Was Sam Houston’s grace with the common man and vocal opposition to slave owners the main reason Texas escaped a pit of underdevelopment that plagued the rest of the South?
Was Sam Houston’s grace with the common man and vocal opposition to slave owners the main reason Texas escaped a pit...
Think it has more to do with oil and a lower percentage of negroes
Texas was a shithole of a state until they discovered oil in the plains and in the gulf.
There were vocal slave owners against secession, too.
Texas is the Saudi Arabia of North America. It's entire economy is based on oil. The rest of the south is a shithole simply because it never recovered from the civil war. Texas was the same till oil was discovered.
It's probably the only state that could separate from the union and not collapse. tbqh.
>Texas is the Saudi Arabia of North America. It's entire economy is based on oil.
>t. time traveller from 1979
Oil's collapsed a few times, user. Texas just decided to use its oil money to diversify the economy.
Texas wasn't hurt by the civil war much, they barely even participated.
Also this, something the Saudis are apparently too low IQ to do.
Yancucks feared the Chad Texans during they short stint battling
While that may be a part, it's mainly because oil is just so fucking cheap to extract in Saudi Arabia they don't see the point. They have SO much profit their greed makes them shortsighted. Brainlet-tier, no doubt. But they didn't have the shock Texas had in the early 80s to jolt them into diversifying, and now if they do receive that jolt there's a non-negilible chance their entire country will collapse into civil war before they can diversify
that's a ridiculous bowtie
>Also this, something the Saudis are apparently too low IQ to do.
I mean, it's not like SA has much else to diversify into. Texas has enormous farmland, lots of big rivers, and cattle.
How about a proper 1st world service economy? Dallas has a huge financial and media sector, Austin has a concentration of Tech development, and Houston handles petroleum, energy, and aerospace engineering.
>implying Texas had to go into other natural resources
They went in on modern industry. Computers, software, networking, to say nothing of Houston's medical field. The Saudis could have done the same, or even built an industrial heartland to rival the rest of the Middle East entirely from scratch. They certainly have the money. But the problem is is that they've been having stratospheric profits for too long (generations now) that they couldn't foresee not having them, and thus they got extremely greedy and wastefully hedonistic. It's only now that the Saudi King is trying to modernize his society, and it's a race to see if he can before the shit hits the fan.
Texas is a powerhouse in IT, research and manufacturing. You're acting like this is the 15th century and the only thing you can do is farm or extract shit from the ground.
Refining, too. Even when the Texan oil fields themselves lagged (before Fracking came into widespread use) Texan refineries were still in full operation. The Saudis could have made themselves a refining capital, but they again did not see the need. Bahrain, to their credit, did and that's how they got as rich as they did.
Bahrain is not rich
Texas’ unique identity and disconnection from the rest of the South certainly helped, but most of why it’s experienced enormous positive growth in the last several decades is because it’s managed it’s oil wealth so well at a localized level.
The US as a whole has constantly been enticed by the prospect of electing Texas Governors to the presidency due to its unprecedented growth, but things that have worked for Texas haven’t worked the same for the rest of the America because it’s a demographically unique state. No Child Left Behind did wonders in closing the educational gap between whites and Hispanics in Texas, but was a disaster at the national level.
These are all after Dallas built industries on agriculture and ranching while Houston got very lucky with a Texan president and a corrupt Louisiana pushing aeronautical and shipping industry to it. Texas benefited from being intrinsically tied to America's post-war growth in ways an independent nation like SA couldn't.
All of which can be traced to the fact that Texans developed a sense of state nationalism that was separate from the confederacy and molded a sense of loyalty to improving their state. In other Southern states there is an initiative on explaining the why the confederacy was in the right and Sherman was a war criminal. In Texas public schools, Texas history is a bigger focus than we wuzing confederate history.
>there's a non-negilible chance their entire country will collapse into civil war before they can diversify
the world would be much better of if this happens