What I love about Cody's videos is that he's not really doing alternate history stuff, but he's rather explaining the major significance of things that seem like minor details and how much impact they really had. Or sometimes that things that are usually seen as hugely important would probably have made little difference if they had not happened.
Exactly, that's why I love this series too. It's actually a history lesson, but he draws you in with an interesting thought-experiment that allows him to conceal the fact that you're learning as you watch.
@@TheMasonK I also like that he is willing to acknowledge his mistakes and fix things. Just look at his two episodes on Trotsky. Made a better one after learning more on the subject after his first. Hope he redoes some more of his older stuff like Africa or the Americas without colonialism.
I would also say grad school is pretty close too. Might be better described as indentured servitude, but with how your pushed around it’s torture either way.
@@ninjagirl226 the thing that makes grad school feel bad is youre the one PAYING to get pushed around😂, which somehow feels even worse than not getting paid and getting pushed around (though obviously actual slavery was much more brutal)
@@VloggingThroughHistory do a reaction on the vid "Why didnt the Virginias reunite?" By um, argh I forgot umm, oh right, I think it is History Matters, i think thats the channel
I had a 3rd great grandfather named John Churchill who fought in Company K of the 39th Illinois Infantry, or “Yates’ Phalanx,” and fought from the time of the First Battle of Kernstown, to Morris Island, and all the way to Appomattox Court House under General Grant. Just thought I’d share, great video keep up the good work. 😊 👍🏻
My ancestor was I think a captain in the union army. When he returned home his wife reportedly shot at him, not recognizing him with his beard. the very cabin they lived in was donated to the county and was moved to the St. Clair county state fair grounds in Michigan about a decade ago.
In the UK we had textile mills back to at least 1772. Even in the mid-1800s, wool mills dominated the east of the country while cotton dominated the west. While the boom in cotton production accelerated development, industrial textile production would still be present. A key factor with the UK's industrial revolution is the preceding agricultural revolution. Food production had boomed, leading to a rising unemployed population that could be utilised in factories. If the industrial revolution had stalled, that excess population would be utilised elsewhere. Perhaps the UK army would see an increase in size as the poor sought work? If so, the UK would have a much larger military in the era of colonial expansion.
That Wilson part of the video would be a great transition to watching Cody’s other video “The Election That Ruined Everything (And If It Never Happened).
Eli Whitney himself is a very interesting character. Born and bred a yankee, he both invented the cotton gin and he heavily advocated for interchangeable parts in manufacturing. He helped the South precipitate the war, and the North win the war.
Oh yeah. Head to New Haven they have a museum where his old shop was. I always found it interesting that the t’s a giant plaque mentioning the cotton gin there, but people love Whitney here.
@@Molorange never even learned about him in school. I mostly remember learning about some hero cadets who died (it may all be made up) during the siege of chapultepec.
Alternate History is wrong on one key point: The cotton gin didn't PICK cotton; it separated the boll from the cotton fibers. THAT was the laborious, time consuming aspect of growing cotton. But once the cotton gin mechanized the process, separating bolls from fibers as fast as the raw cotton could be dumped into it, that's when the demand for people to pick the cotton skyrocketed.
I was a history nut a few years ago in high school, but lost touch w that side of me in college. Discovered your channel a few days ago and I can’t stop watching. Love your vids
I think that without Woodrow Wilson being in power the U.S. likely becomes far more insular as Cody says. The Monroe Doctrine was mostly concerned with the Americas, and even as World War I raged on in Europe it was seen as patriotic even to be anti-war about any conflict that wasn't concerned with North or South America. Woodrow Wilson worked quite hard to push the idea that being opposed to the war was cowardice and to bring forth a more interventionist mindset in America. Would another president in an alternate time with a less cohesive country be able to gather enough support to get involved in a war in Europe? I'm not so sure. Woodrow Wilson was a fascinating president, his methods and actual beliefs are hotly debated even today, plenty of people don't share my thoughts on Woodrow Wilson. You definitely picked an interesting video though, it's a very interesting thought experiment.
Cody is generally very good. He does have an anti Wilson thing, which stems from the 2000s era politics, so be mindful of that. Textiles were a core industry of the first wave industrial revolution, but the ultimate drive is productive efficiency made possible by steam power. You still have coal, iron, railroads in the 1830s onwards and steel. You still have the Erie Canal, the rise of New York and Philly, the rail connection to Chicago. Maybe the Transcontinental happens later but the North would be and industrial power house.
One year later - thank you, and agreed on the Industrial Revolution's other aspects, which Chris VTH brings up as well. Cotton didn't power steam engines, after all. One aspect of the industrial revolution would have been missing, for sure, but the use of coal, iron, steel, copper, the steam engine, were not dependent on cotton mills. If anything, coal, iron, and railroads drove the industrial revolution more than "King Cotton." Some of the mining technologies show a greater linear evolution here. Advanced rail cart designs in British coal mines, along with hoist pump technology in the Cornish tin and copper mines, lead to the railroads. Coal mining leads to the steam engine. Chicago's industrial prowess was based on agriculture from the US Midwest, and being a rail hub port on Lake Michigan. Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pittsburgh all grow from coal and steel.
OMG man, as a latin american i always search for the outside-of-europe-and-the-states version of history but i love your channel. I think youre the most objective american Ive ever seen I really like your points of view on different events and how You approach them. Thanks for doing what you do
I feel like you could make the argument that, without the textile mills, there is a lesser demand for Steel and Iron, since those resources aren't being used to build the factories as well as fewer trains being built since the trains that would normally be built to haul cotton wouldn't exist either.
As a Maine native, I can tell you there was a drive for independence from Mass. well before 1820. In fact, a couple of counties were created in order to dole out cush jobs to certain rabble rousing elites, in order to tamp down the independence drive by depriving it of some of its leaders. So, I gotta believe Maine still would’ve become a separate state and, without the federal need for pro/anti slavery balance, it might’ve even happened *before* 1820.
The Cotton Gin was not just about picking cotton, but making cotton clean - it had seeds and other material that was a manual process, that the Gin managed to automate. Where as, one person could clean the cotton fibres and make about 10-20lbs\Day. The Gin was able to make hundreds of pounds of clean cotton daily.
I like how he jumps to diamonds as the modern equivalent of slave labor purchases in the west, rather than some of the....uh..."labor" practices in the east that make your phone so inexpensive.
Definitely should react to the downfall of german western front by the arm chair historian. Part 1&2. Thank you definitely one of my favorite videos of all times.
I would add a french centric point of view. Napoleon III used the fact that the US was busy in a civil war to invade Mexico. Unfortunately for him, the civil war ended before the end of the invasion, and the US was threat had him leave Mexico. The invasion of Mexico had already hurt France diplomacy in Europe (as France had gone there under the false pretence of demanding Mexico to repay their debt, not invading it). The costly expedition had also hurt france defences against Prussia. When France and Prussia went to war, while other nations werent happy at all about the possibility of Germany unification (breaking appart the balance of power in Europe), nobody joined France which had alienated itself the rest of the continent. So it is possible that the absence of a civil war would prevent France from invading Mexico, France would not alienate itself in the eyes of Europe, and might have had allies to prevent Germany unification and maintain the balance of power.
The message I got from this is that progress requires sacrifice. It's easy to say the cost isn't worth it in the moment, but the results tend to speak for themselves in future generations. History is a funny thing.
I know it's out of left field with the topics you've been covering lately BUT if you haven't seen the Alternate History video "What if the Cuba MIssile Crisis Went Hot" I highly recommend it. Whether you cover it on your channel or not is totally up to you I just personally think it is one of the best videos he has ever made and I think you would enjoy it a bunch. As always thank you for the content and I'm looking forward to see what you do next!
I'd love to see you react to his video on The Election That Ruined Everything (And If It Never Happened). He alluded to making it in this one, when he talks about Woodrow Wilson never taking office. He goes into more depth about the ramifications of Wilson's policies and probably more importantly Teddy's theoretical policies, since the easiest way for Wilson to lose is for Taft to not run, thus the vote isn't split, thus Teddy wins.
I’m from Kentucky myself, a lot of my family raised tobacco for generations. I did a little work with some cousins cutting, housing and stripping. Shits no joke...
17:45 Great point, and I'm really glad you mentioned that fact. Just one addition I would make; among the laws restricting newly-freed blacks in the South, there were also very harsh vagrancy laws which were strictly enforced, essentially labeling any black person who couldn't prove that he had a home as a vagrant, allowing him to be arrested. Since the 13th Amendment specifically allows slavery "as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted", many southern states used this loophole to essentially re-enslave black men by sending them to prison on dubious charges, and then effectively imposing slavery on them as a sentence. EDIT: Hah, I shouldn't have been so hasty. Of course, you mention the exact same thing, less than a minute later in the video lol.
18:46 that explains why criminals in prison is mistreated so badly (not all criminals are bad people and not all bad people deserve even worse treatments)
This is really cool, and using the cotton gin makes a lot of sense. I'd wonder about a similar timeline if the cotton gin was just invented later and/or the industrial revolution allowed for better farming equipment considerably earlier
It would have changed everything. it was argued that annexing Mexico as a whole, it would drastically change the US Congress, Senate, and possibly the Presidency down the line.
27:54 I agree a lot of discussion around this fails to consider non textile industries and while New England might be weaker, the Great Lakes, PA and NY would still be industrial power houses by 1900 based on rail, steel and coal.
OH. Interesting thing you noted about cheap labor from slavery. I read Democracy in America (published in the 1830s), and it noted that slavery was actually pretty expansive. The reason is that you need to keep slaves all-year-round, while with paid labor you only need to pay them for the time needed to pick the crops. You need to house, clothe, feed, bath, etc slaves. Not only that, but if you wished to buy slaves, that too is expansive. In addition, slaves did as little as they could get away with, since they wouldn't being paid for their labor. However, a paid laborer would be encourage to do more since they are being paid, and learn new ways of doing their job better. edit: nevermind, he touches on it. XD
I understand the point with your grandparents, my grandpa had 13 brothers and sisters that their parents had to loan out to their neighbors to work their farms in order to provide for the family because the didn’t have that much money
What about the bounty hunters who chased free men north and kept operating? There are many stops on the Underground Railroad that still exist. The Quakers did take in runaway slaves.
The cotton gin was an invention whose time had come. Before Whitney's invention a primitive gin was in use in India. Also, the Whitney invention was used primarily for long-staple cotton, not the more common short-staple cotton grown in the South. Other inventors (such as William Longstreet) modified the Whitney design for use with this type of cotton. The invention of the cotton gin was inevitable. The what if of its invention is not tenable.
On the idea of textiles being such a vital component while oil and steel being a side note. Oil and steel where monopolies. With cotton, multiple plantations can contribute to textile part of the economy. Not many people had oil farms and steel plantations.
I had a question about ethnicity/race. How far back do you go to determine what your ethnicity is? I always believed I was 1/4 Korean and my grandma was full Korean. We did a DNA test and the quarter I thought was Korean was actually 15% NE China, 7% Japanese, and 3% Vietnamese. That test goes back 21 generations but as far back as I know, that part of my family was in Korea as far back as my great great grandmother. I mean no matter what I still believe I’m 1/4 Korean even if the different portions of my ancestors came from surrounding areas. Just looking for some clarification and how you see it since you do so much of that. Thank you!
That isn't really how DNA testing works. DNA doesn't show you the exact genetic makeup of your ancestors, it only shows the genetic makeup you inherited. You inherit 50% of your DNA from each parent, but not necessarily the same 50% that a sibling would inherit. Perfect example of this, my grandmother's DNA test shows her to be 30% Irish, but mine only shows 2% Irish. I just didn't inherit that much of her Irish DNA.
Ethnicity and “race” are made up to diagram what is a many dimensional spectrum. And often where the lines are drawn are entirely about the social and cultural makeup or class system than actual physiology. Same with especially in America or South Africa your actual ancestry matters less than your presenting skin color. But in other regimes like the Spanish empire, they had an incredibly proscriptive manner of creating terms or rights. DNA markers are even more complicated and where and how they spread only beginning to be understood. Like that 5% we know being specific to humans with regional prevalence from oft tested persons is kinda their whole industry. We thought most of our DNA was junk, turns out a lot of that has viral DNA now endogenous to our system, some of which is still activatable and harmful, and some of it has been co-opted by evolution like the protein that is the reason your mother’s immune system doesn’t attack you in the womb. Plus the amount from ghost populations of extinct hominids which is now some of the primary markers in geocoding your ancestry like which kind and how much Neanderthal, or which subspecies of Denisovan does your region still have too. Idk what my point is now but we contain multitudes, and the ways we now learn to place people shows how little the lines we drew in the past made any sense. Check out the Tides of History podcast if anyone’s interested, basically our entire understanding of prehistorical Homo Sapien and other hominids has completely changed in the last 2-3 years.
It would be interesting to see the effect on the French interventions in Central America. As it was, France invaded Mexico while the USA was preoccupied, I wonder if they would’ve anyways leading to a Franco-American war. Additionally the US civil war gave a huge boost to the mobilization and technological state of the USA in terms of military. Maybe that provided evidence to outsiders that the USA could commit to a large scale war if provoked. In a world where they’ve just had a few minor conflicts with Mexico, and the states do not have a strong central government, foreign powers might not be as deterred from starting a conflict with America.
So you’ve mentioned that your family lineage can be traced back to Birmingham. This is the starting location of the the Netflix show “Peaky Blinders”. Have you watched this show? If so, what are you thoughts on it? What time frame was your family living there?
This is an interesting practice, but he overlooks one critical flaw. Eli Whitney's cotton gin was not the first in America. Most southern communities that focussed on long-staple cotton rather than the short-staple plant were using a roller cotton gin from India as early as the 1730s. Those areas were producing as much cotton daily as Whitney's saw gin would produce decades later. Unfortunately, roughly 70% of cotton grown in the south is short-staple, as the long-staple plant requires a bit more dry conditions to thrive than the short-stem does. Eventually, someone would have adapted the Indian roller gin to separate the short-staple as well. In fact, in 1840, Fones McCarthy developed a gin that could separate all forms of cotton, though it was most efficient with extra-long-stem cotton. Joseph Eve had been experimenting with various modifications to the Indian roller gin, and even presented a counter claim to Whitney's patent for his own similar design in July 1793. This is why Whitney's patent was not validated until 1807.
Excellent video, Prof. Cody. I particularly liked your tie in with the Industrial Revolution and how it changed the idea of cotton farming. If there was no market by way of the North having the factories to produce cloth, (let alone the ships that brought the slaves in the first place, etc.--don't you think they would have been smart to just not buy the cotton and avoid a shooting war? I really don't read anywhere that "We're invading the South to free the slaves" My own ancestors in the South didn't see it that way. My great Aunt, who married into the family, was a Wermacht Dr. during WWII and told me that her father, a Nazi, stated "The US knows what's going on versus the Jews, how come they don't just say "We've got to save the Jews and have a clear Moral reason to have war?" My aunt was a deserter and echoed what was going on, as did many others. With Jews (and I'm 1/4 Jewish) not particularly revered, would anyone fight for that as a theme either. And along these same lines, didn't Britain and Europe just get themselves some new slaves, ie India, Egypt, etc. for cotton? You even touched on the fact that cotton would fade slowly, just like tobacco. But Industrialism was a big new factor and soon upon the end of the Civil War--steel products, and inventions replaced much and in a way kept farming a poor guys game, keeping reconstruction not much of a win. Without respect for monuments to the emotional heroics, as you mentioned the North had to make count, even the Confederacy's monuments appeal to the South's senses. Destroying them displays the grave being dug for even further separation of chances. I love the videos, and this one particularly displayed a lot of what we have discussed for years.
Common misconception. The Union originally fought the Confederacy to keep the U.S. together, later deeming another major goal would have to be ending slavery. That's not to say the Lost Cause is correct however, the South did secede to protect the institution of slavery. As for the WWII example, I can't see how its relevant. From what I can find the Holocaust was not found out about until at least 1944(if you have a source for its discovery early please tell me), and slavery was outlawed in India and Egypt at 1843 and 1904 respectively. tldr I disagree on a few things, but I'm open to opposing arguments(also you may have figured it out already but this isn't Cody).
Greetings from Canada, eh!! On youtube there is a video called "Who would be King of America if George Washington was made Monarch." In one scenario, Robert E. Lee's wife is Queen, he's consort and their 1st born son, George W. Custis Lee later becomes King George III. It's a fascinating video, I don't know how to share "the link" but it's easily found.
I find it interesting how you can draw a comparison to the south reintroducing slavery in all but name to how the people in Russia were after being freed of serfdom, they were now technically free men but the government/power at the time did nothing for them so their situation changed very little as they still had to work for local lords to pay off so much money. The world’s history really is similar in so many ways around the world.
Cotton for wool is a pretty stupid trade. Wool is better in every regard. There is a reason us outdoor youtubers say "Cotton Kills" Its a terrible cloth for outdoors. Gets wet easy, doesn't insulate and doesn't dry easily.
Also. NO! The Coddin gin did not pick coddin. That automated process was done by a machine called the automatic Coddin picker, invented the 1944 so that also explains why slavery continued for 80 more years in the south in the form of share-cropping. Cotton gin merely separated the coddin from the coddin seeds...which was still pretty huge though. "Thank you Phil"🙂. "Your welcome Cody". I know what he meant at 5:25 by "picking individual coddin pieces" but combined with the video at 5:25 I would bet over half the audience came away thinking the Coddin gin picked Coddin...which it didn't. And don't say "coddin".
My favorite way to prevent the Civil War - the boll weevil comes to N. America before the cotton gin is invented, preventing slavery from becoming the behemoth that it did.
Not sure if you normally do, but the research help live stream can you re upload it after in case I or others miss it I've always wanted to attempt to find out more about my family history but i don't really know much at all and don't have contact with any relatives and i don't make enough to pay someone to do it if i did believe me i would in a heartbeat.
Ive often thought about researching my family history but unfortunately my grandmother doesn't know, or just refuses to tell us, the name of my grandfather so that side of the family is completely blocked off. Same goes for my biological father's side, he refuses to tell us any details about his family or parents.
One other potential impact is that the USA may have ended up annexing all of Mexico or more of it since slavery was no longer an issue and thus the idea of balance was no longer an impediment to annexing more of Mexico, if not all of it.
Interesting to also think the affect the American Civil War had on the future wars of Prussia, as they had used the lessons of the war to develop the understanding of modern weapons Von Moltke had in unifying Germany in the Austo-Prussian and Franco-Prussian wars.
Not only did they think slavery was going to phase out, but Eli Whitney did not 'invent the cotton gin', he 'perfected' the cotton gin to separate the sticky seeds from cotton. The original cotton gins could not be used on American cotton.
I think the population of the South, in this scenario, would actually be very similar except much fewer slaves. 10 million non slaves and around 1 million slaves. Reason being that without the buy up of land by huge plantations that land is used by small farmers (which many in the South were) immigration from Europe spreads South as well as North and as a result the South grows just like the West (midwest today).
In these videos I have enjoyed Alt History's content and respect the research and point of view, but every time I head "codden" instead of "Cotton" I twitch.
6:10 yes you can even trace an evolution in the mindset towards slavery from "on its way out" to "necessary evil" in the 1820s to by 1850 s it being spun as a positive by Southern politicians.
You can't have something not be invented because someone would eventually come up with the solution. Newton & Leibniz were both working on calculus at the same time, so we would have had calculus had one of them discontinued their work. If it wasn't Eli Whitney, someone else would have mechanised the production of cotton.
Honestly, I thought that the cotton gin wouldve REDUCED slavery, think about it, less work for cotton, means less slaves needed to pick cotton to put into the cotton gin, but of course, as everything that makes things easier, there is more of it, example, cars making travel easier than horses means more cars. How did I think it would reduce it? HOW.
That point around 22:00 holds true today; myself and many others identify with state first, American second. Esp larger states, such as Californian (me) or Texan.
Coal mining exploded in britain to fuel textile production, so while they may have found another thing to power with coal it wouldn't have turned out the same
If they make DC a state, we can still break Texas up into 5 states and I know some parts of California that would love to NOT be a part of California anymore. Heck we can probably get 10 or 12 states out of Alaska, two Wyomings, two Montanas, and 3 new Colorados that do NOT include the Denver area. Add that to the 133 new Supreme Court Justices.
Very interesting as an european I dont know to much about it do you have some advise for good sources to study the topic Because I found a new passion about it
I'd like to add one major thing, that isn't mentioned here: The South wasn't backwards and non-industrialized because they would not have been able to, but because it was not necessary for the people in power to industrialize in order to increase riches and influence. The industrial revolution came mostly not as some sort of fluke, but because the old ways simply were not profitable anymore. So people thought of ways to increase their wealth in an easy way. Now without the close to free possibility of slave cotton picking, the rich people in the south would most likely think of new ways to make money. One possibility I'd see is Texas starting to harvest oil waay earlier, which would lead to way earlier fuel-based economies. But there are actually multiple ways the south could have industrialized if they needed to.
Iron, coal, and steel are needed to create ships. Ships are needed to transport consumer goods or protect the trade of consumer goods. What are consumer goods in the 19th century? Primarily textiles. So, without textiles then you just are creating war ships with all of that steel and not cargo ships, or at least far fewer ones. I think Cody was right about that being a major deflator of the industrial revolution.
When speaking about textiles and the industrial revolution, mass produced cloth and clothing was absolutely essential to the development of factories and factory workers as we understand it. That industry had an immediate, constant and near universal demand of its produce, which is non- or semi-durable in nature, which is much less so for iron or other metal goods. Metal pots, pans, utensils, plows, etc. being available for the average home is a massive domestic revolution, but does not have the same impact as clothing. Metal goods are durable, and once a family has them, that's the end of that demand so long as they are maintained (people today will tell you about the cast iron skillet they inherited from their grandmother). Obviously metal goods will always have both an industrial use and a military use, but without a constant need to turn out fresh products (like textiles) to meet the demand, there is less need for efficiency in industry. Lumber and paper milling were hugely important to early engines like the steam saw, but also differed from textiles in that you likely wouldn't have a factory in a city, as most lumber yards are located near your lumber supply, because it is much easier to move milled wood than it is to move freshly logged trees (then even more so than today). Foodstuffs could have seen earlier industrialization (the international production and trade in tea or sugar speaks to this), but until the development of more modern preservation techniques or canning would have taken just as long to develop as an industry as it did in our timeline - maybe longer without the knowhow generated by a constant demand industry such as textiles. Fabrics - even leathers and woolens - have a wear out point, and the availability of relatively cheap and higher quality than home-produced clothing was and is one of the main cornerstones of modern consumerism. Think of how many pots and pans or other metal goods (heck, even appliances) are purchased by a modern five-person nuclear family in a year versus that of just shoes, socks, and underwear. An industry that never really loses it's demand, and would require an urban industrial base staffed by salaried workers, and a constant supply chain of raw materials, was a crucial driver of the industrial revolution as we know it. I'd argue none of the other main early industries to see such processes had the kind of impact as textiles.
What I love about Cody's videos is that he's not really doing alternate history stuff, but he's rather explaining the major significance of things that seem like minor details and how much impact they really had.
Or sometimes that things that are usually seen as hugely important would probably have made little difference if they had not happened.
Exactly, that's why I love this series too. It's actually a history lesson, but he draws you in with an interesting thought-experiment that allows him to conceal the fact that you're learning as you watch.
Yes Cody is truly awesome at what he does!
@@TheMasonK I also like that he is willing to acknowledge his mistakes and fix things. Just look at his two episodes on Trotsky. Made a better one after learning more on the subject after his first. Hope he redoes some more of his older stuff like Africa or the Americas without colonialism.
That’s deep brofesser
pro tip : you can watch series on Flixzone. I've been using them for watching all kinds of movies during the lockdown.
"11 sons is about as close as you get to slave labour without having slave labour."
That's a rabbit hole to think about.
Yep, still happens today as well. Need them kids to run the farm basically.
I would also say grad school is pretty close too. Might be better described as indentured servitude, but with how your pushed around it’s torture either way.
@@ninjagirl226 the thing that makes grad school feel bad is youre the one PAYING to get pushed around😂, which somehow feels even worse than not getting paid and getting pushed around (though obviously actual slavery was much more brutal)
Slavery is inherently abusive. Family can be abusive, but done right it's qualitatively different.
I love how your glasses indicate that it is research time.
I watched Alternate History Hub yesterday and I thought What if vlogging through history reacted to one of these videos. Coincidence I think not.
You thought it into existence!
@@VloggingThroughHistory Manifest your Destiny
@@VloggingThroughHistory do a reaction on the vid "Why didnt the Virginias reunite?" By um, argh I forgot umm, oh right, I think it is History Matters, i think thats the channel
what ifception
There is an alternate history where this never happened.
I had a 3rd great grandfather named John Churchill who fought in Company K of the 39th Illinois Infantry, or “Yates’ Phalanx,” and fought from the time of the First Battle of Kernstown, to Morris Island, and all the way to Appomattox Court House under General Grant. Just thought I’d share, great video keep up the good work. 😊 👍🏻
My ancestor was I think a captain in the union army. When he returned home his wife reportedly shot at him, not recognizing him with his beard. the very cabin they lived in was donated to the county and was moved to the St. Clair county state fair grounds in Michigan about a decade ago.
lol I’m picturing a hilarious scene where a man hides behind a tree and hurriedly tries to shave his face so his wife will stop shooting hahaha
In the UK we had textile mills back to at least 1772. Even in the mid-1800s, wool mills dominated the east of the country while cotton dominated the west.
While the boom in cotton production accelerated development, industrial textile production would still be present.
A key factor with the UK's industrial revolution is the preceding agricultural revolution. Food production had boomed, leading to a rising unemployed population that could be utilised in factories.
If the industrial revolution had stalled, that excess population would be utilised elsewhere.
Perhaps the UK army would see an increase in size as the poor sought work? If so, the UK would have a much larger military in the era of colonial expansion.
That Wilson part of the video would be a great transition to watching Cody’s other video “The Election That Ruined Everything (And If It Never Happened).
Eli Whitney himself is a very interesting character. Born and bred a yankee, he both invented the cotton gin and he heavily advocated for interchangeable parts in manufacturing. He helped the South precipitate the war, and the North win the war.
Oh yeah. Head to New Haven they have a museum where his old shop was. I always found it interesting that the t’s a giant plaque mentioning the cotton gin there, but people love Whitney here.
Yea you’re right but you really should’ve mentioned how he was an abolitionist and hoped his invention would help end slavery
@@dand4139, yeah... he didn't really think through how the planter class would do anything, and I mean ANYTHING to keep slavery profitable.
Can you do Mexican-American war reaction somewhere in the future? as a mexican I really want to hear the other side
Hello my fellow citizens
Curious but how do you feel about Winfield Scott?
@@Molorange kicked our ass lol
@@Molorange never even learned about him in school. I mostly remember learning about some hero cadets who died (it may all be made up) during the siege of chapultepec.
Manly cause by the annexation of Texas and the land disputes lead to a less than 2 year war. And Santa Anna getting his butt kicked again..
I always watch the original video first, and then watch your reaction for extra context. Very helpful 👍🏿
That warhammer reference made my day. That is all. The Emperor Protects
Love that you are reacting to more Cody, dude puts some serious work into his videos.
Alternate History is wrong on one key point: The cotton gin didn't PICK cotton; it separated the boll from the cotton fibers. THAT was the laborious, time consuming aspect of growing cotton. But once the cotton gin mechanized the process, separating bolls from fibers as fast as the raw cotton could be dumped into it, that's when the demand for people to pick the cotton skyrocketed.
I was a history nut a few years ago in high school, but lost touch w that side of me in college. Discovered your channel a few days ago and I can’t stop watching. Love your vids
I love these reactions videos. You’re my new history teacher. I appreciate the idea of us learning together and discovering.
I think that without Woodrow Wilson being in power the U.S. likely becomes far more insular as Cody says. The Monroe Doctrine was mostly concerned with the Americas, and even as World War I raged on in Europe it was seen as patriotic even to be anti-war about any conflict that wasn't concerned with North or South America. Woodrow Wilson worked quite hard to push the idea that being opposed to the war was cowardice and to bring forth a more interventionist mindset in America. Would another president in an alternate time with a less cohesive country be able to gather enough support to get involved in a war in Europe? I'm not so sure. Woodrow Wilson was a fascinating president, his methods and actual beliefs are hotly debated even today, plenty of people don't share my thoughts on Woodrow Wilson. You definitely picked an interesting video though, it's a very interesting thought experiment.
Shoutouts from Richmond, VA. Love your content, keep up the awesomeness.
Would love to hear your family history search tips! Can’t wait!
So happy the channel has grown and I love the civil war content!
I've always watched Cody's videos and the other big ones but with this channel it just sticks better in my mind
Cody is generally very good. He does have an anti Wilson thing, which stems from the 2000s era politics, so be mindful of that. Textiles were a core industry of the first wave industrial revolution, but the ultimate drive is productive efficiency made possible by steam power. You still have coal, iron, railroads in the 1830s onwards and steel. You still have the Erie Canal, the rise of New York and Philly, the rail connection to Chicago. Maybe the Transcontinental happens later but the North would be and industrial power house.
One year later - thank you, and agreed on the Industrial Revolution's other aspects, which Chris VTH brings up as well. Cotton didn't power steam engines, after all. One aspect of the industrial revolution would have been missing, for sure, but the use of coal, iron, steel, copper, the steam engine, were not dependent on cotton mills.
If anything, coal, iron, and railroads drove the industrial revolution more than "King Cotton." Some of the mining technologies show a greater linear evolution here. Advanced rail cart designs in British coal mines, along with hoist pump technology in the Cornish tin and copper mines, lead to the railroads. Coal mining leads to the steam engine.
Chicago's industrial prowess was based on agriculture from the US Midwest, and being a rail hub port on Lake Michigan. Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pittsburgh all grow from coal and steel.
How could anyone be pro Wilson?
@@SlyFireVR I am also anti Wilson, I just find it prudent to note creators biases.
OMG man, as a latin american i always search for the outside-of-europe-and-the-states version of history but i love your channel. I think youre the most objective american Ive ever seen I really like your points of view on different events and how You approach them. Thanks for doing what you do
I feel like you could make the argument that, without the textile mills, there is a lesser demand for Steel and Iron, since those resources aren't being used to build the factories as well as fewer trains being built since the trains that would normally be built to haul cotton wouldn't exist either.
As a Maine native, I can tell you there was a drive for independence from Mass. well before 1820. In fact, a couple of counties were created in order to dole out cush jobs to certain rabble rousing elites, in order to tamp down the independence drive by depriving it of some of its leaders. So, I gotta believe Maine still would’ve become a separate state and, without the federal need for pro/anti slavery balance, it might’ve even happened *before* 1820.
It’s kinda funny to think that it happened while John Adams was still alive, and living there in Massachusetts
The Cotton Gin was not just about picking cotton, but making cotton clean - it had seeds and other material that was a manual process, that the Gin managed to automate. Where as, one person could clean the cotton fibres and make about 10-20lbs\Day. The Gin was able to make hundreds of pounds of clean cotton daily.
I like how he jumps to diamonds as the modern equivalent of slave labor purchases in the west, rather than some of the....uh..."labor" practices in the east that make your phone so inexpensive.
Definitely should react to the downfall of german western front by the arm chair historian. Part 1&2. Thank you definitely one of my favorite videos of all times.
I really love your videos! You should finally react to the new Sabaton song, The Royal Guard, released like a couple weeks ago
I am listening to sabaton rn
Damn, I could listen you for days... great videos!
I would add a french centric point of view.
Napoleon III used the fact that the US was busy in a civil war to invade Mexico. Unfortunately for him, the civil war ended before the end of the invasion, and the US was threat had him leave Mexico.
The invasion of Mexico had already hurt France diplomacy in Europe (as France had gone there under the false pretence of demanding Mexico to repay their debt, not invading it).
The costly expedition had also hurt france defences against Prussia.
When France and Prussia went to war, while other nations werent happy at all about the possibility of Germany unification (breaking appart the balance of power in Europe), nobody joined France which had alienated itself the rest of the continent.
So it is possible that the absence of a civil war would prevent France from invading Mexico, France would not alienate itself in the eyes of Europe, and might have had allies to prevent Germany unification and maintain the balance of power.
The message I got from this is that progress requires sacrifice.
It's easy to say the cost isn't worth it in the moment, but the results tend to speak for themselves in future generations. History is a funny thing.
That assumes progress couldn't have been made with non slave operated cotton farms instead though.
having worked tobacco ... looooooord is it rough the constant bending the heat and sun beating down
I know it's out of left field with the topics you've been covering lately BUT if you haven't seen the Alternate History video "What if the Cuba MIssile Crisis Went Hot" I highly recommend it. Whether you cover it on your channel or not is totally up to you I just personally think it is one of the best videos he has ever made and I think you would enjoy it a bunch. As always thank you for the content and I'm looking forward to see what you do next!
Love the alt history videos you should definitely do more
I'd love to see you react to his video on The Election That Ruined Everything (And If It Never Happened). He alluded to making it in this one, when he talks about Woodrow Wilson never taking office. He goes into more depth about the ramifications of Wilson's policies and probably more importantly Teddy's theoretical policies, since the easiest way for Wilson to lose is for Taft to not run, thus the vote isn't split, thus Teddy wins.
I’m from Kentucky myself, a lot of my family raised tobacco for generations. I did a little work with some cousins cutting, housing and stripping. Shits no joke...
17:45 Great point, and I'm really glad you mentioned that fact. Just one addition I would make; among the laws restricting newly-freed blacks in the South, there were also very harsh vagrancy laws which were strictly enforced, essentially labeling any black person who couldn't prove that he had a home as a vagrant, allowing him to be arrested. Since the 13th Amendment specifically allows slavery "as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted", many southern states used this loophole to essentially re-enslave black men by sending them to prison on dubious charges, and then effectively imposing slavery on them as a sentence.
EDIT: Hah, I shouldn't have been so hasty. Of course, you mention the exact same thing, less than a minute later in the video lol.
28:47 Boss hog makes an appearance
The Confederacy expected British support because they depended on King Cotton, but they forgot that cotton grew in Egypt and India.
Great video but I had never heard cotton pronounced as "codun"
Also annoying how he said Briddin instead of Britain. Like every T sound becomes a D.
That’s the southwestern accent we don’t say t’s much around here😂
I’m trying to ignore it but it’s not easy 😬
18:46 that explains why criminals in prison is mistreated so badly (not all criminals are bad people and not all bad people deserve even worse treatments)
Me: how dare the rest of the world profit off slavery back then!
Also me: wow, this video sure looks good on the iPhone I paid $200 for.
Ohh. . .
This is really cool, and using the cotton gin makes a lot of sense. I'd wonder about a similar timeline if the cotton gin was just invented later and/or the industrial revolution allowed for better farming equipment considerably earlier
1:52 I love this map. First saw it in a Civil War book by historian James McPherson.
Why does Cody keep calling it “codd-in”? It’s “cott-en.” Drove me crazy.
This guy says 'aristocracy' like it's a dirty word.
Without the concern over slave vs free states, the US definitely would have annexed a lot more land in the Mexican-American war
It would have changed everything. it was argued that annexing Mexico as a whole, it would drastically change the US Congress, Senate, and possibly the Presidency down the line.
27:54 I agree a lot of discussion around this fails to consider non textile industries and while New England might be weaker, the Great Lakes, PA and NY would still be industrial power houses by 1900 based on rail, steel and coal.
OH. Interesting thing you noted about cheap labor from slavery. I read Democracy in America (published in the 1830s), and it noted that slavery was actually pretty expansive. The reason is that you need to keep slaves all-year-round, while with paid labor you only need to pay them for the time needed to pick the crops. You need to house, clothe, feed, bath, etc slaves. Not only that, but if you wished to buy slaves, that too is expansive. In addition, slaves did as little as they could get away with, since they wouldn't being paid for their labor. However, a paid laborer would be encourage to do more since they are being paid, and learn new ways of doing their job better.
edit: nevermind, he touches on it. XD
I understand the point with your grandparents, my grandpa had 13 brothers and sisters that their parents had to loan out to their neighbors to work their farms in order to provide for the family because the didn’t have that much money
Such great content, love it!
What about the bounty hunters who chased free men north and kept operating?
There are many stops on the Underground Railroad that still exist. The Quakers did take in runaway slaves.
what some great banjo music
Indeed
This comment was made possible by steam
I wish there was a video about what would happen had Gustavus Adolphus survived and led Sweden to becoming a superpower.
Whatifalthist has a video on that
The cotton gin was an invention whose time had come. Before Whitney's invention a primitive gin was in use in India. Also, the Whitney invention was used primarily for long-staple cotton, not the more common short-staple cotton grown in the South. Other inventors (such as William Longstreet) modified the Whitney design for use with this type of cotton. The invention of the cotton gin was inevitable. The what if of its invention is not tenable.
On the idea of textiles being such a vital component while oil and steel being a side note. Oil and steel where monopolies. With cotton, multiple plantations can contribute to textile part of the economy. Not many people had oil farms and steel plantations.
I had a question about ethnicity/race. How far back do you go to determine what your ethnicity is? I always believed I was 1/4 Korean and my grandma was full Korean. We did a DNA test and the quarter I thought was Korean was actually 15% NE China, 7% Japanese, and 3% Vietnamese. That test goes back 21 generations but as far back as I know, that part of my family was in Korea as far back as my great great grandmother. I mean no matter what I still believe I’m 1/4 Korean even if the different portions of my ancestors came from surrounding areas. Just looking for some clarification and how you see it since you do so much of that. Thank you!
The culture I grew up with was Korean so that’s why I still would claim 1/4 Korean. Instead of breaking it down by what the DNA test says.
That isn't really how DNA testing works. DNA doesn't show you the exact genetic makeup of your ancestors, it only shows the genetic makeup you inherited. You inherit 50% of your DNA from each parent, but not necessarily the same 50% that a sibling would inherit. Perfect example of this, my grandmother's DNA test shows her to be 30% Irish, but mine only shows 2% Irish. I just didn't inherit that much of her Irish DNA.
@@VloggingThroughHistory ok that makes a lot of sense and thank you for clearing that up!
@@VloggingThroughHistory I’m excited to learn more during your upcoming livestream
Ethnicity and “race” are made up to diagram what is a many dimensional spectrum. And often where the lines are drawn are entirely about the social and cultural makeup or class system than actual physiology. Same with especially in America or South Africa your actual ancestry matters less than your presenting skin color. But in other regimes like the Spanish empire, they had an incredibly proscriptive manner of creating terms or rights.
DNA markers are even more complicated and where and how they spread only beginning to be understood. Like that 5% we know being specific to humans with regional prevalence from oft tested persons is kinda their whole industry. We thought most of our DNA was junk, turns out a lot of that has viral DNA now endogenous to our system, some of which is still activatable and harmful, and some of it has been co-opted by evolution like the protein that is the reason your mother’s immune system doesn’t attack you in the womb. Plus the amount from ghost populations of extinct hominids which is now some of the primary markers in geocoding your ancestry like which kind and how much Neanderthal, or which subspecies of Denisovan does your region still have too.
Idk what my point is now but we contain multitudes, and the ways we now learn to place people shows how little the lines we drew in the past made any sense. Check out the Tides of History podcast if anyone’s interested, basically our entire understanding of prehistorical Homo Sapien and other hominids has completely changed in the last 2-3 years.
It would be interesting to see the effect on the French interventions in Central America. As it was, France invaded Mexico while the USA was preoccupied, I wonder if they would’ve anyways leading to a Franco-American war. Additionally the US civil war gave a huge boost to the mobilization and technological state of the USA in terms of military. Maybe that provided evidence to outsiders that the USA could commit to a large scale war if provoked. In a world where they’ve just had a few minor conflicts with Mexico, and the states do not have a strong central government, foreign powers might not be as deterred from starting a conflict with America.
So you’ve mentioned that your family lineage can be traced back to Birmingham. This is the starting location of the the Netflix show “Peaky Blinders”. Have you watched this show? If so, what are you thoughts on it? What time frame was your family living there?
Fani regarding Nathan:
🎵He’s so fine
There’s no tellin’ where the money went
Simply irresistible 🎵
My grandmother was a tabbaco child growing up in Kentucky she used to joke, "My daddy had three slaves, me and my 2 brothers" 😂
This is an interesting practice, but he overlooks one critical flaw. Eli Whitney's cotton gin was not the first in America. Most southern communities that focussed on long-staple cotton rather than the short-staple plant were using a roller cotton gin from India as early as the 1730s. Those areas were producing as much cotton daily as Whitney's saw gin would produce decades later. Unfortunately, roughly 70% of cotton grown in the south is short-staple, as the long-staple plant requires a bit more dry conditions to thrive than the short-stem does. Eventually, someone would have adapted the Indian roller gin to separate the short-staple as well. In fact, in 1840, Fones McCarthy developed a gin that could separate all forms of cotton, though it was most efficient with extra-long-stem cotton. Joseph Eve had been experimenting with various modifications to the Indian roller gin, and even presented a counter claim to Whitney's patent for his own similar design in July 1793. This is why Whitney's patent was not validated until 1807.
Excellent video, Prof. Cody. I particularly liked your tie in with the Industrial Revolution and how it changed the idea of cotton farming. If there was no market by way of the North having the factories to produce cloth, (let alone the ships that brought the slaves in the first place, etc.--don't you think they would have been smart to just not buy the cotton and avoid a shooting war? I really don't read anywhere that "We're invading the South to free the slaves" My own ancestors in the South didn't see it that way. My great Aunt, who married into the family, was a Wermacht Dr. during WWII and told me that her father, a Nazi, stated "The US knows what's going on versus the Jews, how come they don't just say "We've got to save the Jews and have a clear Moral reason to have war?" My aunt was a deserter and echoed what was going on, as did many others. With Jews (and I'm 1/4 Jewish) not particularly revered, would anyone fight for that as a theme either. And along these same lines, didn't Britain and Europe just get themselves some new slaves, ie India, Egypt, etc. for cotton? You even touched on the fact that cotton would fade slowly, just like tobacco. But Industrialism was a big new factor and soon upon the end of the Civil War--steel products, and inventions replaced much and in a way kept farming a poor guys game, keeping reconstruction not much of a win. Without respect for monuments to the emotional heroics, as you mentioned the North had to make count, even the Confederacy's monuments appeal to the South's senses. Destroying them displays the grave being dug for even further separation of chances. I love the videos, and this one particularly displayed a lot of what we have discussed for years.
Common misconception. The Union originally fought the Confederacy to keep the U.S. together, later deeming another major goal would have to be ending slavery. That's not to say the Lost Cause is correct however, the South did secede to protect the institution of slavery. As for the WWII example, I can't see how its relevant. From what I can find the Holocaust was not found out about until at least 1944(if you have a source for its discovery early please tell me), and slavery was outlawed in India and Egypt at 1843 and 1904 respectively.
tldr I disagree on a few things, but I'm open to opposing arguments(also you may have figured it out already but this isn't Cody).
Greetings from Canada, eh!! On youtube there is a video called "Who would be King of America if George Washington was made Monarch." In one scenario, Robert E. Lee's wife is Queen, he's consort and their 1st born son, George W. Custis Lee later becomes King George III. It's a fascinating video, I don't know how to share "the link" but it's easily found.
Yep that’s on useful charts. Good stuff.
@@VloggingThroughHistory just found your channel, been binge watching last couple days, GREAT STUFF!!
Sad that there are no textile plants in the United States anymore.
Everything, including Levis, made elsewhere.
I find it interesting how you can draw a comparison to the south reintroducing slavery in all but name to how the people in Russia were after being freed of serfdom, they were now technically free men but the government/power at the time did nothing for them so their situation changed very little as they still had to work for local lords to pay off so much money.
The world’s history really is similar in so many ways around the world.
Cotton for wool is a pretty stupid trade. Wool is better in every regard. There is a reason us outdoor youtubers say "Cotton Kills" Its a terrible cloth for outdoors. Gets wet easy, doesn't insulate and doesn't dry easily.
Also. NO! The Coddin gin did not pick coddin. That automated process was done by a machine called the automatic Coddin picker, invented the 1944 so that also explains why slavery continued for 80 more years in the south in the form of share-cropping. Cotton gin merely separated the coddin from the coddin seeds...which was still pretty huge though. "Thank you Phil"🙂. "Your welcome Cody".
I know what he meant at 5:25 by "picking individual coddin pieces" but combined with the video at 5:25 I would bet over half the audience came away thinking the Coddin gin picked Coddin...which it didn't. And don't say "coddin".
My favorite way to prevent the Civil War - the boll weevil comes to N. America before the cotton gin is invented, preventing slavery from becoming the behemoth that it did.
Not sure if you normally do, but the research help live stream can you re upload it after in case I or others miss it I've always wanted to attempt to find out more about my family history but i don't really know much at all and don't have contact with any relatives and i don't make enough to pay someone to do it if i did believe me i would in a heartbeat.
Ive often thought about researching my family history but unfortunately my grandmother doesn't know, or just refuses to tell us, the name of my grandfather so that side of the family is completely blocked off. Same goes for my biological father's side, he refuses to tell us any details about his family or parents.
One other potential impact is that the USA may have ended up annexing all of Mexico or more of it since slavery was no longer an issue and thus the idea of balance was no longer an impediment to annexing more of Mexico, if not all of it.
This guy has been growing in subs like crazy
Interesting to also think the affect the American Civil War had on the future wars of Prussia, as they had used the lessons of the war to develop the understanding of modern weapons Von Moltke had in unifying Germany in the Austo-Prussian and Franco-Prussian wars.
Not only did they think slavery was going to phase out, but Eli Whitney did not 'invent the cotton gin', he 'perfected' the cotton gin to separate the sticky seeds from cotton. The original cotton gins could not be used on American cotton.
I think the population of the South, in this scenario, would actually be very similar except much fewer slaves.
10 million non slaves and around 1 million slaves.
Reason being that without the buy up of land by huge plantations that land is used by small farmers (which many in the South were) immigration from Europe spreads South as well as North and as a result the South grows just like the West (midwest today).
The way he pronounces cotton bothers me and I don't know why.
It bothered me too. He said Britain the same way...Briddan.
In these videos I have enjoyed Alt History's content and respect the research and point of view, but every time I head "codden" instead of "Cotton" I twitch.
6:10 yes you can even trace an evolution in the mindset towards slavery from "on its way out" to "necessary evil" in the 1820s to by 1850 s it being spun as a positive by Southern politicians.
You can't have something not be invented because someone would eventually come up with the solution. Newton & Leibniz were both working on calculus at the same time, so we would have had calculus had one of them discontinued their work. If it wasn't Eli Whitney, someone else would have mechanised the production of cotton.
Commenting to show love.
Honestly, I thought that the cotton gin wouldve REDUCED slavery, think about it, less work for cotton, means less slaves needed to pick cotton to put into the cotton gin, but of course, as everything that makes things easier, there is more of it, example, cars making travel easier than horses means more cars. How did I think it would reduce it? HOW.
Probably the best history channel
Woodrow Wilson wouldn't have a traumatic childhood, leading him to have Southern "sympathies"....
That point around 22:00 holds true today; myself and many others identify with state first, American second. Esp larger states, such as Californian (me) or Texan.
I’m American before Georgian
Outstanding content. My wife, son and myself all love this channel were all history lovers from Amelia ohio
Coal mining exploded in britain to fuel textile production, so while they may have found another thing to power with coal it wouldn't have turned out the same
I'd recommend watching his video on Wilson, very good in my opinion.
I enjoy the civil war videos because I haven't learned much obviously in school but outside of that I was never interested but it's still fascinating.
If they make DC a state, we can still break Texas up into 5 states and I know some parts of California that would love to NOT be a part of California anymore. Heck we can probably get 10 or 12 states out of Alaska, two Wyomings, two Montanas, and 3 new Colorados that do NOT include the Denver area. Add that to the 133 new Supreme Court Justices.
No governor is going to give up 1/2 of their state nor 4/5ths of their state for that matter.
Good luck getting Congressional or State approval for any of those ideas.
I swear if you say Codden one more time
Haha yeah that bothered me too.
Thank you! I thought I was the only one annoyed by that.
7:37 The problem is that necessity is the mother of invention, so the cotton gin was inevitable. (AHH says "co-don", not "cotton".)
This video is a great example of the Butterfly effect. What 1 single thing can do to change the entire course of the world forever.
Very interesting as an european I dont know to much about it do you have some advise for good sources to study the topic
Because I found a new passion about it
Highly recommend Ken Burns' Civil War documentary if you want to learn a lot and understand it
Thank you sounds intersting
@@Idontknow-yj8ps Bruce Catton also gives a good overall historical view on it.
I'd like to add one major thing, that isn't mentioned here: The South wasn't backwards and non-industrialized because they would not have been able to, but because it was not necessary for the people in power to industrialize in order to increase riches and influence.
The industrial revolution came mostly not as some sort of fluke, but because the old ways simply were not profitable anymore. So people thought of ways to increase their wealth in an easy way. Now without the close to free possibility of slave cotton picking, the rich people in the south would most likely think of new ways to make money. One possibility I'd see is Texas starting to harvest oil waay earlier, which would lead to way earlier fuel-based economies. But there are actually multiple ways the south could have industrialized if they needed to.
The South was philosophically and morally opposed to industrialization. It was feudal system, built around an agrarian system.
Iron, coal, and steel are needed to create ships. Ships are needed to transport consumer goods or protect the trade of consumer goods. What are consumer goods in the 19th century? Primarily textiles. So, without textiles then you just are creating war ships with all of that steel and not cargo ships, or at least far fewer ones. I think Cody was right about that being a major deflator of the industrial revolution.
Why not consider more narrow questions. such as what if Douglas had not introduced the Kansas and Nebraska Act?
A good one is "What if Napoleon never rose to power" from AHH
When speaking about textiles and the industrial revolution, mass produced cloth and clothing was absolutely essential to the development of factories and factory workers as we understand it. That industry had an immediate, constant and near universal demand of its produce, which is non- or semi-durable in nature, which is much less so for iron or other metal goods. Metal pots, pans, utensils, plows, etc. being available for the average home is a massive domestic revolution, but does not have the same impact as clothing. Metal goods are durable, and once a family has them, that's the end of that demand so long as they are maintained (people today will tell you about the cast iron skillet they inherited from their grandmother). Obviously metal goods will always have both an industrial use and a military use, but without a constant need to turn out fresh products (like textiles) to meet the demand, there is less need for efficiency in industry. Lumber and paper milling were hugely important to early engines like the steam saw, but also differed from textiles in that you likely wouldn't have a factory in a city, as most lumber yards are located near your lumber supply, because it is much easier to move milled wood than it is to move freshly logged trees (then even more so than today). Foodstuffs could have seen earlier industrialization (the international production and trade in tea or sugar speaks to this), but until the development of more modern preservation techniques or canning would have taken just as long to develop as an industry as it did in our timeline - maybe longer without the knowhow generated by a constant demand industry such as textiles.
Fabrics - even leathers and woolens - have a wear out point, and the availability of relatively cheap and higher quality than home-produced clothing was and is one of the main cornerstones of modern consumerism. Think of how many pots and pans or other metal goods (heck, even appliances) are purchased by a modern five-person nuclear family in a year versus that of just shoes, socks, and underwear. An industry that never really loses it's demand, and would require an urban industrial base staffed by salaried workers, and a constant supply chain of raw materials, was a crucial driver of the industrial revolution as we know it. I'd argue none of the other main early industries to see such processes had the kind of impact as textiles.