The South:
>goes to war with the USA
>loses and has its lands and economy crippled
>resists occupation and reconstruction afterward
> remains the poorest part of the US for 150 years after the war
>still cries about it to this day
Japan:
>goes to war with the USA
>loses and has its lands and economy absolutely devastated
>accepts occupation and reconstruction afterward
>rebounds and becomes one of the wealthiest and most prosperous nations in the world barely 40 years later
>still reflects on the war but has mostly gotten over it and moved the frick on
What's the key difference here?
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
>remains the poorest part of the US for 150 years after the war
>rebounds and becomes one of the wealthiest and most prosperous nations in the world barely 40 years later
>What's the key difference here
Black people vs Japanese people
>What's the key difference here?
japan's wartime economy didn't depend on a slave class that often outnumbered nonslaves
black people were slaves, yes.
>still cries
who?
Japan doesnt have 100 million blacks being a net drain on the economy.
Also the South is economically the fastest growing part of the US and the most desirable place to retire.
black people are not slaves, they are just not contributors.
Dixie turned contempt for work, scapegoating, and dinduing into performance art and a central part of their identity
>accepts occupation and reconstruction afterward
I mean understand post aside, but anon, i don't think they had a choice if about that.
It was either accept American occupation or open the door for the Soviet Union to drive a wedge in their country like they did with Korea
You're comparing permanent vs 10 year occupation.
both occupations were 10 years long anon
One became independent the other didn't.
reabsorption isn't occupation
Depends what definition you go by.
South was never and will never be an independent country.
You said it right there yourself...
>The South
>resists occupation
>Japan
>accepts occupation
The difference is Japan is a hardworking, industrious nation, while the South is a dilapidated shithole infested with lazy, morbidly obese D*Xoids
Japan was a world power before WW2. And although about 1/2 of its factories were destroyed during the war, former soldiers formed formed a well-disciplined work force to rebuild them with the help of billions of dollars of foreign aid. Japan took a niche (electronics) market approach and capitalized on it, and it helped being a main supplier to the world's largest economies (UK and USA) post-WW2. Similarly, the West Germans took another niche (automobiles, agriculture products, etc) and capitalized on it. Also, the educated Japanese officers were given positions in the new democratic government
Contrarily, the South in 1866 had no factories for the former soldiers to occupy, and although the USA freed rebellious states from their debts incurred, there were no large factories for former soldiers to go back to. The South had always been agrarian, and many former soldiers were forced into poverty by the Plantation Elite they helped defend. Many former soldiers did create industry, though, and some of the South is still home to the largest industrial sectors. Likewise, after the Civil War, more money was to be made elsewhere like in the West, so many of the educated Southerners moved Westward.
1940s and 1860s are pretty different. The South isn't necessarily poor and its downsides cant entirely be blamed on Reconstruction or the Civil War.
Radical Republican goal was to punish the South and force lower class to donate land for the freedman
Truman on the otherhand actually gave Japan assistance to rebuild their economy in order to curb Soviet influence. They also treated them much better compare to the South.
>Japan
>but has mostly gotten over it and moved the frick on
Lol you don't know shit.
The entire reason for the civil war was that the American South refused to modernize their economy, if the good old boys had their way it would have remained a cotton plantation until the end of time.
Japan meanwhile, went to war with the US because it wanted to take over it's market share in South East Asian markets, as an industrial competitor to the US.
Japan had just experienced the most explosive economic growth of any country in history.
>The CSA would have had an organic inelastic economy resilient to all the problems the US economy is facing
based?
No, they would have been conquered by the north, economically or militarily, just like they were IRL.
Why?
Why didnt the North Conquer Mexico if they were just in the mood for conquest?
Why would the North Abolish slavery if the Civil War hadnt occurred?
What if they just annexed the South and nothing changed?
slavery is the ideal economy.
To prevent Foreign powers from using the political division as a wedge to destroy North American sovereignty by playing the two countries off of each other.
The South had potential for industry that would synergize with the rest of America.
The CSA would squander this potential keeping their workforce picking cotton for sake of maintaing plantation society.
>Why didnt the North Conquer Mexico if they were just in the mood for conquest?
They did, for similar reasons.
Mexico was basically basically squatting California, doing absolutely nothing of note with the land.
The US took it, connected it by railroad and developed it to one of the most industrious areas on the planet.
The rest of Mexico was too populated and would not Integrate well into the US.
>Slavery is the ideal economy
Clearly not.
Client state vs. constituent part of the country is the main difference I think. Southerners could throw a wrench into national politics, often with support from northern democrats, and thereby force the people who wanted racial equality to back down.
But if postwar Japanese people were mad about the US the only real option was to seek support from the USSR and China. Which a lot of them did to be fair, it's a major strain in the Japanese left, but for the old elites from the imperial period the US was by far the lesser evil.