AHC: Brazilian Slavery Ends ACW style?

So basically what I want is Brazil to be ripped apart by a group of states seceding in support of slavery at a time when it seems likely be to be abolished. One idea I had was a "liberal" emperor accedes the throne, and at that point the agricultural states secede.
 
Slavery is important Nationally in Brazil. Virtually all the states are largely agricultural and rely heavily on slavery as a means of support, with Sugar in the North and Coffee in the south. There were some liberal agitators in Brazil and the Emperor was known to be against slavery privately, but abolition was never seriously considered. The other problem would be finding enough middle class Brazilians willing to fight and die over the issue of slavery. I think for this to work you need to limit the growth of coffee in the South and find some other way for southern Brazil to be economically viable. That way, existing North/South tensions in Brazil could re-open over the slavery issue and trigger a civil war, otherwise I just can't see it happening.
 
I know very little of Brazilian history. Is it possible they had states where few or no slaves worked, and a majority of the population in those states was opposed to slavery? Parana, SantaCatarina, Rio Grande Do Sul? Even so, I don't really see anything like a regional civil war, a la ACW, happening. Too much of the populace lived in areas where sugar grew, where slavery was most needed. So I don't know.
 

Krall

Banned
Slavery is important Nationally in Brazil. Virtually all the states are largely agricultural and rely heavily on slavery as a means of support, with Sugar in the North and Coffee in the south. There were some liberal agitators in Brazil and the Emperor was known to be against slavery privately, but abolition was never seriously considered. The other problem would be finding enough middle class Brazilians willing to fight and die over the issue of slavery. I think for this to work you need to limit the growth of coffee in the South and find some other way for southern Brazil to be economically viable. That way, existing North/South tensions in Brazil could re-open over the slavery issue and trigger a civil war, otherwise I just can't see it happening.

Is there anyway Brazil could industrialise, with industrialisation mainly taking hold in the North or South, a la the USA?
 
The main problem is that everybody, with the exception of the Imperial Family and a handful of politicians, wanted slavery until the 1880's.

Is there anyway Brazil could industrialise, with industrialisation mainly taking hold in the North or South, a la the USA?
Brazil had been constantly industrializing ever since 1844, with a minor break in the 1860's, and a resurgence in the Rio Branco Cabinet (1871-1875). Industrialization really kicked off in the 1880's, but then a wild republic appears and the government's investments are cut to merely half of its previous value, not to mention the anarchy caused by the coup.
 
Is there anyway Brazil could industrialise, with industrialisation mainly taking hold in the North or South, a la the USA?

I'm not really very knowledgeable about industrialisation in the US, but one thing that would be worth considering is that Brazil's economy was built up by Portuguese and British merchants as a supplier of raw materials for Europe, indeed, manufacturing was banned until around 1807 or so if memory serves. Britain had many favourable trade deals with Brazil that were designed to keep it as an exporter of raw materials and nothing more. Then there is the problem that coffee was by far the most important export and grew best in the South, even with industrialisation, coffee would probably make a lot of economic sense for the landowners in South Brazil.
 
The main problem is that everybody, with the exception of the Imperial Family and a handful of politicians, wanted slavery until the 1880's.

Brazil had been constantly industrializing ever since 1844, with a minor break in the 1860's, and a resurgence in the Rio Branco Cabinet (1871-1875). Industrialization really kicked off in the 1880's, but then a wild republic appears and the government's investments are cut to merely half of its previous value, not to mention the anarchy caused by the coup.

But when the republic came Slavery was already outlawed.
 
Another big reason slavery ended when it did was the fear of a massive revolt, which was boiling up big time. It's unlikely you'll get the Brazilian elite to fight over it, but a violent end of slavery might come with an all out revolt. Another possibility, to make it a little broader across Brazilian society, is a revolution that encourages a slave rebellion or takes advantage of one.
 
My understanding of the situation is this:

Coffee was not highly slave dependent.
There were a few states which either did not allow slavery, or had no significant amount of slaves and weren't opposed to ending it.
There was a very significant abolitionist movement in Brazil, especially after the Paraguayian war.
The land owner elite of the North were the ones maintaining slavery in Brazil. They were a minority, but powerful in the gov't.

It's hard to come up with a scenario where slavery ends violently from civil war. Easy to come up with separatist movements, as there were lots of them. The issue wasn't over slavery, though. Some areas just didn't identify with the country as a whole and thought they'd do better on their own.

Attempting to get rid of slavery doesn't result in states opposing each other, it leads to deposing the ruling gov't that went against the landed elite, which pretty much controlled each and every area in a monoculture economy (unlike the US North, which had a strong middle class/diversified economy)
 
fear of slave revolt was not a leading driver of the ultimate (final) demise of slavery. By the time the 1880's came around, I believe the majority of blacks (or a very significant minority) were free. Unlike the US, the abolitionist movement in Brazil, including the laws, focused to a large extent on allowing slaves to buy their way into freedom, and there were a lot of societies/groups dedicated to helping them do that.
In the early days of the Brazilian empire, such was not the case, and there was a great fear of a slave rebellion, and there were some black insurrections.
 

Krall

Banned
My understanding of the situation is this:

Coffee was not highly slave dependent.
There were a few states which either did not allow slavery, or had no significant amount of slaves and weren't opposed to ending it.
There was a very significant abolitionist movement in Brazil, especially after the Paraguayian war.
The land owner elite of the North were the ones maintaining slavery in Brazil. They were a minority, but powerful in the gov't.

It's hard to come up with a scenario where slavery ends violently from civil war. Easy to come up with separatist movements, as there were lots of them. The issue wasn't over slavery, though. Some areas just didn't identify with the country as a whole and thought they'd do better on their own.

Attempting to get rid of slavery doesn't result in states opposing each other, it leads to deposing the ruling gov't that went against the landed elite, which pretty much controlled each and every area in a monoculture economy (unlike the US North, which had a strong middle class/diversified economy)

Well a separatist movement was essentially what the CSA was. Is it possible that a number of provincial separatist movements could flare up and join each other in response to some change in government that they believe will leave them powerless compared to the other provinces? Maybe if the Conservative and Liberal/Progressive factions become associated with the two sides of the slavery issue and there's some sort of major change (likethe Emperor choosing a new Prime Minister, or the creation of a new cabinet that excludes pro-slavery politicians), could that create the conditions necessary for a Brazilian CSA analogue?
 
Well a separatist movement was essentially what the CSA was. Is it possible that a number of provincial separatist movements could flare up and join each other in response to some change in government that they believe will leave them powerless compared to the other provinces? Maybe if the Conservative and Liberal/Progressive factions become associated with the two sides of the slavery issue and there's some sort of major change (likethe Emperor choosing a new Prime Minister, or the creation of a new cabinet that excludes pro-slavery politicians), could that create the conditions necessary for a Brazilian CSA analogue?
No, because all provinces used slaves, especially the ones most important for the nation: Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Minas Gerais. There can't be a CSA analogue, because if a civil war ever happened, unlikely as it is, the Alt-CSA will win and annex the rest of the country. If a truly separatist rebellion happens, it won't be over slavery.

The Emperor did choose mainly abolitionist politicians as the prime minister in the 1870's and 1880's and this was used as an argument by the slavers that Dom Pedro II wanted to rule as an absolutist ruler and enforce his will upon the parliament. Needless to say, it didn't work.
 
I've considered a Brazilian TL that sees the Empire last longer. A big part of what ended the Empire was Pedro II losing interest in his rule. Although that happened after abolition, the end of slavery saw the landowning class become quite alienated, while the War of the Triple Alliance alienated the officer class.

So I suggest, Pedro's son survives from 1848, this makes him more confident in his Imperial legacy, this makes him more confident in fighting slavery. Combine that with a tenser crisis over the Aberdeen Act (Britain clamping down on the slave trade), say Pedro pushes through abolition shortly after the American Civil War.

Pedro is still liked by the mostly liberal officer class, and have a live male heir to encourage his generally high popular support. The slave-owners decide to lash out and attempt a coup. Rather than a ACW analogue, it would be a Spanish Civil War analogue - a failed coup leads to growing upheaval, say the rebels are able to muster the support of various local figures and militias, leading to full blown war. Say the Confederados, who IOTL ended up joining the Brazilian slavers effectively become mercenaries, brining over more ACW veterans.

Eventually the government troops win, Pedro confirms abolition and wides off into a sunset made of benign industrialisation and parliamentary democracy.
 
Remove Dom Pedro II and you might get your wish, especially if he dies earlier in his reign than OTL. The problem with this is that Argentina will eye Rio Grande do Sul and perhaps Santa Catarina as well, and if the Brazilians are ripping each other to pieces then Paraguay, Bolivia, and Peru might decide they want a bite as well.
 
Remove Dom Pedro II and you might get your wish, especially if he dies earlier in his reign than OTL. The problem with this is that Argentina will eye Rio Grande do Sul and perhaps Santa Catarina as well, and if the Brazilians are ripping each other to pieces then Paraguay, Bolivia, and Peru might decide they want a bite as well.
Remove Dom Pedro II and you remove the major abolitionist of Brazil. I don't see how that would bring a quicker abolition. Depending on when you remove him, you effectively can destroy the country.
 
Top