D&D Make a new show

Pretty much. Slavery post Civil War in the event of a Confederate Victory would still be economic suicide to them

Triggered much, drumpfcuck?

Just like kikes will never let go of the Holohoax, Yankees will never let go of the war

Name's Ronald. Ronald Crump. I'm the meanest, toughest slave wrangler in these parts. You best hand in that black sumbitch or there's gonna be yuge trouble. Believe me. We'll take the little infant baby too, he'll be good firewood.

SHUT THE FUCK UP CRACKA, THIS AMERICA BITCH, BLACK LIVES MATTA, WHITE BRAINS SPLATTA
emmy award inbound

indeed…

I don't remember the Confederacy passing anything like pic related

I wonder why Yankees are so butthurt about the civi… oh :'^)

White Northerners are not the ones keeping this shit alive, it's (((them)))

Still waiting for an adaptation of Guns of the South.

Yankees are gone, user. They got outbred by the potato niggers and WOPs who arrived in the early twentieth century. The ones who are left are uptight progressive good goys who serve as breeding stock for kikes.

WHO DAT NIGGA UP ON DAT NAG? WHO DAT NIGGA UP ON DAT NAG?

I always a good show that shits on the inbred nigger blooded mongrels of the south. Never gets old watching their impotent anger and listening to them mushmouth the english language trying to make excuses for why they lost. Fucking embarrassing that they think they are white.

How Few Remain is better. Shame the rest of the series is blatant jewish-leftist propaganda.

Anyone wanna bet that California would still be liberal? Also chances are that the Confederate states of America would be like a 3rd world while USA in the north would be "modern".

Like real life?

I expect it to flop. These idiots managed to destroy the most popular show on earth. Let see what they can do without the hype.

Because the Civil War was totally all about slavery goys! Honest!

Destroy? It's more popular than ever.

Popularity does not meant quality. The show as decent for the first three seasons. It had good acted, good plot, good cast, good score, good directors, good art design. Now it was completely shite because its showrunners. The reason it popular now is because of it is popular. Once the hype end, it will be posthumously panned.

remember that there's slavery and then there's slavery. We don't know anything more about the show (and these two jew hacks themselves probably don't either), but you can safely assume things will have changed in 150 years or whatever. Chattel slavery as practiced in the American south will probably be shown to have evolved into something "civilized", while still being punctuated by random and occasional brutality for television. As far as the Brits are concerned, they'll be irrelevant as a check on the Confederacy after they lost whenever WWI came around in this timeline.

Also, keep in mind how the Jew thinks. They considered it "slavery" that Pharaoh made them work on the Sabbath. They're likely to simultaneously show the horrors of slavery while expanding the meaning of slavery to shit like just being in debt and having to work.

in truth, the south would look like a temperate climate, english-speaking latin america since the confederacy would have annexed everything down to the Yucatan peninsula by the mid 20th century and expelled/holocausted the negroes and replaced them with various latino castes. Keep in mind the only reason africans were brought in the first place was that they were the only ones who could be made to tolerate chattel slavery as practiced in those areas. Once technology obviates that need, why keep the population around?

Will it feature Maisie?

...

archive.is/siODm

Because the Southern Aristocracy was not so merciless that genociding their slaves would seem like a good solution. There's a tendency to exaggerate the horror of slavery and all that, in part thanks to Hollywood's sensationalism and in part thanks to it being ideologically convenient to think 300,000 Americans died for the Union fighting for a much more just cause (and against a more evil cause) than they actually did.

Most families in the South weren't slave-owning and most of those that were only had a single slave, likely as a household servant. Slavery as a household servant wouldn't have been all that bad, their needs were taken care of and they'd be treated well (provided they did their job). Field slavery was no doubt unpleasant, because the business of growing cash crops without much in the way of equipment is extremely physically demanding. In order to coerce understandably exhausted/reluctant workers and ensure they don't attempt some kind of uprising, some degree of force is necessary, hence whippings. I'm sure there were incidents of unusually cruel masters or white overseers, but for the most part the violence inflicted against the slaves was proportionate to what they needed to make them work. Slaves were reasonably expensive, so it really wouldn't be in even a plantation owner's interest to have them crippled or die early.

If you look at the post-slavery South, the wealthier families continued having a paternalistic outlook to the people whose ancestors were their ancestors' slaves. They continue employing them as servants, providing them with clothing and with food, and generally keeping as amicable of relations as possible, given the circumstances.

The phenomenon of lynching is tremendously overblown and mischaracterized in popular culture, about 5,000 lynchings occurred from 1882 (start of statistics on lynching being collected) to 1962, over 1,000 of the victims were statistically considered White. That is still a very high black:white ratio, but bare in mind that there were actually reasons for lynching besides "look ma, a nigger!". Lynchings primarily occurred in response to alleged crimes which may be difficult to take to court (either for evidenciary reasons or because of the great distance required to travel to take it to a court) or for the failure of the court to come to a verdict satisfactory to the accuser. People weren't (in large numbers) just lynched at random because of their race, it was usually because they had done something. Lynching was nowhere near as widespread nor as (in)descriminate as it's depicted.

Back to the main point, I don't think outright genocide is in the Southern aristocratic ethos. For one thing, that's putting a whole lot of property to waste in a very callous manner. It's more likely, I think that the slave market would become tiered with mestizo slaves being worth more and black slaves being worth less. It's probable that there would be a soft-genocide of the black slaves (through castration or otherwise imposing sterility), but they could also sell the black slaves to poorer aspiring plantation owners or make Lincoln's dream come true and ship them back to Africa.

I'd like the South to be like Draka:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Domination

I remember being on faggot nerd forums back in 2013 where they hated the Draka and Gor novels.

Why did they dislike The Domination books?
They're decent alt-history.

...

That's why the Rebellion won in Star Wars, you know.

Opinions forever dismissed.

Certainly not, and especially not once photography and mass media were invented. i should've stipulated that expelling them, confining them to reservations, or other means of reducing their numbers to an inconsequential figure would have been the obvious first choice since i didn't mean to imply genociding the nig nogs would have perceived as an equivalent option with expulsion. You're absolutely correct that Southerners weren't the cartoon villains that the (((media))) made them out to be.

And?

>>>/sudo/

Also the original klan was a white self defense militia that protected white communities from black rape gangs during the reconstruction era.

The original Klan was made to enforce the law that the Northern officials wouldn't. They killed more whites than blacks, but you will never hear about that

If you have to use one movie's flaws to justify a flaw in another work, you lost the argument.

looking forward to it

...

unnfff

if the first season of got is anything to go by we will be getting a lot of bbc in this show

Name?

The Domination is a book series. It's a common practice for an author to determine the winner and have them win through improbable methods. What happened is people disliked who was chosen in this case.

Hollywood already made a retarded mockumentary in which the South wins, set in the present, and yes they still have slavery, and even allied with the Nazis (who also exist for some reason) and take over all of America.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C.S.A.:_The_Confederate_States_of_America

Reminder that the admin of the biggest faggot nerd alternate history forum banned the author of those books because of islamophobic comments he made on usenet back in the '90s.

There have been a lot of really interesting "What if"s involving the civil war. One where the Confederates join the allies and the Union joins the Axis. One where the Confederates buy Cuba and the North is a weakling midget. One where at the cold war era the Union and Confederacy rejoin to fight against Russia.

You know what all of these Confederate worlds had in common? They disbanded slavery. Because Slavery 20-30 post Civil War era would not have been possible. It's a retarded concept that's less about a "What if they had won" and more about "Here's your daily fuck racism message never question the Union"

The South will rise again