AHC: Have the CSA become independent and survive to the Modern Day

Most of the timelines where the CSA become independent they end up becoming a weak nation or being reabsorbed by the USA. What could be done to make a powerful CSA survive to the modern day?
 
Have the U.S lose a war with the U.K and France as allies of the CSA. Have California secede (As they almost did OTL) during the Civil War, have the Indians actually decide to fight with the CSA against the Union, or atleast have them making alot more trouble than OTL (or at least most Plains Indians). Make the peace really bad for the U.S, maybe loose border states and Maryland, lose Pacific to California Republic, industry is destroyed, country is in super debt. After that the U.S is not likely to recover very easily. Maybe have France win the F-P war to keep the CSA with an important ally though this isn't necessary. I imagine the CSA could keep slavery for at least 1880 in all likelihood and certainly not farther than 1900.

California and the CSA become allies, to defend each other if the the Union tries to reconquer them. The CSA needs to industrialize by 1880, to almost as much as a post war Union otherwise they'll be economically dominated and "re-union" is almost inevitable. It isn't impossible, not by any stretch of the imagination.
 
A more peaceful secession followed by a president or two intent on restoring relations between the US and CS can't hurt. After all, how likely would the US be to attack its good friend in the South?

This is possible by the fact that in the 1860s a lot of people were more closely aligned to their state than to the whole USA. At that sort of time, a bunch of far-off places (Mississippi to California is quite a long distance) leaving wouldn't raise too much concern without a great war. Especially if the president wasn't crying out for men to crush the rebellion.

- BNC
 
Have the U.S lose a war with the U.K and France as allies of the CSA. Have California secede (As they almost did OTL) during the Civil War, have the Indians actually decide to fight with the CSA against the Union, or atleast have them making alot more trouble than OTL (or at least most Plains Indians). Make the peace really bad for the U.S, maybe loose border states and Maryland, lose Pacific to California Republic, industry is destroyed, country is in super debt. After that the U.S is not likely to recover very easily. Maybe have France win the F-P war to keep the CSA with an important ally though this isn't necessary. I imagine the CSA could keep slavery for at least 1880 in all likelihood and certainly not farther than 1900.

California and the CSA become allies, to defend each other if the the Union tries to reconquer them. The CSA needs to industrialize by 1880, to almost as much as a post war Union otherwise they'll be economically dominated and "re-union" is almost inevitable. It isn't impossible, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Problem is getting UK to support CSA. UK wouldn't ever support slave-owner nation. And UK even hasn't any reason do that.
 
Problem is getting UK to support CSA. UK wouldn't ever support slave-owner nation. And UK even hasn't any reason do that.
Perhaps have only British diplomatic/monetary support while the French provide troops. Honestly the Union performed so poorly for much of the war a few French divisions (and the Imperial Navy) might make all the difference.
 
Most of the timelines where the CSA become independent they end up becoming a weak nation or being reabsorbed by the USA. What could be done to make a powerful CSA survive to the modern day?

There is a excellent timeline about that, it is called "Heart of dixie" it even got some interesting updates about the state of the culture in the CSA after the independence
 
One key fact about the American Civil War that people don't completely take on board is that the Confederate States of America at the time of Manassas was very different from the one that existed when they fired on Fort Sumter. Blame a misleading map that keeps getting reprinted in school textbooks.

Six states seceded after Lincoln was elected. After Fort Sumter, once Lincoln called for volunteers to put down the rebellion, other states in the Upper South left, notably Virginia, all of which had considered but rejected secession earlier. And before Fort Sumter, regardless of whatever Lincoln's intentions were, it was unclear what a President of the United States could really do about a state seceding, with the consensus being in the direction of basically nothing.

So if you mean the original six state CSA, they could pull it off by just seceding, not antagonizing the USA, and the federal authorities, maybe with Lincoln, maybe with a different President, eventually accept this as settled fact and negotiate a settlement on the remaining issues, maybe trading Sumter and Pickens for unrestricted access to the Mississippi.

Once you get the federal government committed to using force to prevent secession, you get your eleven plus state CSA, but then the chances of pulling off secession go to somewhere between slim and none.
 
Most of the timelines where the CSA become independent they end up becoming a weak nation or being reabsorbed by the USA. What could be done to make a powerful CSA survive to the modern day?
Destroy the United a states, tearing it completely apart, then having something wreck the French, British, and Germans in a way that they keep buying cotton from the Confederates, but they never have enough money to invest in countries to the south of them. It is not a roses picture.
 
One key fact about the American Civil War that people don't completely take on board is that the Confederate States of America at the time of Manassas was very different from the one that existed when they fired on Fort Sumter. Blame a misleading map that keeps getting reprinted in school textbooks.

Six states seceded after Lincoln was elected. After Fort Sumter, once Lincoln called for volunteers to put down the rebellion, other states in the Upper South left, notably Virginia, all of which had considered but rejected secession earlier. And before Fort Sumter, regardless of whatever Lincoln's intentions were, it was unclear what a President of the United States could really do about a state seceding, with the consensus being in the direction of basically nothing.

So if you mean the original six state CSA, they could pull it off by just seceding, not antagonizing the USA, and the federal authorities, maybe with Lincoln, maybe with a different President, eventually accept this as settled fact and negotiate a settlement on the remaining issues, maybe trading Sumter and Pickens for unrestricted access to the Mississippi.

Once you get the federal government committed to using force to prevent secession, you get your eleven plus state CSA, but then the chances of pulling off secession go to somewhere between slim and none.
To nitpick, the original CSA was 7 states, rather than 6 (South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas).

More significantly, this over-simplifies the discussions in the Upper South. The core of the debate, particularly in Virginia, was in discussion of whether secession should be immediate, not whether Virginia should permanently reject secession. There wasn't a majority in favour of immediate secession, but as demonstrated by when they were forced to make a choice, the Upper South went with the CSA. (Admittedly, North Carolina mostly went along because they were surrounded by seceding states, but still, they seceded).

In an ATL where the Original 7 (TM) are permitted to depart peacefully, it's still likely that the Upper South will opt to join them, since they will feel even more vulnerable to slavery being extingushed if they are now a much smaller minority within the Union. It would also be interesting to see the discussions which emerge in the border states in such circumstances, since there were significant pro-secession minorities in most of them (sans Delaware).
 
To nitpick, the original CSA was 7 states, rather than 6 (South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas).

More significantly, this over-simplifies the discussions in the Upper South. The core of the debate, particularly in Virginia, was in discussion of whether secession should be immediate, not whether Virginia should permanently reject secession. There wasn't a majority in favour of immediate secession, but as demonstrated by when they were forced to make a choice, the Upper South went with the CSA. (Admittedly, North Carolina mostly went along because they were surrounded by seceding states, but still, they seceded).

In an ATL where the Original 7 (TM) are permitted to depart peacefully, it's still likely that the Upper South will opt to join them, since they will feel even more vulnerable to slavery being extingushed if they are now a much smaller minority within the Union. It would also be interesting to see the discussions which emerge in the border states in such circumstances, since there were significant pro-secession minorities in most of them (sans Delaware).
I imagine this could work, but I think Lincoln would not accept that. With a different President the impetus to secede is absent. Assuming it is someone like Douglas which is likely, the South wouldn't secede.
 
Top