed what that’s going to do to the farms and plantations that depended on that water to grow crops.
The South is not going to be okay in only a year after that. Not remotely.
Their economy was cotton dependent because the north had a high demand for it in their textile mills.
"The north industrialized off the back of southern cotton"
What the south tried to do was find other buyers instead of the north for their cotton. which made the north panic and led to the blockade.
Wasn't England big market for southern cotton as well?
yes but you can only ship so much cotton over sea as opposed to up north.
“So much” in this case being two-thirds of the world’s cotton supply by 1860.
Anon you do realize alot of the "two-thirds" was textile cotton from the north right?
Unsurprisingly, it was easier to sell cloth than raw cotton.
Let me see, how to break this to you...eh, blunt is best.
You have been lied to all your life.
About 75% of raw cotton was sold internationally; the remaining 25% was sold to northern textile mills. In 1860 this would have been about 1.5 billion pounds of cotton being sold internationally with only 500 million pounds of raw cotton going to the North.
https://www.nps.gov/blrv/learn/historyculture/cotton-economy.htm
The North absolutely got rich off of the South's cotton. But the South got rich off the South's cotton too. The idea that the North was somehow unfairly exploiting them or cheating them or denying them foreign markets is, to keep things blunt, a flat-out lie told by Lost Causers who would be pitiful if they weren't so willfully ignorant, a thing for which I have no pity whatever.
God i wish I was born 200 years ago and could see homosexuals like this hanging from trees
Even in the Old South, I don’t think they lynched people just for being correct.
>Let me see, how to break this to you...eh, blunt is best.
lol look at this boomer
I note that you’re not denying that I’m right, though.
>reddit spacing
What's with tourists and the fricking spacing? This is why we have remedial english classes overflowing in University now.
I would love going back to 2003. Better economy, more jobs, you didn't have to support millions of dead beats and crackheads... Shit was nice man.
Seconded.
Redditor, there was once a know-it-all at my local high school. He was like you: greasy, fat, and wore a fedora. He would lecture everyone on pointless trivia. His face covered with pimples, his mouth with zits, a odor pervading his very presence, yet he thought he was God's gift to women. One day, he came back home black and bruised with a one way ticket to the slums of Sacramento.
Wanna know why? He tried getting a football player arrested. For what? He turned 18 and had a girlfriend. In High School. Thankfully the Cops didn't have enough evidence to arrest the guy, nor did they want to, so they dropped the 'case.' But you know who we found walking to the GF's house? The redditor. The manipulative little frick had candy and gifts, planning to 'comfort' the girl.
We stopped the car and we beat him, and we beat him badly. We knew what he did. Oh he tried to lecture us on the age, oh he tried to lecture us on rape as he dropped his candy, oh he tried to plead about toxic masculinity, oh he called us racists and rednecks and misogynists and every reddit term in the book. But that didn't stop us, the Chad's fist rammed into the frick's cheek so hard it almost tore open with blood slopping all over the cement. Then the kicking started, even I joined in.
We spent five minutes, five whole minutes beating the little creep as he squealed like a pig. But in the end he was merciful, the Football player bought him a bus ticket and said if he ever came back he'd kill him. We never saw him again.
>using fantasies of violence to cope with one’s own ignorance
That’s honestly kind of sad.
It wasn't a fantasy, I can you that. In the end nobody cares about your argument, nobody cares about your upvotes and gold and funkopops. What truly matters is if you piss them off. And the fact you immediately took the side of the redditor makes me wonder... Eugene.
>nobody cares about your upvotes
What upvotes? This is Ganker, Anon, there are no upvotes.
We're dealing you, my reddit spacing friend, and one can't help but find it amusing you're desperately hiding from that moment. That one moment your upvotes and reddit gold and funko pops were all for naught.
Who said I took his side? Trying to get someone arrested for a non-crime is utterly moronic, and he’s doubly moronic for not reporting the ACTUAL crime of assault. However, bringing it up completely unprompted, in response to someone correcting you on the historical facts of the economy of the Old South, and explicitly drawing a parallel between that poster and your victim, makes it clear that you’re fantasizing about visiting such violence on someone—again, for nothing more than knowing more than you.
NTA, but why are you taking the side of the redditor? You sympathize with the freak. You even want the football Chads to get arrested.
Let us presume for a moment that I am a redditor. I want you to explain to the class how that, even if it’s true, affects the fact that you were wrong about the South and the Civil War. And how the Confederacy would fair under OP’s conditions if you have the time and spare brain cells.
I don't care about that anymore. I wanna know why you want the football players arrested. I wanna know why your immediate reaction is to side with the creep.
>I wanna know why you want the guys who committed assault arrested
Because they committed a crime. That’s how enforcement of the law functions.
One can side against the football players without siding with the creep. The world does not exist solely in binaries.
Nobody would want to get those guys arrested. Everyone would know the creep would just try again, but who wants to get them arrested? You, Eugene.
I didn’t. This was my response,
. I don’t care about whether your precious little story happened or not nor any of the details in it because it has nothing to do with any aspect of this conversation vis-a-vis the Confederacy and it appearing in Middle-earth.
Try and remember that you are talking to more than one person.
>Try and remember that you are talking to more than one person.
Sure we are. Eugene, Eugene, Eugene, and maybe the federal agent watching you after that... Uh... 'Incident' a few years ago.
Cool.
The civil war was still about slavery and the Confederacy, due to economic collapse following the disappearance of its foreign markets and the drying up of its waterways that were the main means of bulk transport between the cities and states of the Confederacy, is still going to be fertile ground for Sauron and the Ring as per OP’s post.
Man, I WISH my name was Eugene. Gene’s a fine name to to by. But, frick, do you have any idea what it’s like to share your name with 4% of your classmates? Shit’s awful.
You can always write it Evgeniy, and talk with a Russian accent.
I got lucky; despite my name being pretty common in the US I just generally seem to never run into someone else with it. Dumb luck, I guess.
Christopher, by the way, though I prefer Chris (much to my mom and dad’s consternation).
If there truly are multiple redditors trying to 'debunk' the story in a panic, then that site must be one hell of a drug.
Frankly, both participants should have been arrested. The shitstain for libeling the meathead and the meathead for assaulting the shitstain.
At least, if we’re still pretending that this isn’t a wholly made-up story, that is. But most jurisdictions in the US explicitly have laws on the books covering the area in question and clarifying that it’s a-okay, and the twerp would have been told that—he wouldn’t have been traipsing over there to comfort her because he would have known nothing was going to happen.
Yeah. You're real tough for calling the cops on people Eugene .
Football players are brain damaged subhumans
>cries reddit spacing at another poster
>proceeds to employ reddit spacing
yeah okay there champ
Those are actual paragraphs, see the sentences? Four for each paragraph as that's all you need. Short, terse, and to the point which served the story structure. Redditors just go with a single sentence.
I know authors that use punctuation and they are all cowards
I want to run a game like this book but without the child raping.
I think it'd be fun and its basically about a bunch of murderhobos anyways.
>basically about a bunch of murderhobos
Which is the easiest part to get your players onboard with, since they would likely default to that play style anyway. You'd have to include lectures about cycles of primordial violence started by a Gnostic God if you wanted it to be more like BM instead of just another particularly violent Western set RPG.
>All progressions from a higher to a lower order are marked by ruins and mystery and a residue of nameless rage.
I fear I'm not clever enough to wax lyrical like the judge does in a way that's engaging.
Unfortunate.
Maybe a plebe take but I took the truer than you know as meaning he's an embodiment of the void, abyssal nothingness.
I wish I knew more people who'd read that book because I was confused a bit bye the end of it but I wanted to talk it out more, Ganker didn't seem to have an interest in talking about it though, which was disappointing.
Only time I ever visited that board too.
Ganker has been trash since its inception and only spiraled downward since. They only notable thing about that board is that it had a special rule made for it day 1 which was "No Ayn Rand" because people spammed it incessantly.
Blacks in the fields, lank and stooped, their fingers spiderlike among the bolls of cotton. A shadowed agony in the garden.
>What's with tourists
I’ve been on this site since before Reddit existed, and resorting to accusing people of being redditors and tourists is the surest sign that you’ve reached the “I have no counter but I must argue” stage or denial.
>We never saw him again.
Cool.
The civil war was still about slavery and the Confederacy, due to economic collapse following the disappearance of its foreign markets and the drying up of its waterways that were the main means of bulk transport between the cities and states of the Confederacy, is still going to be fertile ground for Sauron and the Ring as per OP’s post.
Bullshit. So Eugene, I hear they confiscated your hard drives a while back. Mind telling us what happened?
I'm a proud Southron and this did not happen. At your age, you should be more focused on high-school than imageboards.
Considering that britbong cities like Manchester grew on processing cotton into cloth, I'd expect bongland was primarily importing "raw" cotton and made profits on processing that into the cloth instead of importing cloth from overseas.
> What the south tried to do was find other buyers instead of the north for their cotton
Anon by 1860 two-thirds of the world’s cotton supply came from the South. The South didn’t “try to find” new buyers, they’d *had* other buyers for decades. Their economy was totally dependent on those buyers. This also wasn’t anything new nor anything that was opppsed by anyone, as the North profited from Southern cotton exports just as the South profited from Northern grain exports.
The Numenoreans could literally commune with God Himself by climbing a mountain, and lived in sight of Heaven on Earth populated by divine beings.
Sauron still managed to convince them to start committing human sacrifice in the name of Melkor (aka literally Satan).
>the csa has guns and tanks
>who in the CSA has anything remotely resembling the power to resist the Ring’s temptations?
apparently, pic related
I'm pretty sure Aragorn could solo the entire Army of Northern Virginia under Robert E. Lee including their artillery divisons, Anderson's Corps, Longstreet's Corps and the Defense District of Shenandoah Valley.
The confederacy ironically probably sees the agrarian, aristocratic feudal society of Gondor as being much more like their own society over the industrialized, centralized society of Mordor. So most likely you would see the Confederacy side with Gondor, then enslave the Orcs and non-Gondorian humans. The Hobbits would likely end up being relegated to slavery as well, albeit as house-servants.
All Sauron would have to do is recognize them as their own Society and let them keep their slaves.
>people genuinely think sauron couldn't manipulate the southern gentlefolk through their economic insecurity and the desire to maintain the wealth and power of their landed estates in slavery
I'm talking ringwraiths. Hundreds of them. Ringwraiths with guns.
If Sauron wasn't able to manipulate the aristocratic landowners of Gondor and Rohan, dependent on their own landed estates with peasants and serfs beneath them, why would he have any more success with the CSA?
Because the CSA is totally economically dependent on an export market that now no longer exists. For that matter even its own internal economy is fricked. No more Mississippi river to start with.
They can always just turn to farming food instead though. Keep in mind that long before the Confederacy was using slaves for cash crops, nations of all kinds including the Roman Republic and Empire were using slaves to farm regular crops. You don't NEED cash crops for slavery.
Well, clearly they would side with humans over orcs so.. Benefit for gondor.
Really the question is what happens after. How would the monarchical society's take to a confederation of republics. The technological difference. The south ironically had a blend of industrial and agrarian Tolkien might have approved of (minus the slaves of course).
What happens to the Blacks? Are they replaced with orcs / goblin slaves? Are they freed eventually (As much the south did plan to do eventually)
Do we selectively breed house goblins to create some of /tg/s favorite waifus?
>(As much the south did plan to do eventually)
The South never made plans to free them. A handful of Southerners might've mentioned it in passing as an idle future hope, but it was never in any serious plans to do.
not the government of the south, the individual states.
Each of them knew industrialization made slavery less viable. Hell that was one of the big reasons for the war, the north kept the south from industrializing to weaken their economic influence.
Seriously, there is a reason most the textile mills were in the north instead of the south were it would have made more sense, less transport costs and all that.
It was generally accepted slavery was on the way out, but the method of abolishing, or at least restricting it was the real question. What the south did not want, was a single federal decree that freed them all at once and caused economic collapse. Most were in favor of eroding the institution over time with the help of industrialization which they had trouble doing because political bickering.
>lost cause-ism southerner cope
At least be proud of your slave-keeping history.
how is any of that lost causer?
>Each of them knew industrialization made slavery less viable
But that's wrong. The southern states fully intended to industrialize with slave labor in the factories.
The southern states fully intending to use slave labor in an industrialized system doesn't make industrial slavery a better system. The maintenance costs of slave labor is greater than the actual cost of paid labor, and deprived lower class free whites of industrious jobs while benefitting solely the slave owners who had bought in early or could afford the huge entry costs. The South just maintained the practice of slavery due to deeply ingrained cultural attitudes towards the practice and a collective sunk cost fallacy, not because it was more economically beneficial; were slavery more economically beneficial than industrialized paid labor, the North wouldn't have had total economic advantaged against the South during the war.
>The maintenance costs of slave labor is greater than the actual cost of paid labor
We don't actually see this holding true though. Southern factories were just as, if not more profitable than northern factories. Even factories that went bankrupt using free labor were able to become profitable with slave labor.
In truth, the reason slavery ended wasn't because of economic reasons, but was largely because of cultural attitudes changing. People became opposed to the institution around the time that industrialization was taking off, industrialization didn't force the end of slavery.
>Southern factories were just as, if not more profitable than northern factories.
At the same scale as Northern factories? In the same markets for the same products?
Yes. There were two major metalworking foundries in the south, the Tredegar Iron Works was one, half-employed with slaves.
Looking at the balance sheets of individual factories doesn't necessarily allow us to extrapolate that to the economy as a whole, though, for at least two reasons:
1) Privatized profits, socialized costs. When comparing free labor and slave labor, the main added cost associated with the latter is that you need to have a security state keeping them as slaves: militia, slave patrols, slave catchers paid on a bounty system, courts and government officials that have to deal with enforcing the slave system instead of what they would be doing otherwise, and so forth. Like, the actual cost of capturing a runaway, I've only seen figured for prominent cases like Anthony Burns, but there they ballparked it at $40,000 in 1850s dollars just for that one guy. That means that a few factories can free-ride off of the amount of enforcement that you're already doing for plantation slavery, but the economy as a whole can't afford to effectively subsidize too many more of these "profitable" factories. (Especially since security for a factory that is constantly transporting materials in and out seems harder than security for a rural plantation where there is nowhere obvious to run to.)
2) Competition tending to lower prices -- if Tredegar can be profitable if and only if it is competing with (Northern good price + Northern transportation cost), as seemed to be the case, then the local area can't even support a duopoly and is fully saturated at one foundry.
Nah, they openly stated that slavery was the correct and god-driven thing to do and got blown the frick up for it. They should've finished burning you traitors.
I agree, anon! Burning Southerners who do not feel like they lost the war is certainly the right thing to do. Laxity is how we've ended up with a bunch of Southerners running all over Yankee territory looting (out of a sense of Southern entitlement to the wealth of others), beating people for saying words (just like Preston Brooks and Charles Sumner, of course), shrieking at the notion that they are subject to Yankee laws in any shape or form, kicking Yankees out of the inner parts of their own cities, and what-have-you. General Sherman should certainly do it again, starting with Occupied Detroit.
Southerners who identify with the confederacy are traitors to the US. Identify with the confederacy and get the roast. Simple as man; no innocents killed.
If you don't want to be part of the US, you should leave. I hear the Mariana Trench is wonderful this time of year.
I'm a descendant of nine Confederates and no Union soldiers, and I don't have any delusions about our ancestors being closeted abolitionists or of slavery being a more efficient economic system than anything but communism. I still think it was a good thing and I'm proud to be a neo-confederate. (You) are b***hmade cowards too afraid to own it, whose ancestors probably came here half a century after it was done. I'm ashamed to see this limpwristed shit everywhere anyone discusses the Confederacy.
>yes I know it's objectively, factually a bad thing BUT I still think it's a good thing and if you don't then you're just a pussy!
did those 9 confederates happen to all be related to each other?
The CSA was bad because importing Blacks was a dumb idea like
says.
Importing Black folks would have worked fine if they were
A: christianized
B: incentivized to assimilate into American society rather than deliberately kept separate and socially engineered against assimilating
Look at what we did with the Chinese and Irish in the 19th century.
>christianized
Modern blacks are some of the most devout Christians in America.
A small, extremely well assimilated minority of them are, yes. That's a good thing.
I'm obviously talking about replacing importation with selective immigration in the same time period. Not the mass importation of unqualified economic migrants intended to shift voting demographics that we see today. Exercise a little critical thinking before you respond.
Chinese people are a fifth column and the irish are not even human. /tg/ is weird because you guys all live in the year 2003 mentally, you really show your age posting shit like this.
>/tg/ is weird because you guys all live in the year 2003 mentally
heh, yeah... 2003... what a terrible year... i sure am happy we're living in 2024 instead... i'd totally never want to go back to 2003...
You're right, we're way too weird for you. You should head on leave.
So immigrants instead of slaves? Fricking brilliant.
>Well, clearly they would side with humans over orcs
Why?
depends if they take their slaves with them or it's just the honourable white Men and their wives and daughters
Well im no modern historian but my understanding is that the confederates' entire economy basically ran on selling cotton to the UK and fought to keep slaves partially because they'd collapse without that industry. Gondor has domestic textile production and opposes slavery while sauron supports it and has a huge population of orcs that are mostly naked. Seems like they would either side with sauron out of greed/economic nesessity, or collapse and be useless with landowners defecting to sauron while the escaping slaves and jobless became a burden on gondor.
Best case scenario the confederates get picked apart slowly in successive raids rather than gondor, but the biggest issue is sauron gets tonnes more space to play with, so frodo would probably lose it and succumb to the ring before getting to mnt doom
One thing to also take into account is the southern militias that were organized and active throughout the early 1800s hunting for escaped slaves. They are probably going to be at least as effective at finding wandering midgets at Faramir's band was, while also being far less likely to contain someone with the moral fiber of Faramir (and it was already merely a stroke of luck that Frodo managed to run into a band led by Faramir rather than someone else).
>"This here Ring must go to Richmond!" Exclaimed McNeill, holding the chain upon which the Ring sat high. His rangers let out a cheer, and Sam wept, sure that the final Doom had truly come to Middle-earth.
I don't see how Faramir or Aragorn would've had any more willpower to resist the ring than a southerner. The whole idea of "noblesse oblige" wasn't just an idea subscribed to by aristocratic nobility, southern slaveholders adhered to that same belief.
>I don't see how Faramir or Aragorn would've had any more willpower to resist the ring than a southerner
Well not being out and about for the express purpose of preserving slavery strikes me as immediately making them more moral.
"Damn, I'm wrong. But if I kill the person who called me wrong, I'll be able to pretend I'm not wrong!"
>Well not being out and about for the express purpose of preserving slavery strikes me as immediately making them more moral.
Eh, being in favor of aristocracy isn't that much better. One of them legally reduces people to a lower class, and the other legally raises people to a higher class, but the end result is the same, a bunch of people serving their higher ups in menial labor.
>Eh, being in favor of aristocracy isn't that much better.
It literally is within the context of the world that the Confederacy now exists in. The Confederacy has appeared in Middle-earth in the universe of Tolkien's legendarium. The Confederacy now has to play by Arda's rules, not the other way around.
>I don't see how Faramir or Aragorn would've had any more willpower to resist the ring than a southerner
Aragorn is basically the chosen one and Faramir is pretty unique in his ability to resist the temptations of the Ring. If any group of Gondorians aside from Faramir's rangers had captured Frodo, they would have taken the Ring.
I'm not familiar with these militias. My knowledge of slave hunters has them being solo acts, who patrolled the borders between slave states and non-slave states looking for suspicious blacks to arrest as probable escaped slaves. They were also middling effective because they knew where slaves were likely to cross, say, the Ohio River, whereas they've never been to that there Middle-Earth.
Confederates replace Blacks with the much more resilient orc, reasoning that enslaving non-humans makes more sense than quasi-humans.
How exactly are the Confederates going to keep the Orcs in line? Orcs are by all accounts stronger and tougher than humans, and the only ones who've ever been able to control them are Melkor, Sauron, or their lesser (but still extremely powerful, far more powerful than any human) servants on their behalf.
It also seems like it would be incredibly difficult to break their wills enough that they would serve a human without constantly trying to kill everything and escape. I doubt buckbreaking would be effective on Orcs, and who would even want to try?
>who would even want to try
Cobson.png
I mean, for all the Confederates know, Orc buckholes have teeth and excrete acid. And who's gonna risk their willy to see if they don't? I guess they could order a Black to do it, but that might empower the Black, assuming it is able to break the buck.
orcs are weaker and lesser than humans in the lotr canon
what are you a self-hating southerner?
what would the Confederates think of Buckland?
They'd make it into Buckbrokenland.
>Meriadoc Brokenbuck
Confederates?
Good and evil are objective facts. Slavery is objectively evil. Southern slave owners were thus objectively evil. Sauron is objectively evil. The Southern slave owners would side with Sauron and be killed in their homes without the mountainous defenses of Mordor once Sauron is defeated.
That is one of the dumbest things I have ever read in my life.
Again, the Confederacy has arrived on Arda, not the rest of the world around the Confederacy was replaced by Arda. The Confederacy has to play be the rules of Tolkien’s universe, not the other way around, and as a result at least within the context of this thread, Good and Evil are in fact objectively real.
The Confederate States of America would not align with Mordor because you're offended by the concept of slavery.
His opinion on slavery is irrelevant. Tolkien's isn't
They’ll align with Mordor because Sauron will convince them that it’s a good idea to. Keep in mind that Sauron is extremely adaptive, creative, cautious, and patient. The Confederacy appearing isn’t something he’s going to act rashly towards, he’s going to spend time scouting it out and getting a feel for it, what they want, and how he can bend them to his will. And the Confederacy is practically tailor-made to be the sort of nation that Sauron could corrupt even under ideal circumstances, nevermind the Confederacy in a state of economic collapse due to its foreign markets disappearing and its waterways drying up.
As was pointing out upthread, the Numenoreans were a prosperous and powerful people who lived in sight of literal Heaven on Earth and could even directly commune with God himself on a fairly regular basis, and Sauron was still able to corrupt them into human sacrifice and worship of what amounts to Satan. It didn’t even take him very long.
What chance does the Confederacy have? And why do you think it has one?
Moral relativists are cowards. The Gondorians will sleep soundly at night once the slave owners have been put to the sword.
Gondor has an aristocracy and would feel far more welcome in the Confederacy, which was essentially a 19th century Roman Republic. They're also Men, and would never align with Easterlings or Harad because the concept of slavery offends you.
>the Confederacy, which was essentially a 19th century Roman Republic.
Rome actually won its wars so not really.
Gondor and Rohan participate in feudal systems which makes use of serfdom which is equivalent to chattel slavery
Guess Gondor and Rohan sided with Sauron
Wait...
>serfdom which is equivalent to chattel slavery
It's not.
Slavery is evil.
>Slavery is evil.
You could make the same theoretical argument as Feudalism, Kingship, Aristocracy, Xenophobia, or any of the other traits that Elves, Men, and Dwarves share -- but those are not inherently Evil things, you're just projecting a Marxist worldview on things -- and Marx, Communists, and Socialists would have sided with Mordor per the Soviet Union's own propaganda: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Ringbearer
I could, but within the context of Tolkien’s world I wouldn’t, because it just plain isn’t true there.
You're actually moronic or just a boring 40+ year old troll.
No, he's right. You're the one projecting your shit onto Middle Earth.
nah, he's wrong, and so are you
Black person
they'd enslave orcs, maybe, but work for sauron?
nah, Eru is literally the Christian God, average southerner would fight against morgoth's minion
No he's not. Slavery is consistently a marker of evil in Middle Earth.
The Numenoreans usage of slaves wqs one of the marks of their turning from Eru and Valar to Melkor.
>nah, he's wrong, and so are you
You lack imagination if you insist that all fictional worlds must bend to your personal whims and you never have to bend to theirs.
How about you bend over lmao
Who gives a rat's ass
But neither the Gondorians or the Rohirrim fell, or the elves, or the dwarves. Like sure some did, but overall alot of people stood against Sauron so really the question is, what makes the South so much more likely to fall?
>what makes the South so much more likely to fall?
The greed that brought them to fight a bloody war against their own countrymen on the chance they would lose the right to traffic in slaves.
The Gondorians didn't fall because their entire existence, going all the way back to the beginnings of their nation, has been in opposition to Sauron and what he stands for. Gondor (and Arnor, which was corrupted and destroyed by the Witch King) was founded by Numenorean refugees who had stayed true to Eru and rejected Morgoth worship, which is why Eru allowed them to leave Numenor while he drowned all the evil bastard slavers.
And even then, Sauron was able to corrupt Denethor, and Saruman corrupted Grima who corrupted Theoden.
>what makes the South so much more likely to fall?
Well, first of all, they have absolutely no knowledge about Sauron or Middle-Earth in general. Unlike the Gondorians, they don't have thousands of years of history that revolves around resisting and defying him. They know nothing about him.
Sauron is also the only one around who utilizes slavery and would have no moral qualms with it. Since Gondorians are faithful to Eru, they would naturally oppose slavery - just as they opposed it when their fellow Numenoreans started to practice it after being corrupted by Sauron.
And Sauron is an angel. He can lie. It's not that hard to understand bro
>nah, Eru is literally the Christian God, average southerner would fight against morgoth's minion
Sauron turned a race of supermen who (as has been said twice already) lived in sight of Heaven on Earth and could commune with Eru.
Please explain how the frick southerners are going to be more resistant to corruption than the fricking Numenoreans.
You're the one projecting. You're just mad because you're probably brainwashed into having a cringe kneejerk reaction to anything related to the Confederacy.
No, I'm not. Who practices slavery in Middle Earth, again?
>Morgoth
>Sauron
>Numenoreans as they fall from grace
Go ahead, try and argue Tolkien considered them not evil.
You can easily make the argument that being a peasant (a subject, not a citizen remind you) is just a step above slavery as you are not entitled to personal property, private property, freedom of movement, and are de facto required to work for the local authority/lord. You're being ridiculous by trying to force post-modernist American university into the world of LoTR. The fact is that culturally and spiritually, the Confederacy would have clearly aligned with Gondor as they are the closest in temperament and attitude.
No, you can't. Not in the context of Middle Earth.
You'd first have to argue that Middle Earth has serfdom as we understand it and that its political structures are identical to real life analogues.
It totally is. Don't start doing apologism for one of the most extreme forms of classicism to ever exist now anon
Nothing's wrong with slavery. It's much kinder fate than killing your enemies.
Given the number of people who throughout history have preferred death to slavery, that’s highly questionable in real life, nevermind in the context of Tolkien’s legendarium where it’s objectively wrong.
It's literally not questionable for exact same reason you pointed out. You watch too many movies. You really have to live in a purely fictional world to even think for a second any significant portion of people ever chose death over slavery
This argument would hold more weight if we weren’t talking about the Confederacy ending up in an entirely different universe that plays by explicitly different rules to our own.
You’re the kind of person who thinks that the transporters in Trek are suicide booths, aren’t you?
You're literally the one who brought up history moron
>Given the number of people who throughout history have preferred death to slavery
The number of people who preferred death to slavery, historically, is statistically completely insignificant. It's literally only ever been anecdotal. It turns out 99.9% of the living animals, including people, are hard wired to want to live no matter what because that's kind of a requierment to make it past the very first hurdles of natural selection.
Cool. But also irrelevant within the context of Tolkien’s legendarium, which was the main thrust of my argument. Slavery is *not* kinder than killing your enemies, especially when you’re already an evil bastard to begin with, as indeed the Confederacy’s leadership is by the very nature of Arda for their fanatics desire to keep slaves, which is so strong that they’re willing to kill their former countrymen for it.
Fertile ground indeed for Sauron and his Ring.
You had no argument and you still don't. Erasing someone's existence will always be more evil than allowing them to live and even reproduce under submission. That's not a matter of opinion, that's an objective truth to anyone with a functioning brain.
God disagrees.
Which one?
Eru Ilúvatar, which in the context of this thread is the only god that matters.
Tolkien never made him say anything of the sort. You're getting desperate.
Tell you what, name a society in Middle-earth that practices slavery that isn't portrayed as evil, and I'll concede the point.
Tell you what, find a statement that backs up your initial claims and I'll think about considering you as anything but a moron trying to wiggle out of an argument by moving the goalpost.
>Tell you what, find a statement that backs up your initial claims
The claim was that slavery is inherently Evil within the context of Arda. The proof is that not a single nation or culture identified as "good" in Tolkien's Legendarium practices slavery. Gondor exists for thousands of years without taking a single slave. Fingolfin, when he challenges Morgoth, derisively calls him the "Lord of Slaves". Slavery is repeatedly shown to be brutal and horrible by those who suffer it, like Gwindor and Rúmil.
You would have to be a massive idiot, and a c**t, to not grasp that it is very, very, very obvious that slavery is a capital-letters EVIL THING in Middle-earth.
No goalpost has been moved. No tangent has been gone on. The original claim remains valid, that the Confederacy, by its very nature as coming into being for the express purpose of keeping slaves, would be by its very nature an evil realm if it were somehow transported to Arda.
Nope, the claim is that slavery being kinder than extermination is, according to you, objectively wrong.
But don't worry I never had any hope you would have the brain capacity to remember your own statements and therefore have a coherent conversation.
No, your claim is that nothing is wrong with slavery.
My claim are both that there is nothing wrong with slavery and that's it's a better fate than killing your enemies, to which you replied here
that it was objectively not a better fate both in real life and in Tolkien's world. A statement extremely moronic in real life, as we've already discussed and that you cannot back up in Tolkien's world either. Which is why you have to resort back to muh slavery bad as if anyone would ever argue Tolkien depicted human trafficking as virtuous in lotr.
Now that we're done exploring the depths of your moronation I suggest you don't plague this thread with it anymore.
In Middle Earth death is specifically stated to be a gift given to humans. Slavery cannot be better than a gift given by Eru.
Oh gee I wonder if people dispensing that "gift" left and right are good people :^).
Alright alright, I'll stop replying, if only to save your keyboard from that constant drooling.
Doesn't make any sense at all.
>Aragorn is evil because he's willing to kill to become King over peasants, serfs and others who owe him taxes for the sole nature of being King. But he's evil because <current_year>.
>Slavery is *not* kinder than killing your enemies
Completely subjective argument.
>The Southern slave owners would side with Sauron
monsters like shelob are evil but operated independently of sauron
>and be killed in their homes without the mountainous defenses of Mordor once Sauron is defeated.
aragorn is not likely to institute a policy of genocide
Orcs were exterminated in the Fourth Age because they existed as beings of evil. The slave owners would face the same fate.
Let's say you were right about the Confederacy joining the side of Sauron(which you're not).
Were the Easterlings, the men of Harad, and the Hillmen also all exterminated in the fourth age?
Curious, I genuinely don't know.
Easterling were exterminated in their westernmost regions and the followers of Sauron so thoroughly wiped out the previously suppressed followers of the Blue Wizard asserted control. Haradrim faced a similar fate with a Blue Wizard revolt seizing control after the most ardent supporters of Sauron were killed fighting Gondor. The hill-men are not a unified group, many tribes were wiped out leaving their lands desolate.
>Easterling were exterminated in their westernmost regions and the followers of Sauron so thoroughly wiped out the previously suppressed followers of the Blue Wizard asserted control. Haradrim faced a similar fate with a Blue Wizard revolt seizing control after the most ardent supporters of Sauron were killed fighting Gondor
This is fanfiction.
lost cause moronism is the ultimate cope
at least they’ll die unhappy
Why are people debating whether the Confederacy would enslave orcs? They 100% would. They would also support Sauron/Sarumon. It's not like enslaving orcs is going to be considered wrong by the guy who literally has them enslaved to his will. The Steward of Gondor is not gonna be okay with a new nation being propped up on his border & being courted by the greatest evil walking Middle Earth. He's gonna attack or in the minimum act like a rude dick & sour the diplomacy.
That being said, there would of course be some champions of light among them who would rally in the hills & aid the good men of Middle Earth. I'd love to see a chapter where Frodo & Sam get the help of a Tom Sawyer type Good Ol Boy
Deprived of Yankees to focus their hatred on the Southerners turn on each other in a traditional borderlands gaelic orgy of violence and the pursuit of antique blood vendettas. The Men of Gondor look on in abject horror as two million drunken crackers slaughter each other and whip their illiterate slaves on loop for eternity. Rohan quietly passes an anti-immigration bill and builds the walls of Helm's Deep ten cubits higher. The Elves make a killing selling mithril bowie knives. Whiskey becomes all the rage in the Shire.
Ah, a fellow reader of Albion's seed.
Sauron's orcs get enslaved, and Mordor's forces get mown down by repeating rifles.
Numenoreans taking slaves was a symptom of them rejecting the Valar.
As Tolkien said, "Tipping your cap to the squire may be damn bad for the squire but it's damn good for you." Slavery is an institution that benefits the slave, not the master in Tolkien's eyes.
How would the Lord of the Rings have gone if Tolkien had been raised in the Antebellum South? Gollum would obviously have been a tortured figure, one part Uncle Tom and one part vicious runaway slave. Tormented by his need for a master and the indulgences of vile, base nature he had as a primitive uncivilized blackie.
Frodo would likely have ended up more warlike. He, Merry and Pippin would have been privileged sons of plantation owners, as yet unused to the need for war to assert their civilization and defend their properties. Sam would be a groundskeeper, lower class, but possibly with experience of the Indian Wars or somesuch.
>How would the Lord of the Rings have gone if Tolkien had been raised in the Antebellum South?
It wouldn't have been written in any capacity. The entire point of Tolkien's Legendarium is to create a distinctly English myth cycle in the vein of Finland's Kalevala, which was still nevertheless heavily influenced by Tolkien's Catholic faith, English upbringing (which would include a cultural hatred of slavery - remember the English were the ones who took it upon themselves to kill the trans-Atlantic slave trade, and outlawed slavery decades before the USA and without needing to fight a war over it), and experiences in World War I and witnessing the industrialization of war.
Antebellum Southron Tolkien would be too different to create anything remotely resembling The Lord of the Rings. I'm not even saying whether it would be better or worse - just vastly different.
>And even then, Sauron was able to corrupt Denethor
Small point of order, Sauron actually *wasn't* able to corrupt Denethor. Denethor's devotion to Gondor and its ideals (including utterly opposing Sauron) was absolute and could not be taken away or bent to Sauron's will. But as I mentioned upthread Sauron is nothing if not adaptive, clever, creative, and patient. Rather than corrupting Denethor and turning him into his slave, he instead kept sending images of Gondor's doom to Denethor, as well as more or less showing him exactly the size of the army that he had at his disposal, making Denethor give in to despair and a belief that there was nothing Gondor could do to win.
>outlawed slavery decades before the USA and without needing to fight a war over it
Sugar beets killing Caribbean sugar cane production helped them to make that decision.
Why it happened is less important then the fact that by the time Tolkien was born (1892), nevermind by the time he was writing The Lord of the Rings (started 1937, published 1954) Britain had made a hatred of slavery a part of its cultural identity.
NOW I LIKE LAMBAS AND I LIKE MEAD
BUT I DONT LIKE Black folk, NO SIREE
THERE AINT ONE THING THAT'LL MAKE ME PUKE
LIKE A ORC EATIN SLOP AND A BIG BLACK SPOOK
> popular song in the Shire
What would the Confederates think of the elves?
they would commit collective mass suicide upon the realization that in comparison to elves, even the whitest southern boy is still a Black person