How many deaths would have been an acceptable price for abolition of slavery?

[mencken]

Discuss with maps.

[mencken]

I wasn't talking in an economic sense...

well, then, it's worse than I thought.  (actually, it was obvious that you weren't talking in an economic sense but I was being generous)  Since you're willing to bring it up:  If you're not measuring the economy of it, you must be trying to put a price on the intrinsic value of a human life vis-a-vis political goals. 

That's some serious Che Guevara shit right there.  ("¡¿Qué vale la vida de un hombre cuando está en peligro el futuro de la humanidad?!")  I'll wash my hands of this whole sordid business and leave it to the rest of you to figure out that price.

Believing that people should be pragmatic and try to reduce and avoid human suffering as much as possible is worse then valuing human lives merely by economic output? Your definition of reprehensible is f**ked up.

You do realize the most effective way to end human suffering is to kill all humans, right?

Most respondents to this poll seem to agree.

[mencken]

What was the entire population of the slave states during the civil war? That would be my answer for anyone who refused to accept the abolition of slavery.

Including the slave population?