Respuesta :
Fundamentally, Texas had a less developed economy at the time of the Civil War and simply didn’t have as many slaves in their economy. This meant that the various economic dislocations of trying to adapt to large popualations of freed slaves continue in essentially he same work they’d been doing as slaves were not a significant issue for Texas.
But the main result is the follow-on effect of political culture. The rest of the South devised all sorts of ways (legal or not) to try and keep their large populations of freed blacks in a socio-economically repressed position. These efforts were extremely harmful economically. Most especially the establishment of the idea of many types of work being ‘beneath the dignity’ of whites, but the energy diverted into things like the KKK and so forth didn’t help.
Texas, on the other hand, had a strong supply
HOPE THIS HELPED!!
PLS MARK AS BRAINLIEST!! TYSM! :)
Answer:
Texas was only lightly invaded by Federal forces before the end of the war. Just Galveston island plus part of the coast and a little inland from Brownsville. So the devastation of war didn’t affect most of the populated areas.
During the war the blockade had rested lightly on Texas because a great amount of cotton was exported through Mexico. So it was sold at high wartime prices. Yes, carting it to Matamoros was labor intensive and expensive but that just spread the proceeds through all levels of society.
Post-war, Texas quickly began driving beef cattle north to Kansas, and from there shipping by railroad to the big northern cities where beef was in demand and people had money. There was a tremendous number of longhorned cattle in Texas. So this produced cash, with little capital investment needed, and the money spread through the Texas economy.
Texas gave land or sold it cheaply to confederate veterans, drawing more population. Basically people could declare bankruptcy, move to Texas, and start over. (This had happened pre -war too, in previous economic depressions or “panics”, so it was a well trodden path rather than an innovation.) And Texas’ economic problem had always been a small population, so more people meant a larger economy.
Explanation:
im the brainlyest