• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Prussia.jpg

So why are you fighting for independence? I thought you were fighting for states's rights as in a states's right to slaves. I don't think your people will react well.

Most of us aren't fighting for the right to own slaves! We are fighting for our independence from the tyrant Yankees!
 
Most of us aren't fighting for the right to own slaves! We are fighting for our independence from the tyrant Yankees!

Prussia.jpg

So how will the people who are fighting for slaves feel about this recent development that you want to abolish slavery. Isn't slavery key to your nation's economy? How were the "Yankees" tyrants again?
 
Her Majesties Government has voiced her support for the CSA not due to their stance on slavery, but due to the firm British tradition of individual rights. Furthermore, Her Majesties Government accepts the Confederate statement that slavery is not the primary issue in this conflict and we shall not accuse them of otherwise unless we see contrary evidence. I should also like to point out the to honourable members of the House, that the reason our beloved Empire has managed to reach such a level of tolerance and abolitionism, is due to a gradual and natural realisation of the cruelty of slavery, something that in time the CSA will likely experience. Therefore, it is the belief of Her Majesties Government that in the long term, the people of the CSA shall reach a better outcome through their own thoughts than through the boot of a foreign power. I would also remind the prominent investors that have withdrawn their funds, that the CSA has a large cotton market which the Empire will happily purchase the products of.

Furthermore, Her Majesties Government thanks the USA for lifting trade restrictions upon our ships and would also like the USA to note that Danish ships will only be searched should they be suspected of carrying arms.​
 
Prussia.jpg

Forgive me, you are saying that the enslaved don't have their own individual rights? Please my English friend, your great nation has been at the forefront of the fight against slavery for so many years, please do not ruin all the good work that your countrymen have accomplished.

edit: OOC: :(
 
Her Majesties Government has recognised the CSA precisely because of our stance as being so deeply against slavery. We believe that in the long term, the Southern States will experience a greater tolerance and understand between the various peoples, if they reach the conclusion of abolitionism by themselves. If the condition is forced upon them, it may breed centuries of hatred and paranoia between the Blacks and Whites.

Furthermore, Her Majesties Government believes that slavery is no better even if it is not called as such. We object to the Union attempting to force the Southern states to abolish slavery.​
 
Prussia.jpg

To be honest, I don't understand how enslaving a people will make one more tolerant of them. The Kingdom of Prussia will not interfere in this conflict between the CSA and USA. We may not like what is happening, but we will not risk Prussian lives in another nation's quarrel.

OOC: Abraham Lincoln actually had to profusely promise to not abolish slavery and he never intended to do so as he knew the union would collapse. But the Confederates were fearful and pre-empted anything by attacking fort Sumter. I think. :p
 
Enslavement will not. However, conditions forced upon a people by force of arms are never accepted graciously and as such Her Majesties Government believes that in the long term, a natural solution to slavery will create a CSA more tolerant of all its people, as has been the case in our own Empire.​
 
In order to move with the current stance on society, slavery shall be abolished as soon as possible after the war of Independence.
OOC: This won't end well for you. At this point in time not even the Union had abolished or promised to abolish slavery. The Confederate President saying so would be totally and utterly unacceptable to his constituents.
 
OOC: That is not true.
 
OOC: You do realise that you just declared to be on the same side as the Union on one of the main issues of seccesion? Thats treason.
 
OOC: Then disregard that IC post and think ahead as if nothing happened.
 
OOC: Nah, he only said that "eventually" slavery would be abolished, to gain foreign support. Of course, the actual details of that might mean that it will be abolished in 200 years, or they will not be named slaves anymore, but be known as servants, or any other designation.

Spain recognizes the Granadine Confederation as the rightful government of Columbia. We propose a trade deal making trade between our two countries less restricted. We also offer to sell a few light ships to the Confederation, to protect their trading lines and territorial waters.

We will make the same offer to other formerly Spanish countries, and we shall strive to create a Hispano-American economic bloc, with the goal of improving the economic power of all it's members. We are willing to create and help maintain an investment fund, that would be applied to the modernization of all member nations.
 
OOC: @Reis, he quite clearly said 'as soon as possible after the war', but it's been taken back anyway now. I hear

IC:

The USA is grateful for the neutral stance of much of the world, and is willing to open trade links with all countries that maintain neutrality. Italy's offer of support is appreciated, but currently our government seeks not to escalate the war further.

Furthermore, we are confused at the stance of the Ottomans. We have so far issued no declaration with regards to slavery. The USA seeks reform through debate and compromise, and has never sought to force a decision unilaterally upon its people.
 
You say you have no stance on slavery? Then tell me about the policies of Abraham Lincoln...
 
The Great Qinq are offering to anyone who wants it trade. However this trade must be fair and non-exploitative. IF the governments are willing to do this then they can come and trade fairly for Chinese goods by either giving money or their own goods.
 
OOC: "I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
—First inaugural address, 4 March 1861

Maybe look up policies first? Anyway, there's a difference between 'no declaration' and 'no stance'.


Lincoln's position has always been clear. Slavery has never been threatened in the South. His personal feelings are separate from his political stance.
 
Her Majesties Government is of course willing to open up more trade with China, although our business owners and merchants will sell at their own price, not one that we dictate.​
 

Furthermore, we are confused at the stance of the Ottomans. We have so far issued no declaration with regards to slavery. The USA seeks reform through debate and compromise, and has never sought to force a decision unilaterally upon its people.

OOC: It has been a while, since I have read about ACW, so correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't one of the breaking points Northern state stance (policy?) on keeping slavey out of new states or territories. Meaning that South would gradualy lose it's influence in Union which at that time was more or less equal ?