Confederacy W/O War

[NapoleonXIV]

WI the Union had done what (I think) Lincoln had first suggested be done with the Confederacy, that is "wayward sisters, go in peace"? What if the Union had decided the South, for a variety of reasons, just wasn't worth a war. How would the CSA develop then?

[David S Poepoe]

I think you better find out if Lincoln ever said that, since that certainly isn't anything the new Republican Party would endorse. If the South isn't worth fighting over the entire United States will fall apart. Those abolitionalists in New England may take New England out of the Union also. I also don't quite think the observation that McClellan would have offered peace to the Confederacy is all that right either. He certainly distanced himself from the Peace Democrats platform. He probably would have down whatever was possible to get the South to rejoin the Union.

Had the South been allowed go then you would probably find a Confederacy even more agrarian centered than in OTL and much slower to industrially develop. No Confederate conquests of Cuba, Nicaragua, Angola, the Philippines or wherever, as suggested by others upon this website.

[Diamond]

I'd guess you'd have a very, very weak government. By the end of the 1870s, probably 2 or 3 states (at least) will have seceded from the CSA over various issues. More will likely follow. After all, there is no strong central government to really contest it, and I'd imagine the US will be covertly supporting CSA-secession movements in the hopes of regaining lost territory. Eventually some of these states will petition the US for re-admittance to the Union.

I can see Texas trying to go it alone, possibly united with Louisiana. The border states, such as Tennessee and Virginia, will try to make it as independent nations for awhile, but will eventually re-unite with the US. In the end, I think you've got a hard-core southern republic made up of Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and maybe North Carolina - and that's assuming that these states, with their black majorities, don't mutate into something else entirely. At most they'll end up as very minor players on the world stage, akin to Nicaragua or Haiti.

[NapoleonXIV]

[QUOTE=David S Poepoe]I think you better find out if Lincoln ever said that, since that certainly isn't anything the new Republican Party would endorse. /QUOTE]

Sorry, Winfield Scott, but he was high rank Union military.

[tom]

The "wayward sisters" quote was by, IIRC, Horace Greeley.

[Xen]

Perhaps to avoid a war the Constitution is clear on secession, to keep things and New England in the Union it could read something like "Any state wishing to end its union with the federal government may so choose to do so, except for at times of war, hence it will be treated as high treason against."

So with this clause, Kentucky and Missouri join the CSA and it departs on its merry way. As previously suggested, Texas and Louisiana will go their own ways. The border states like Missouri, Kentucky and Virginia will likely rejoin the Union.

The CSA becomes the Dixie Confederation made up of North and South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Tennessee and Arkansas. After giving limited support to the Germany in World War I,the Confederacy is bankrupt, and lost territory to the US in Tennessee and North Carolina. The Dixie Civil War erupts in the 1920s between the Conservatives and Communists, the US supports the Conservatives, but the majority of the souths black population supports the Communists and overruns the Conservatives. The US is unwilling to have a Red Neighbor and invades, quickly crushing the Communists. Dixie is re-incorporated as US territories, South Carolina becomes the first Dixie state to rejoin the Union in 1931, Georgia follows in 1932, by 1940 all former Confederate States except Louisiana and Texas have rejoined the Union.

[Norman]

I think this is doable but would require an earlier secession, say between 1845 and 1854. I think that if, on the heels of a successful Mexican War, the issue of Secession had been discussed, it is possible that both sides would have peacefully separated.

[Grey Wolf]

I can't see why any state would WANT to seccede from the Confederacy, I mean what's the point ? If the CSA has a weak central government, then that is not something for the states to COMPLAIN about, its what they WANT in the first place. A weak central authority will allow the states to do what they want WITHIN the Confederacy - so why leave it ?

Grey Wolf

[Straha]

mmkayyy I've noticed alot of threads on the new forum involve the confederacy ;)

[LDoc]

What will probably happen is that the CSA will simply become a discussion group for the variouse states. Each state would be a country with little central government influnce. CSA would have little to no foriegn influnce with a terribly weak army and navy. I still see it as agarian based with slavery lasting until the revolts get to much and force an end to it even though it will continue in all but name. So in the end the CSA is a weak country with much internal strife (blacks V whites) maybe even same inter-state conflict about borders and runaway slaves.

[Xen]

I can't see why any state would WANT to seccede from the Confederacy, I mean what's the point ? If the CSA has a weak central government, then that is not something for the states to COMPLAIN about, its what they WANT in the first place. A weak central authority will allow the states to do what they want WITHIN the Confederacy - so why leave it ?

Grey Wolf

Simple

Money, money, money. MON-AY

There would be alot of rifts between states, especially if Texas left followed by Louisiana. States would be bidding against eachother over contracts which will lead to division and hurt feelings. Some states will insist they are being treated unfairly and always getting the short end of the stick. They may even try to become independent, but if that fails then what?

[Diamond]

:eek: I'm not trying to hijack your thread, Napoleon, but I didn't want to start a whole new one just to ask this question:

Is there a POD in 1844 or 1845 that allows for the peaceful separation of the Confederate states from the US? I'd like to have it before the Mexican-American War.

[robertp6165]

[QUOTE=David S Poepoe]I think you better find out if Lincoln ever said that, since that certainly isn't anything the new Republican Party would endorse. /QUOTE]

Sorry, Winfield Scott, but he was high rank Union military.

Actually, wrong again...it was Horace Greeley, in various editorials published in early 1861.

[robertp6165]

Simple

Money, money, money. MON-AY

There would be alot of rifts between states, especially if Texas left followed by Louisiana. States would be bidding against eachother over contracts which will lead to division and hurt feelings. Some states will insist they are being treated unfairly and always getting the short end of the stick. They may even try to become independent, but if that fails then what?

Well, I have to disagree with you. What contracts would they be bidding over? The Confederate Constitution forbade Congress from engaging in pork-barrel "internal improvement" spending. In general, the Confederate government simply would not be engaging in activities which would lead States to want to secede. The Confederate Constitution also was designed to allow conflicts between the States and the central government to be resolved without secession. So there just is not a real reason why this would take place. Texas might go because it was kind of an odd-ball in the Confederacy anyway, with a history as an independent nation. But other than the possibility of Texas, there is almost certainly going to be no secession from the Confederacy.

[Fiver]

I can't see why any state would WANT to seccede from the Confederacy, I mean what's the point ? If the CSA has a weak central government, then that is not something for the states to COMPLAIN about, its what they WANT in the first place. A weak central authority will allow the states to do what they want WITHIN the Confederacy - so why leave it ?

Grey Wolf

I suggest reading Look Away by William Davis and The Confederacy as a Revolutionary Experience by Emory Davis. In OTL, the citizens of the CSA put up with central control which surpassed that of the USA.

The Davis administration drafted state militia members who should have been exempt from the national draft. They instituted internal passports. They dictated rates to the railroads and required blockage runners to devote a certain percent (1/3 IIRC) of cargo space to government cargos free of charge. They instituted income taxes and the draft (which covered men aged 17 to 50). It authorized the execution and enslavement of certain Union POWs. Richmond was under martial law from March 1, 1862 and civilian firearms were confiscated by the government. Price controls were imposed. It impressed cotton, horses, food, and slaves and when it paid, paid far below market rates. It avoided labor unrest by drafting the workers. It dictated allowed rates of profit for business. By 1863 "the Richmond government employed more civil servants than its counterpart in Washington". Several CSA states instituted Prohibition during the war.

[Lord Grattan]

Bumped Bumped

A.S. A Prime Rule on this site is "Thou shalt not bump long dead threads."

[Plumber]

I suggest reading Look Away by William Davis and The Confederacy as a Revolutionary Experience by Emory Davis. In OTL, the citizens of the CSA put up with central control which surpassed that of the USA.

The Davis administration drafted state militia members who should have been exempt from the national draft. They instituted internal passports. They dictated rates to the railroads and required blockage runners to devote a certain percent (1/3 IIRC) of cargo space to government cargos free of charge. They instituted income taxes and the draft (which covered men aged 17 to 50). It authorized the execution and enslavement of certain Union POWs. Richmond was under martial law from March 1, 1862 and civilian firearms were confiscated by the government. Price controls were imposed. It impressed cotton, horses, food, and slaves and when it paid, paid far below market rates. It avoided labor unrest by drafting the workers. It dictated allowed rates of profit for business. By 1863 "the Richmond government employed more civil servants than its counterpart in Washington". Several CSA states instituted Prohibition during the war.
But the Confederate leaders did it to preserve the rights of their states*, so that makes it ok ;)

*in Yankeespeak, the rights to oppress poor whites and blacks


A.S. A Prime Rule on this site is "Thou shalt not bump long dead threads."

And also "Why can't thou use a search bar?" It's gotta be one or the other.
I do agree though that threads over a few months old are not fair game (just was being a bit of a Devil's Advocate). But since this has been necromanced, might as well go with it.

[anon_user]

Keep in mind the order of secessions. South Carolina (always first), then the rest of the Deep South, then parts of the upper South. Virginia didn't secede until the US called on Virginia to provide troops to suppress the rebellion; under this scenario, in which Fort Sumter (and thus the call for troops to repress the rebellion) doesn't happen, you'll get a rump confederacy of South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Louisiana and Texas.

The dangerous bit is that historically, the southern New Mexico territory tried to join the CSA before Sumter.

Still, assuming the more likely outcome (namely, that that doesn't spark a war, just a campaign in which the pro-CSA folks get beat), the most likely split-off is Texas, possibly with Louisiana as well.

Maryland and Delaware, and possibly Virginia, may sell their slaves south, then go abolitionist; they weren't achieving the kind of success that the Deep South had with slavery.

The big question is what happens when King Cotton is no longer king?

[DuQuense]

WI the Union had done what (I think) Lincoln had first suggested be done with the Confederacy, that is "wayward sisters, go in peace"? What if the Union had decided the South, for a variety of reasons, just wasn't worth a war. How would the CSA develop then?This is what Davis called for in his Inaugural Speech.I suggest reading Look Away by William Davis and The Confederacy as a Revolutionary Experience by Emory Davis. In OTL, the citizens of the CSA put up with central control which surpassed that of the USA.

The Davis administration drafted state militia members who should have been exempt from the national draft. They instituted internal passports. They dictated rates to the railroads and required blockage runners to devote a certain percent (1/3 IIRC) of cargo space to government cargos free of charge. They instituted income taxes and the draft (which covered men aged 17 to 50). It authorized the execution and enslavement of certain Union POWs. Richmond was under martial law from March 1, 1862 and civilian firearms were confiscated by the government. Price controls were imposed. It impressed cotton, horses, food, and slaves and when it paid, paid far below market rates. It avoided labor unrest by drafting the workers. It dictated allowed rates of profit for business. By 1863 "the Richmond government employed more civil servants than its counterpart in Washington". Several CSA states instituted Prohibition during the war. Except this was all done as -War Time Emergency - If there was no War most of this would not have been done.Is there a POD in 1844 or 1845 that allows for the peaceful separation of the Confederate states from the US? I'd like to have it before the Mexican-American War. I would have it as part of the Mex-Am War.
Whe take the CCS tier of states. The Missouri Compromise extension to the West coast is considered more Rigorous internal Border.
When secession takes place in the 1870's it is a peaceful legalization of what was a accepted fact.

[Snake Featherston]

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/attachments/international-politics/18309d1264018105-racism-ignorance-laziness-just-plain-stupidity-necromancy.jpg

[Maur]

I suggest reading Look Away by William Davis and The Confederacy as a Revolutionary Experience by Emory Davis. In OTL, the citizens of the CSA put up with central control which surpassed that of the USA.

The Davis administration drafted state militia members who should have been exempt from the national draft. They instituted internal passports. They dictated rates to the railroads and required blockage runners to devote a certain percent (1/3 IIRC) of cargo space to government cargos free of charge. They instituted income taxes and the draft (which covered men aged 17 to 50). It authorized the execution and enslavement of certain Union POWs. Richmond was under martial law from March 1, 1862 and civilian firearms were confiscated by the government. Price controls were imposed. It impressed cotton, horses, food, and slaves and when it paid, paid far below market rates. It avoided labor unrest by drafting the workers. It dictated allowed rates of profit for business. By 1863 "the Richmond government employed more civil servants than its counterpart in Washington". Several CSA states instituted Prohibition during the war.
OP premise is that the civil war does not happen, so there is no reason for such drastic measures that happened IOTL.

The big question is what happens when King Cotton is no longer king?
CSA remains backwards underdeveloped state with economy based on agriculture and resource extraction until it manages to modernize. Something akin to... OTL southern states? :D ;)

[XNM]

Cool necromancy, bro.

[Maur]

You mean, the yesterday thread? I didn't dig it up, someone else did! I just found this decaying abandoned body and i'm having fun with it! :D

[Fiver]

Except this was all done as -War Time Emergency - If there was no War most of this would not have been done.

Definite point. For a CSA without war, you need them to not open fire on Ft Sumter or anything else. You also need a USA president willing to let them go. Neither seems particularly likely.

If they manage it, you have a smaller and less industrial CSA than in OTL. They also don't have the border states with their significant pro-union populations.

But they're still founded on the idea that any state can leave at any time for any reason.

South Carolina nearly didn't join because of the prohibition on the international slave trade. Texas will probably find the Richmond government even less willing than the Washington one to spend money to protect them from Mexicans, bandits, and Indians. Some will still favor expansion into Mexico or the Caribbean, while other states will oppose it. As 7 state CSA is less prone to fragmentation than an 11 state CSA, but the risk is still there.

The main slave exporting states were Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Maryland. In TTL, all but South Carolina are Union territory. To meet their labor needs, many CSA states are going to need to import slaves from the Union, find a way to encourage whites to move there, or reopen the African slave trade.