AHC: American Civil War where the rebel side wishes to depose, rather than secede

So a 'traditional' civil war, rather than a war of secession?

Are there any reasonable PODs for a rebel group to seek deposition of the government rather than independence?
 
Highly unlikely, given the structure of American government.

  • The way Congressional seats are apportioned (By state, and then by geographic regions within states) mean that you never get large swaths of territory without an official guranteed voice within the power structure
  • The nation has a functional democracy with guranteed turnover of power, at least on the executive level, and defusion of legislative power to the point nobody can consolidate enough of a personal empire of loyalty to gum things up
  • For much of it's history the US has lacked a large, stable officer centeralized officer corps. When it did,they lacked political power/tie ins or an independent resource base to provide the core of a reactionary faction/coup
  • The decenteralizion of day to day power to the states limits the Fed. ability to be oppressive,and for much of history the National Guards outnumbered the standing Federal army and so, again, limits the temptation towards centeralization against popular will.
 
So a 'traditional' civil war, rather than a war of secession?

Are there any reasonable PODs for a rebel group to seek deposition of the government rather than independence?
Probably. The problem is that OTL there was sympathy for secession in the country. That's less true of an actual coup. But let's say the initial states which seceeded instead declare their intent to overthrow the US government completely. In response Lincoln declares them to be in rebellion and takes his OTL step of calling for 75,000 volunteers to crush them.

The different messaging means that the rebellious states don't have a leg to stand on, meaning Virginia and North Carolina at minimum won't secede. Tennessee probably won't either, and Arkansas likely won't.

That leaves the OTL CSA deprived of their most important state (Virginia), plus a vast number of possible soldiers from all four states, much of their officer corps (including ALL of the Virginians). AND the different messaging means there will less volunteers even from rebelling states since they aren't defending their homes from (perceived) attack, but rather actively attempting overthrow of the government.

All of this means the rebels have even less men, less industry, etc. AND they have no prayer of foreign intervention. Basically they are completely fucked.
 
Probably. The problem is that OTL there was sympathy for secession in the country. That's less true of an actual coup. But let's say the initial states which seceeded instead declare their intent to overthrow the US government completely. In response Lincoln declares them to be in rebellion and takes his OTL step of calling for 75,000 volunteers to crush them.

The different messaging means that the rebellious states don't have a leg to stand on, meaning Virginia and North Carolina at minimum won't secede. Tennessee probably won't either, and Arkansas likely won't.

That leaves the OTL CSA deprived of their most important state (Virginia), plus a vast number of possible soldiers from all four states, much of their officer corps (including ALL of the Virginians). AND the different messaging means there will less volunteers even from rebelling states since they aren't defending their homes from (perceived) attack, but rather actively attempting overthrow of the government.

All of this means the rebels have even less men, less industry, etc. AND they have no prayer of foreign intervention. Basically they are completely fucked.
Worse, their actions have the effect of Northern Radicals gaining much more support. Emancipation will gain much stronger support, the instigators will be hanged and Southern Institutions will be dismantled. The Democratic Party will be seen as a nest of traitors and will be rendered powerless.
 

samcster94

Banned
Highly unlikely, given the structure of American government.

  • The way Congressional seats are apportioned (By state, and then by geographic regions within states) mean that you never get large swaths of territory without an official guranteed voice within the power structure
  • The nation has a functional democracy with guranteed turnover of power, at least on the executive level, and defusion of legislative power to the point nobody can consolidate enough of a personal empire of loyalty to gum things up
  • For much of it's history the US has lacked a large, stable officer centeralized officer corps. When it did,they lacked political power/tie ins or an independent resource base to provide the core of a reactionary faction/coup
  • The decenteralizion of day to day power to the states limits the Fed. ability to be oppressive,and for much of history the National Guards outnumbered the standing Federal army and so, again, limits the temptation towards centeralization against popular will.
For a meaningful contrast, 1930's Spain had the right ingredients for a more "typical" Civil War(which originated in a failed coup) even before taking into effect Fascist countries would back it. None of those things existed in the U.S. on the day Lincoln was elected.
 
There was the Business Plot in the 30s, though I guess it's up for debate whether they were actually plotting a coup or not.
 
The Democratic Party will be seen as a nest of traitors and will be rendered powerless.
Why do I have a feeling the Constitutional Union Party might develop into the replacement for the Democrats as moderates within the Republicans, Southern Unionists, and Northern Democrats (especially "War Democrats") would join them in such a scenario?
 
There was the Business Plot in the 30s, though I guess it's up for debate whether they were actually plotting a coup or not.

The most likely explanation, IMO, is that some business interests were contemplating using veterans as a political tool against FDR, but the notion that this would have been a violent coup is probably an embellishment by Butler who despised the financial class.
 
Top