Napoleon outlaws slavery.

Most historians will tell you the fall French Empire in the America's can be traced to the slave revolt in Hispaniola. Hispaniola was making great progress after slavery was made illegal in revolutionary France despite backlash from rich whites. The population of the island was 98% black and free africans were becoming extremely important to the islands economy. Napoleon stuck to his ideas and executed them no matter what; if he simply has a change of heart in the matter and decides he can maintain the profitable colony better by encouraging this rather than re-enslaving almost the entire populace I think there will be massive repercussions.
For one Thomas Jefferson will probably be far more anti-French because he traditionally cozied up the interests of southern states and their inflated representation due to the 3/5ths rule. This butterflies away the Louisiana Purchase which I believe is the only thing Jefferson did correctly. He was exceedingly unpopular in his second term because of the decision to effectively boycott the rest of the world, I think a huge diplomatic blunder could lead to him getting impeached. This political instability in the US might lead to a concise british victory in 1812.
My favorite way of imagining this scenario ends with Lousiana becoming a free multicultural state flooded with european immigrants and free slaves after the U.S and the French empire are dismantled.

If they had kept it as no slavery, Saint-Domingue might have lasted slightly longer, but sooner or later either the native whites or the native blacks will make a move.

Enigmajones said:

If they had kept it as no slavery, Saint-Domingue might have lasted slightly longer, but sooner or later either the native whites or the native blacks will make a move.

Click to expand...

what would the native black's be moving against if they are French citizens? I think a good way for Nappy to get rid of dissent would be to offer the rich whites on the island massive tracts of cheap land in the Louisiana territory. They will still be pissed but they are a tiny tiny minority at this point.

TheGingerninja41 said:

Most historians will tell you the fall French Empire in the America's can be traced to the slave revolt in Hispaniola. Hispaniola was making great progress after slavery was made illegal in revolutionary France despite backlash from rich whites. The population of the island was 98% black and free africans were becoming extremely important to the islands economy. Napoleon stuck to his ideas and executed them no matter what; if he simply has a change of heart in the matter and decides he can maintain the profitable colony better by encouraging this rather than re-enslaving almost the entire populace I think there will be massive repercussions.
For one Thomas Jefferson will probably be far more anti-French because he traditionally cozied up the interests of southern states and their inflated representation due to the 3/5ths rule. This butterflies away the Louisiana Purchase which I believe is the only thing Jefferson did correctly. He was exceedingly unpopular in his second term because of the decision to effectively boycott the rest of the world, I think a huge diplomatic blunder could lead to him getting impeached. This political instability in the US might lead to a concise british victory in 1812.
My favorite way of imagining this scenario ends with Lousiana becoming a free multicultural state flooded with european immigrants and free slaves after the U.S and the French empire are dismantled.

Click to expand...

With no Louisiana Purchase due to declining Franco-American relations, butterflies would cause the US to declare war on France rather than Great Britain.

Not sure why Jefferson wouldn't make the Louisiana Purchase. He did it because he wanted New Orleans and stuff, not because he wanted to fund Napoleon.

Not to mention Jefferson was a francophile, it would take a lot to make him worse than 'mixed".

TheGingerninja41 said:

what would the native black's be moving against if they are French citizens? I think a good way for Nappy to get rid of dissent would be to offer the rich whites on the island massive tracts of cheap land in the Louisiana territory. They will still be pissed but they are a tiny tiny minority at this point.

Click to expand...

and who will tend those fields.....The Haitians wanted to have slavery removed from all the French colonies inthe Carribean.

Not sure how much difference it would make in world history, might buy the little guy a few months worth of manpower though. Doubt he could convert it into anything significant, or that it would induce the U.S. to declare war. It might have some ramifications in the State of Louisiana in the future, and make Hatai a little more viable, but nothing else.

I know this is a well-known scenario, but if Napoleon does outlaw slavery and that result is tolerable enough for him to hold on to Louisiana (and the US have no objections) then perhaps after either of his falls from power he tries to set-up shop in North America.

Not plausible, but hey, had to say it.

King of Rome said:

I know this is a well-known scenario, but if Napoleon does outlaw slavery and that result is tolerable enough for him to hold on to Louisiana (and the US have no objections) then perhaps after either of his falls from power he tries to set-up shop in North America.

Not plausible, but hey, had to say it.

Click to expand...

Well, he might be welcomed as a refugee to a Toussaint dominated Haiti, but its doubtful he'd prefer that to St. Helena as a British prisoner, the time being what they are.

TheGingerninja41 said:

Most historians will tell you the fall French Empire in the America's can be traced to the slave revolt in Hispaniola. Hispaniola was making great progress after slavery was made illegal in revolutionary France despite backlash from rich whites. The population of the island was 98% black and free africans were becoming extremely important to the islands economy. Napoleon stuck to his ideas and executed them no matter what; if he simply has a change of heart in the matter and decides he can maintain the profitable colony better by encouraging this rather than re-enslaving almost the entire populace I think there will be massive repercussions.

Click to expand...

IOTL the Haitians actually pledged loyalty to France only to have Napoleon reject these "gilded Africans" and unsuccessfully try to re-enslave them. The Americans actually owe a great and unacknowledged debt to the Haitian people for destroying French designs in the Western Hemisphere, which under Napoleon included plans to rebuild a North American empire out of Louisiana.

TheGingerninja41 said:

For one Thomas Jefferson will probably be far more anti-French because he traditionally cozied up the interests of southern states and their inflated representation due to the 3/5ths rule. This butterflies away the Louisiana Purchase which I believe is the only thing Jefferson did correctly.

Click to expand...

Jefferson was already sufficiently anti-Bonaparte as would make no difference. He's not going to war with them no matter what, and his policy IOTL was rather hostile to them.

TheGingerninja41 said:

He was exceedingly unpopular in his second term because of the decision to effectively boycott the rest of the world, I think a huge diplomatic blunder could lead to him getting impeached. This political instability in the US might lead to a concise british victory in 1812.

Click to expand...

The Congress passed the Embargo Act with convincing majorities in both chambers. Nor was Jefferson's hope to encourage import substitution without results, especially in Pennsylvania. It was a high-minded (and admittedly anti-British) way of trying to broker a peace between Britain and France and it did cause significant economic stress to the battling empires. It was the brute unenforceability of the act and the human reality that the willingness to sacrifice for a long war is often greater than for a protracted peace. Mr. Jefferson's high-mindedness was, unfortunately, for naught.

The idea of impeachment is right out, since Jefferson's only got about a little over year left in his term, and the next Congressional elections aren't until 1808; they are for the Senate and the Federalists don't stand a chance of gaining enough there.

TheGingerninja41 said:

My favorite way of imagining this scenario ends with Lousiana becoming a free multicultural state flooded with european immigrants and free slaves after the U.S and the French empire are dismantled.

Click to expand...

That's somewhat easier to do. IOTL Joel Barlow and Thomas Paine came to Jefferson and begged him not to allow slavery in the Louisiana Territory, but Jefferson was more concerned with the sugar crop than filling the Trans-Mississippi with thrifty German settlers instead of slaves and slavers.

Wolfpaw said:

IOTL the Haitians actually pledged loyalty to France only to have Napoleon reject these "gilded Africans" and unsuccessfully try to re-enslave them. The Americans actually owe a great and unacknowledged debt to the Haitian people for destroying French designs in the Western Hemisphere, which under Napoleon included plans to rebuild a North American empire out of Louisiana.
Jefferson was already sufficiently anti-Bonaparte as would make no difference. He's not going to war with them no matter what, and his policy IOTL was rather hostile to them.The Congress passed the Embargo Act with convincing majorities in both chambers. Nor was Jefferson's hope to encourage import substitution without results, especially in Pennsylvania. It was a high-minded (and admittedly anti-British) way of trying to broker a peace between Britain and France and it did cause significant economic stress to the battling empires. It was the brute unenforceability of the act and the human reality that the willingness to sacrifice for a long war is often greater than for a protracted peace. Mr. Jefferson's high-mindedness was, unfortunately, for naught.

The idea of impeachment is right out, since Jefferson's only got about a little over year left in his term, and the next Congressional elections aren't until 1808; they are for the Senate and the Federalists don't stand a chance of gaining enough there.That's somewhat easier to do. IOTL Joel Barlow and Thomas Paine came to Jefferson and begged him not to allow slavery in the Louisiana Territory, but Jefferson was more concerned with the sugar crop than filling the Trans-Mississippi with thrifty German settlers instead of slaves and slavers.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I am Haitian American and history goes that many of the black generals did not want independence from France. What they wanted was slavery outlawed. Tousaint himself was very loyal to France but Nappy send his annoying brother in law to capture Toussaint,disarm the blacks,and kill the Black leaders. With this it gave the black generals no choice but to seek independence since all the work they did for France(expelling the French and Spanish) was not rewarded. Napoleon is a villain in Haitian history and his army to reinstate slavery was defeated. Had he outlawed slavery and allowed the corvee system Toussaint wanted,things would have been different.

Elfwine said:

Not sure why Jefferson wouldn't make the Louisiana Purchase. He did it because he wanted New Orleans and stuff, not because he wanted to fund Napoleon.

Not to mention Jefferson was a francophile, it would take a lot to make him worse than 'mixed".

Click to expand...

There is on the Globe one single spot, the possessor of which is our natural and habitual enemy. It is New Orleans, through which the produce of three-eighths of our territory must pass to market.... The day France takes possession of New Orleans... we must marry ourselves to the British fleet and nation."

Click to expand...

This was Jefferson, in 1802.

If Haiti is not in revolt, then it is a valuable part of the French Empire, and Napoleon will envision Louisiana serving as a source of foodstuffs (and, increasingly, cash crops) to feed Haiti and the French Empire as a whole.

Jefferson didn't go to war because he had no reason to; but an abolitionist French state holding onto Louisiana is a whole different kettle of fish.

Faeelin said:

This was Jefferson, in 1802.

If Haiti is not in revolt, then it is a valuable part of the French Empire, and Napoleon will envision Louisiana serving as a source of foodstuffs (and, increasingly, cash crops) to feed Haiti and the French Empire as a whole.

Jefferson didn't go to war because he had no reason to; but an abolitionist French state holding onto Louisiana is a whole different kettle of fish.

Click to expand...

That sounds like a reason he'd try harder to get New Orleans than avoid it, however. Might not succeed, but he'd certainly try. "Marrying ourselves to the British fleet and nation" is not something I can see Jefferson doing until exhausting alternatives.

I thought Napoleon said that one of his greatest mistakes was not leaving Louverture in charge....and with Haiti still making money for France, they don't need the cash from the Purchase, hence there isn't a purchase, unless the US is willing to fight for it.

Elfwine said:

That sounds like a reason he'd try harder to get New Orleans than avoid it, however. Might not succeed, but he'd certainly try. "Marrying ourselves to the British fleet and nation" is not something I can see Jefferson doing until exhausting alternatives.

Click to expand...

Other than go to war for it, if Napoleon doesn't want to sell it, what'd he going to do?

Obviously you need a different Napoleon than OTL for this discussion.

trollhole said:

I thought Napoleon said that one of his greatest mistakes was not leaving Louverture in charge....and with Haiti still making money for France, they don't need the cash from the Purchase, hence there isn't a purchase, unless the US is willing to fight for it.

Click to expand...

Napoleon fighting in America? Me like.

Faeelin said:

Other than go to war for it, if Napoleon doesn't want to sell it, what'd he going to do?

Obviously you need a different Napoleon than OTL for this discussion.

Click to expand...

Shoot himself.

trollhole said:

I thought Napoleon said that one of his greatest mistakes was not leaving Louverture in charge....and with Haiti still making money for France, they don't need the cash from the Purchase, hence there isn't a purchase, unless the US is willing to fight for it.

Click to expand...

To say nothing of how absolutely traumatic battling Afro-French soldiers will be to American society in Greater Appalachia and the South, the places most likely to be invaded.

If he plays his cards right, Nappy could portray himself as Liberator Africanus in the New World, which will send shockwaves throughout the Anglo-American and Ibero-American worlds.

Wolfpaw said:

To say nothing of how absolutely traumatic battling Afro-French soldiers will be to American society in Greater Appalachia and the South, the places most likely to be invaded.

If he plays his cards right, Nappy could portray himself as Liberator Africanus in the New World, which will send shockwaves throughout the Anglo-American and Ibero-American worlds.

Click to expand...

Well I am writing a TL in which he order Toussaint to invade Jamaica. If he did do that in America..there is a shitload of butterflies. If invaded America through the South and instigated a massive slave rebellion it would tear the nation apart. Someone should write a TL like that. Imagine Dessalines and Murat in the Carolinas. For an invasion like this to happen the British needs to defeated or isolated from Europe. And Napoleon would need to send a massive army to the Americas. I could see the invasion force could be mostly blacks from St Domingue. Napoleon could easily mobilize and train a force of 150,000-200,000 black soldiers in St Domingue. This would be a hell of a war and a TL.

Haiti is literally the one thing holding the French juggernaut by the balls. Without it, who knows what could happen? It's a pretty freaking awesome TL, that's for sure....