How would the US be today if the african slaves were never brought?

Slave labour is actually bad to "build a country", it's only good for the rich people, and not even much, during the time of the war the richer parts of the country were the nothern states that had already outallowed slavery, the secessionist not were only keeping a status quo that is morally wrong but it's also objectively bad for the economy.
The USA without slave labour could still be a strong country today.

Weren't it jewish ships that brought them over

We'd never have had a civil war, the south wouldn't be the shithole it is now and overall we'd be better off.

>They were only used in the agriculture sector.
They were also tradesmen and craftsmen. And there were laws passed to keep slaves from becoming literate.

Attached: secret relationship between jews and blacks.jpg (480x360, 38K)

For once, the US would have never became one country. A loose confederation at most.
For second, there'd be no cotton job to kickstart the industrial revolution up north and in England.
For third once peak liberalism hit, they'd be so naive over other exotic cultures they'd be even more hypnotized by the black bvll and the country would end up like Sweden.

Don't forget that you wouldn't have shithole cities like Detroit, Baltimore, Memphis and St louis.

The cotton didn't need slave labour to work, it was simply the most profitable for the land owners but without it there would have been ways to find workers, it would have been a bit less profitable and nothing more.

Attached: Mexico.jpg (534x699, 180K)

That "less profitable" means it wouldn't have boomed and that exact boom that wouldn't have happened was the mass production that allowed for the creation of the worker class for the industrial revolution.

That's only speculation, cotton was also produced elsewhere without slave labour (but not really great conditions) so unless you show me a serious study on the subject that can defend you argument you won't convince me the same way I won't convince you that slave labour wasn't necesary to make USA an industrial powerhouse and eventually a global super power.

>the country would end up like Sweden.
>:(

This. Anglos and jews are the worst parasites.

It's rather the industrial revolution that "kickstarted" insane demand for cotton (and boosted the US slavery economy) than the cotton that kickstarted the industrial revolution.
Industrial revolution was happening with or without cotton.

Well, given that blacks built America, without them there would be nothing there.

its like saying the roman empire or the spanish colonial empire didnt need slave labour
the entire system was set up based on workforce that was free because there was NO other source of workforce

The Spanish colonial empire didn't have slave labour as the main source of labour, slave where only in big numbers in the Caribbean islands, in mainland America and Philippines the workers were the native and their slavery was prohibited, although the working conditions even as non slaves weren't much better of slaves.
There were more source of workforce, slaves have always been a fucking minority and if they weren't they revolted fastly because slave require someone to control them, for example according to this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Rome roman slaves were 30% to 40% of the people, since nobility has always been a minority there probably was a good 50% to 60% of people that weren't slave but didn't hold much power and simply worked, slave population was even lower in the colonies and USA and if there was such a demand of workers they could have been sustitued by European poor people with a tad bit better conditions, or probably be solved with increased natalism.

Blacks built the south, not America

aren't they the origin of the south richness therefore the origin of south lifestyle therefore the origin of their butthurt over their lifestyle being threatened therefore the origin of the civil war which is the war that made more american blood flow in all history?
in a way that shaped what america is today, maybe they didnt directly build it but it would be very different if they werent there
can't say if better or worse tho

>objectively bad for economy
The South is objectively good for growing cotton.

You don't need slave to pick up cotton.

You need slaves to pick up cotton cheap

You don't need everything to be the cheapest possible, hiring someone wasn't very expensive back then and a industry could have flourished without slaves.

Bud, they were breeding those slaves and importing them en masse. You can't do that with free people.

Slave owners didnt use slaves to build because it was dangerous and if they died they lost money. They used irishman instead

white.

America's murder rate would be the same as Canada if I remember correctly