How is this timeline?

  • It's great!

    Votes: 45 54.2%
  • It's good.

    Votes: 20 24.1%
  • It's ok.

    Votes: 12 14.5%
  • It's awful!

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • It's fine... for an ASB.

    Votes: 5 6.0%

  • Total voters
    83

Md139115

Banned
Ooops, Lee is going to be pissed as hell now. First you accuse him of exceeding his orders and squandering his men, and then you reveal that it was you that started the fight in the first place.

Yes, but it's worse than that.

Remember Seward's crazy plan to unite the country by declaring war on France and Spain? These idiots went ahead and did it!
 
Yes, but it's worse than that.

Remember Seward's crazy plan to unite the country by declaring war on France and Spain? These idiots went ahead and did it!
Not only that, but he is now a national hero..... If he were oh I don't know..... To make mention of it to the press or within earshot of them, he would be believed and there would be quite literally hell to pay for the government, as I gaurantee they have been claiming in the press that they were desperatly trying to avoid a war.....
 

Md139115

Banned
Not only that, but he is now a national hero..... If he were oh I don't know..... To make mention of it to the press or within earshot of them, he would be believed and there would be quite literally hell to pay for the government, as I gaurantee they have been claiming in the press that they were desperatly trying to avoid a war.....

I do not consider it a facet of Lee's character to do things like this, so it will not be done in the story.



But.........
 
I do not consider it a facet of Lee's character to do things like this, so it will not be done in the story.



But.........
Fair nuff.....

But..... What is to stop somebody else who holds a politicial grudge from doing so. After all, some men are honourable and some are not.
 

Md139115

Banned
Actually, time for a question to the masses...

What IS the value of Canada in this time period, money wise? As in, if you were to put a price tag on British Canada, sans Newfoundland and Labrador, just before Confederation, what would it be?


I am only going to say that any final number will NOT be used in the treaty...
 
Hopefully they try tio take Canada and fail, either because the South rises or/and the British blockade the heck out of the Union collapsing their economy
 

Md139115

Banned
Hopefully they try tio take Canada and fail, either because the South rises or/and the British blockade the heck out of the Union collapsing their economy

Well there wouldn't be a British blockade or a failed attempt to take Canada.

They already "have" Canada, in that they control Quebec and have cut the rail lines to Halifax. The British cannot defend, resupply, or maintain commerce with the rest of the country because of this (and it's important to note that Vancouver isn't yet built and the British don't yet have a rail line to any port on Hudson Bay).

What this arguing is over is whether the US should receive Canada in the peace negotiations (which they can reasonably expect to recieve for the reasons listed) or not because of the massive imbalance in the slave state/free state ratio it would cause.
 
1. The latest plot twist with Lee finding out the war was ginned up is amazing. I have no idea how he would react--he is extremely dutiful and punctilious, but he takes his identity as a Christian gentleman very seriously also, and in this era a Christian gentleman would absolutely not, never, never, gin up a war to manipulate the public. The levels of contempt Lee is feeling for the the inner circle and the white hot levels of fury he has are unimaginable. (Lee really was like a 2nd Washington in one way, in that he seemed to have a gigantic temper that he rigidly controlled).

2. Lee' victory in Canada was amazing, and I will be extremely disappointed if it turns out for little to nothing.

3. I would like to see something to further justify the title of this TL. Given the attitude of the times, a 2nd Constitutional Convention to completely rewrite the thing is unlikely. But could there be a movement for a new convention of the states to address the long-festering problem with slavery and etc., with Lee publicly throwing his weight behind it, so Southern politicians are OK with taking in Canada? Perhaps private or even public assurances could be made. Lee's private motive would be to do something to clean up Washington, since he is disgusted with it at the moment.

4. Long-term, Southern politicians with vision (there were some) need to realize that the accounting of free states v. slave states is never going to work for them and need to find a way to broaden their faction. One way they could do it is by bringing in more states that are outside the norm and have reason to fear a standardizing national culture and robust federal government. Mormon Utah, French Catholic Quebec, Latin New Mexico/Arizona. It would be in their interests to have these states admitted with government systems that were explicitly Mormon, French Catholic, and Hispanic Catholic. Maybe even an explicitly Native American state in Oklahoma. It would be interesting to see what an attempt at something like that would look like, and what would actually happen.
Or, alternatively, the old standby of splitting Texas up into multiple states.
Much as it pains me to say it, Brigham Young would probably have been willing to declare Utah a slave state and even to try to figure out a way to get some actual slaveholdings in the area if it meant admission as a state. OTL, he was opposed to mining and mining culture, thought it attracted the wrong people and was a temptation to the Saints, so I could see him making some kind of deal where mining was allowed to proceed but only on the basis that the miners were slaves. Probably mining would even be legally restricted to slaves. Which is horrible, but neither history nor alt-history have to turn out the way we like.
 

Md139115

Banned
4. Long-term, Southern politicians with vision (there were some) need to realize that the accounting of free states v. slave states is never going to work for them and need to find a way to broaden their faction. One way they could do it is by bringing in more states that are outside the norm and have reason to fear a standardizing national culture and robust federal government. Mormon Utah, French Catholic Quebec, Latin New Mexico/Arizona. It would be in their interests to have these states admitted with government systems that were explicitly Mormon, French Catholic, and Hispanic Catholic. Maybe even an explicitly Native American state in Oklahoma. It would be interesting to see what an attempt at something like that would look like, and what would actually happen.
Or, alternatively, the old standby of splitting Texas up into multiple states.
Much as it pains me to say it, Brigham Young would probably have been willing to declare Utah a slave state and even to try to figure out a way to get some actual slaveholdings in the area if it meant admission as a state. OTL, he was opposed to mining and mining culture, thought it attracted the wrong people and was a temptation to the Saints, so I could see him making some kind of deal where mining was allowed to proceed but only on the basis that the miners were slaves. Probably mining would even be legally restricted to slaves. Which is horrible, but neither history nor alt-history have to turn out the way we like.


Here's the thing: why would Quebec or the proposed Hispanic states be willing to support a bunch of virulently anti-Catholic slaveholders? How does it benefit them? In Quebec's case in particular, the much more obvious move would be to ally with the Northern states that it historically conducted most of its trade with.

Also, I didn't get a chance to address it in this chapter but the war has exposed some serious shortcomings with American slavery that even the Southerners are starting to sweat over. The most obvious one has been the complete closure of European markets to Southern cotton (and Britain's development of independent sources in Egypt and India), but two far more critical ones are just now beginning to be realized with the war's end:

1. I was not being facetious when I described the raiding actions in the Gulf states as devastating. A good percentage of the plantations within 30 miles of the coast have been raided and/or put to the torch. Furthermore, the slaves in those states were not stupid- many of them fled to the coast to be liberated by the Royal or Imperial Marines. I have been working on a rough number of slaves freed by the war, and I've come up with 40% of Florida's and Louisiana's population, 30% of Texas, 25% of Mississippi, and Alabama, 10% of North and South Carolina, and 5% each of Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware, for a grand total of 555,535 freed slaves out of an 1860 population of 3,950,546, with Mississippi and Louisiana being the biggest losers by far.
The effects of this are going to be quite dramatic, with the slave population having lost a full decade of growth just as the pent-up immigration surge from Europe finally starts landing again. For starters, the price of slaves, particularly females of child-bearing age, is going to shoot through the stratosphere (Lee's about to find out that he (or rather, his wife) is now far wealthier than he/she was five years ago), and many land owners, particularly in the Deep South, may find themselves resorting to immigrants to fill the labor gap.

2. Kansas has finally entered the Union as a slave state (well what did you expect? This is a Douglas administration trying to cater to Southern Democrats), and... well as can probably be predicted, slave labor there just is not that economically viable. None of the prophicized plantations have come to pass and there frankly is no need to own a slave to take in a harvest every fall when you can hire a bunch of Irishmen to do it for a far cheaper price. The settlers streaming into the territory are not bringing slaves with them, and more worryingly, they're voting Republican. At this point, the South is starting to come to terms with the hard reality that even if Dred Scott vs. Sanford allows slavery in every territory, and even if all those territories are somehow founded as slave states, they're not going to stay slave states. Nevada and Nebraska are growing by leaps and bounds and chafing to get into the Union (Nevada's 1864 accession was postponed TTL) and it's almost a given that both are going to be Free states, as are Colorado and Utah just behind them. Southerners are already panicking and reaching for their almanacs and drawing any number of divisions to Texas, Virginia, or Florida that they can dream up, but even the most hard-line Dixiecrat can see that they're going to permanently lose the Senate by the century's end unless a miracle happens.
 
It wouldn't be an alliance to promote slavery. That wouldn't work, and the time for it is over anyhow. What I'm suggesting is that far-sighted Southerners interested in defending their peculiar institution, as distasteful as it is to us, should see some advantage in trying to create more states that have an interest in resisting centralization and homogenization.

It's your TL, of course.
 

Md139115

Banned
It wouldn't be an alliance to promote slavery. That wouldn't work, and the time for it is over anyhow. What I'm suggesting is that far-sighted Southerners interested in defending their peculiar institution, as distasteful as it is to us, should see some advantage in trying to create more states that have an interest in resisting centralization and homogenization.

It's your TL, of course.

I'm afraid that probably only a few Southern politicians have thought that far out and come to that conclusion, and they probably don't have enough influence to make it a reality. I may write in one or two arguing that point though just for a diversity of opinions.

No, right now, the "farsighted" are drawing lines over maps of the US trying to figure out ways to keep the slave states at least above 1/3 the total number, the rationale being that so long as they do so, they can filibuster the Senate, stop veto overrides, and, most critically, stop any Anti-Slavery Amendment from passing through Congress and going to the state legislatures. This last one might not seem like a problem since it takes 3/4ths of the states to ratify an amendment, but amendments do not have to have time limits and the U.S. has never actually determined if a state can rescind its ratification once it does so, so if some fluke happens and the Republicans or another anti-slavery party managed to get control of a border state legislature for even a month, they could potentially permanently add that state's assent to it.
 
Also, I think you're probably right about what kind of strategy even far-sighted Southron pols will be pursuing, and my wierd idea is just a wierd idea.

That said, the idea about Brigham Young being willing to go to extreme lengths in order to get statehood for the Mormons is not just a wierd idea, its OTL.
 
Just found this off of your signature, really awesome story so far.

I wonder if the south via Lee's support (disregarding the little reveal at the end) would ever consider some sort of deal to phase out slavery? Obviously, Lee is on the south's side, but would he be pragmatic enough to propose (or agree) to a deal where the federal government slowly (over decades) 'bought' every new slave as they were born? or perhaps (somehow) jump to a different (serf? sharecropping?) system which obviously heavily favored the southern states?
 

Md139115

Banned
Just found this off of your signature, really awesome story so far.

I wonder if the south via Lee's support (disregarding the little reveal at the end) would ever consider some sort of deal to phase out slavery? Obviously, Lee is on the south's side, but would he be pragmatic enough to propose (or agree) to a deal where the federal government slowly (over decades) 'bought' every new slave as they were born? or perhaps (somehow) jump to a different (serf? sharecropping?) system which obviously heavily favored the southern states?

To quote Churchill:

“You can always rely on America doing the right thing... after they’ve tried everything else first!”
 
Top