Message from @Grenade123
Discord ID: 451556339835994123
the south using slaves didn't make the north want cotton more.
i dont really see why it would have increased need for textiles
the north could make things faster, which mean they needed cotton faster, so the south needed to produce it faster
if you produce more than is consumed, you start to not be profitable, even with slaves
the south using slaves made it cheeper to get cotton, that means to own land it was less expensive, meaning you could own more land to develop into cotton feilds, which means that the north could creat more mills due to higher production in the south
the need for textiles was already there, but the speed of product was at a fixed pace.
really cotton just supplanted older forms of textiles
but yeah america as a nation profited HEAVLY on cotton, north and south. it was the major industry of the north, and the major produce of the south
i don't think it would matter if the cotton was picked using slaves or not, it was always gonna be cheaper not needing to be shipped across the ocean
it was cheeper with slaves
to think it wasent would just be imagining people had slaves for no reason
which is what allowed for great profit margins, but its not like there was much risk from foreign markets
when the cotton gin was invented they just had slaves use the cotton gin
they had slaves because it allowed the rich to edge out local competition
but it also lead to higher production
short term, yes. but the major advantage was market dominance
the only time that it wouldent lead to higher production is if the south ever ran out of land to farm, which they hadent yet
since local labor could not compete
they just didn't have the money
No I'm just pointing out their double standard. Jews can have a ethno state but whites can't.
there are gays in Israel even if it is on the books as illegal just like places in the US @Deleted User
What do they define as Jew? The ethicity or the religion?
I'm pretty sure it's part of their faith that their spouses must convert.
If it's the religion, then that title is disingenuous.
That chart is based on religion, not race.
@Deleted User unless you are suggesting blacks can convert to the white race.
In which case I guess that is a bit of a double standard
Otherwise it's not a double standard of a ethno-state. It's that the US can't have a theocracy but Isreal can.
Race. Jews are a race and some fellow the religion of judaism. I define the race as the important one.
Grenade you can't convert your race that's my point jews are a race not just a religious group that is why communists like Trotsky who were atheists are still jews because jews are a race.
Israel is a secular country not a theocracy.
theres more than one jewish race if you group them geneticly, theres more than one jewish religion if you consiter sects (like how christianity isint actually monolithic). and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_Israel "The religious authority for Jewish marriages performed in Israel is the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and the Rabbinical courts. The Israeli Interior Ministry registers marriages on presentation of proper documentation. Israel’s religious authorities — the only entities authorized to perform weddings in Israel — are prohibited from marrying couples unless both partners share the same religion. Therefore, interfaith couples can be legally married in Israel only if one of the partners converts to the religion of the other. However, civil, interfaith and same-sex marriages entered into abroad are recognized by the state"
you realize jews are technicly aryan right?
any ethnic group decended from indo-europeans are
every group of people springing from the migration from india to northern europe are aryan
people have evolved since then, i think you should to aussie
aryan was used as synonym for european
