WI: Confederate Insurgency?

[AlfieJ]

Just before Robert E. Lee's surrender in April 1865, General Porter Alexander knowing of Lee's intentions to surrender proposed instead that the troops "scatter into the woods and hills".

What would have happened if Lee had agreed to this, or at least gave over the command to Alexander?

Would there have been a full blown insurgency? How long would it last? Would the South be fully occupied by Union troops? Could the Confederacy rise from defeat?

[NothingNow]

Originally Posted by AlfieJ

Would there have been a full blown insurgency? How long would it last? Would the South be fully occupied by Union troops? Could the Confederacy rise from defeat?

Yes, and it'd have been hard-pressed to be much more than a bunch of Klansmen camping out in the woods. Most of both armies just wanted the war to fucking end already, and the confederate troops are already exhausted.
It wouldn't do any good either.

Reconstruction would just be that much harsher, and the Reconstruction governments would've gone out of their way to hunt any insurgents down (and then most insurgents would get summarily executed, with the odd lucky one maybe getting a trial.)
Also, the Port Royal Experiment might be expanded to deny resources to the insurrectionists and their sympathizers.

[Cymraeg]

Originally Posted by AlfieJ

Would there have been a full blown insurgency? How long would it last? Would the South be fully occupied by Union troops? Could the Confederacy rise from defeat?

It would have been a disaster. It would have poisoned the post-war atmosphere irreperably. There would have been atrocity and counter-atrocity, probably a longer military occupation of the South and the start of a poisonous hatred on both sides. Hell, some areas of the South still resent the results of the war. In TTL, it would be even worse.

[NothingNow]

Originally Posted by Cymraeg

In TTL, it would be even worse.

Oh yeah. Probably the only places that might not have a continuous occupation would be like the Carolina Lowlands South Florida, and some more mountainous areas, as those regions might be able to police themselves just fine. Especially since the locals would react poorly to pro-confederate guerrillas in their neck of the woods, or endemic disease can be expected to solve the problem.

Now, the Lowlands, where you had the planter class and all that before the war?
Decades of armed occupation probably.

[Anaxagoras]

Insurgencies are only effective in areas where the civilian population favors the insurgents. John Mosby was effective in Northern Virginia precisely because most of the local population was on his side. But Jefferson Davis wanted the remnants of the Confederate armies to melt into the more rugged areas of western North Carolina, eastern Tennessee, and northern Alabama, where he thought the terrain would give his men an advantage in guerrilla warfare. The problem was that the civilian population in those regions was either ambivalent to the Confederate cause or, in the case of Eastern Tennessee, generally pro-Union. The Confederate guerrillas would have obtained no support there and the locals would probably have sided with the Union forces sent in to hunt them down.

[NothingNow]

Thinking about everything, you can bet the Union troops in the South would really prefer Spencer Carbines and Henry Rifles, as suits mounted cavalry patrols, along with revolvers and sabres, cutlasses or the like.
I wonder if that experience might spread to the rest of the Army, and trapdoor designs never really take off.

[Cryptic]

Originally Posted by AlfieJ

Would there have been a full blown insurgency? How long would it last?

While it could last for years, I doubt it would be full blown. As another poster mentioned, the South was exhausted and was being offered pretty generous terms for cooperation. Any insurgency would follow historical patterns in Missouri: A small number of CSA insurgents quickly turn bandit and then proceed to alienate even those locals who may have been nominally sympathetic to them....

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Cryptic

A small number of CSA insurgents quickly turn bandit and then proceed to alienate even those locals who may have been nominally sympathetic to them....

AKA what happens to every romantically inspired resistance group ever. See also the Chinese Triads and the IRA.

[Clandango]

The butterflies might keep Lincoln alive despite the lack of protection for him, though having Confederates burning large amounts of supplies and farms to deny them to the Unionists (against the wills of their owners), attacks on Freedmen, the revelation of southern prisoner-of-war camps, some banditry, the assassinations, discovery of the arson and smallpox plots by the Confederates... Not sure if the future Klan would still blame Blacks and Catholics for their defeat, though they might get anti-Semitic or head to Latin America on an early Rat Way.

[Daztur]

Originally Posted by Anaxagoras

Insurgencies are only effective in areas where the civilian population favors the insurgents. John Mosby was effective in Northern Virginia precisely because most of the local population was on his side. But Jefferson Davis wanted the remnants of the Confederate armies to melt into the more rugged areas of western North Carolina, eastern Tennessee, and northern Alabama, where he thought the terrain would give his men an advantage in guerrilla warfare. The problem was that the civilian population in those regions was either ambivalent to the Confederate cause or, in the case of Eastern Tennessee, generally pro-Union. The Confederate guerrillas would have obtained no support there and the locals would probably have sided with the Union forces sent in to hunt them down.

Yup. Would've probably been a good thing too in the long run. The fewer hard core Confederate dead enders knocking about when Reconstruction was winding down the better. Hopefully the kind of clusterfuck that guerilla campaign would've turned into (without support from the locals) would've turned at least some people against Redeemer politics.

[Clandango]

Originally Posted by Daztur

Yup. Would've probably been a good thing too in the long run. The fewer hard core Confederate dead enders knocking about when Reconstruction was winding down the better.

Would it be sufficient in separating white southerners in the minds of themselves and others so that they are not all lumped as Neo-Confederates? No Solid South or decades of disenfranchising the poor would certainly loose them their disproportionate influence.

[Daztur]

Originally Posted by Clandango

Would it be sufficient in separating white southerners in the minds of themselves and others so that they are not all lumped as Neo-Confederates? No Solid South or decades of disenfranchising the poor would certainly loose them their disproportionate influence.

Well it wouldn't be all honey and roses, but anything that opened up daylight between poor southern whites and Confederate loyalists has at least the potential to do some good in the long run.

[Cryptic]

Originally Posted by Anaxagoras

Jefferson Davis wanted the remnants of the Confederate armies to melt into the more rugged areas of western North Carolina, eastern Tennessee, and northern Alabama, where he thought the terrain would give his men an advantage in guerrilla warfare. The problem was that the civilian population in those regions was either ambivalent to the Confederate cause or, in the case of Eastern Tennessee, generally pro-Union.

Good points. The best state for a large scale insurgency was probably Texas - largely unoccupied, had not been devastated, largely pro confederate and still possessed intact military units. Texas leaders briefly considered continued resistance after Lee surrendered, but then saw it was hopeless.

Originally Posted by Thande

AKA what happens to every romantically inspired resistance group ever. See also the Chinese Triads and the IRA.

Good point. The same happened to the various seventies extreme leftists in the USA (SLA, Black Panthers etc.) as well as the Shining Path.

[Anaxagoras]

Originally Posted by Cryptic

Good points. The best state for a large scale insurgency was probably Texas - largely unoccupied, had not been devastated, largely pro confederate and still possessed intact military units. Texas leaders briefly considered continued resistance after Lee surrendered, but then saw it was hopeless.

And they were very right.

[Rich Rostrom]

Originally Posted by AlfieJ

Just before Robert E. Lee's surrender in April 1865, General Porter Alexander knowing of Lee's intentions to surrender proposed instead that the troops "scatter into the woods and hills".

What would have happened if Lee had agreed to this, or at least gave over the command to Alexander?

Would there have been a full blown insurgency? How long would it last? Would the South be fully occupied by Union troops? Could the Confederacy rise from defeat?

Nothing much. By 1865, even most pro-secession Southerners were worn out and ready to surrender. Lee's own men were exhausted and starving. Thousands had discarded their rifles, leaving them spiked into roadsides by their bayonets.

And there was never more than a plurality for secession, except in a few hotbeds like South Carolina. In many areas, more people opposed secession and were coerced by the secessionists. In all areas there was a large element that had no opinions, and either wanted to be left alone or was temporarily stampeded by the secessionists in 1860-61.

By 1865, these groups far outnumbered the remaining secessionists, and they would not support, would in fact oppose Confederate guerrillas.

Then where would the guerrillas operate?

In the mountainous areas of the South, the people were largely Unionist. They would help the Yankees or hunt down the Secesh themselves.

In the broad plains, half the population (often much more) were black ex-slaves. No guerrilla movement can survive in an area where most of the population opposes it. Even if the blacks did not take an active part against the guerrillas - they would be everywhere, see everything, and tell the Yankees.

[The Knight]

Just wondering, if they had ran to the hills how many would have become insurgents and how many would have deserted and gone home?

[King Thomas]

There might have been no Jim Crow laws and even a Civil Rights Act with teeth by the 1870s. Far better for the South to accept they had lost and influence things behind the scenes.

[Max Sinister]

Originally Posted by Thande

AKA what happens to every romantically inspired resistance group ever. See also the Chinese Triads and the IRA.

A confederate mafia? Now I bet that noone has ever written something like that before.

[Laplace's Demon]

Originally Posted by Thande

AKA what happens to every romantically inspired resistance group ever. See also the Chinese Triads and the IRA.

So America would get its own domestic mafia with a colorful past about resisting an occupying regime (see the Italian Mafia and Napoleon, the Triads and the post-Ming dynasties especially the Qing, etc.).

[Space Oddity]

Originally Posted by Laplace's Demon

So America would get its own domestic mafia with a colorful past about resisting an occupying regime (see the Italian Mafia and Napoleon, the Triads and the post-Ming dynasties especially the Qing, etc.).

Yep. Just like IOTL, only... more blatant.