• BallShapedMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I appreciate your input, one article isn’t enough to convince me just like one book isn’t. But you’ve opened up a train of thought I’ll want to explore further for sure.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Ελληνικά
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, just consider in general, the Union was fielding mostly “American made” equipment, like Springfield rifles, while the CSA was using imported firearms like the Enfield. Confederate Uniforms were much more basic, most of the time just being a Gray coat, and the remaining equipment was frequently provisioned by the soldier themselves, meanwhile the Union could afford to equip their soldiers with a consistent Uniform. In the battle between the Monitor and the Merrimack, the Union Monitor was a purpose built Ironclad warship, and the Merrimack was a refit, essentially a regular ship with a bunch of iron plating slapped on it. Off the top of my head, those are some pretty compelling, well-known examples that show the difference in economies and production capabilities.

      • BallShapedMan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I hear you, but I don’t think that’s the lens of the time prior to the war. Going back to the books it looks like my simplified sentence mischaracterized and oversimplify what was going on. Northern industry was struggling to move into the South and replace slave labor, to again oversimplify due to initial CapEx and supplanting one caste system for another.

        So we’re making different arguments and talking past one another to an extent.

        The North’s problem was more like Chiquita banana’s problem with Guatemala.