AHC :: Most Unique/Anti-Cliche Southern Victory Possible.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Your challenge, should you choose to accept it, is to turn a subject that is arguably the most cliched in Alternative History, that is, the Confederate States of America achieving it's independence and the results thereof, into something interesting and unique with a POD of at least 1860.

Good luck ;)
 
Your challenge, should you choose to accept it, is to turn a subject that is arguably the most cliched in Alternative History, that is, the Confederate States of America achieving it's independence and the results thereof, into something interesting and unique with a POD of at least 1860.

Good luck ;)

Well, the Confederacy would need a decisive victory and some allies...even in an alternate timeline. I would submit TWO such decisive battles....Gettysburg and Vicksburg.

Gettysburg would go as it did OTL except that the Confederates achieve surprise and use that to gain their victory.

Vicksburg would be a scenario in which the city holds out against the Union siege, and a relief force from Mississippi and Tennessee arrives and drives the Feds into Lousiana, where a Texan force would then crush them.

Britain, France, Prussia and Holland would then back the South.

next person wish to either challenge or continue this?...........
 
US Grant dies from his first fall off his horse shortly before the Battle of Shiloh due to the soft ground that saved him being rather harder. Without Grant the US Army under Don Carlos Buell wins an Antietam-style victory near Corinth, but the Confederacy is able to fight the war without a sufficiently ruthless and aggressive general in the West able to follow these victories up.

As a result, with the Union offensives in Virginia never gaining anything, and with the absence of Sherman and a buttload of Buells and McClellan-types who win battles but never campaigns or true victories over Confederate armies, the US population elects Horatio Seymour in 1864, who signs the Treaty of Baltimore with the Confederacy, recognizing it as the 11 1861 states plus the Indian territory. The election of Seymour is due to a repeated pattern where US troops would go on the offensive with superior numbers, only to have to detach so many troops to occupy territory that Confederate soldiers achieved local superiority of numbers and prevented the Union from ever getting too far past Kentucky and Missouri. Too, Confederate guerrilla and partisan war policies in the ATL are blown quite out of proportion to the real results of the war, which showed that Union troops were able easily to suppress them by mid-1863. Lee's strategy's potential damage to the Southern cause is limited because the Union strategic victories in the West never mollify his repeated victories over McClellan and his similar type of officers, who in turn squander the largest army that had yet been raised in North America. In the ATL this is used to subvert the idea that Steamroller strategies are viable, and is used as an example of why Russia loses the Russo-Japanese War.

No Grant or Sherman, the Union has a great deal of leaders who prefer the Soft War policy to the Hard War policy, and no examples of successful generalship with a great deal of examples of crapsack generals against Confederates more than able to exploit their victories. CS victory is attributed due to having had the foresight to outlast the USA in a war of wills and to the inability of any US Generals to follow up Grant's victories at Forts Henry and Donelson with an offensive that might not merely have defeated the pivotal Pittsburg Landing Battle, but outright stopped Confederate power near the Mississippi as a threat to the Union.

Confederate histories hail Joe Johnston and his Fabian Strategy as the key to victory, and there's a subtle undertone that had General Lee ever faced a competent opponent he could easily have ruined the CSA by his victories. Foreign observers attribute the Confederate victory to the Union's folly in trying to invade a region the size of Russia in Europe and conquer it without any degree of foresight and with a political leadership handicapped by damnfool generals. The Union Anaconda Plan in the ATL becomes a source of AH Fodder, as does the question of what Grant might have done had he been in charge of defeating Johnston's counteroffensive, not Buell.
 
Last edited:
Well, the Confederacy would need a decisive victory and some allies...even in an alternate timeline. I would submit TWO such decisive battles....Gettysburg and Vicksburg.

Gettysburg would go as it did OTL except that the Confederates achieve surprise and use that to gain their victory.

Vicksburg would be a scenario in which the city holds out against the Union siege, and a relief force from Mississippi and Tennessee arrives and drives the Feds into Lousiana, where a Texan force would then crush them.

Britain, France, Prussia and Holland would then back the South.

next person wish to either challenge or continue this?...........

At the start of the Vicksburg Campaign both Confederate armies had more men than Grant did, but he still won every single battle and captured Pemberton regardless. A Confederate victory at Vicksburg is pretty ASB, especially if we allow anything like the OTL scenario to work.
 
The Civil War becomes a 'hard war' faster than OTL due to British aid (supplies, but not outright intervention) to the Confederacy following the Trent affair. As a result, anti-war sentiment in the North increases, as well as incidents of sabotage. Lincoln reacts by cracking down slightly harder against dissidents, revoking the writ of habeas corpus over a larger part of the Union, polarizing the United States. In order to cut off British aid to the Confederacy, Lincoln calls for the Emancipation Proclamation earlier than IOTL, making politics in the Union even more polarized. Following more military defeats, Lincoln clashes with McClellan and starts looking for his replacement. McClellan, infuriated to the point of near insanity, decides that Lincoln is a tyrant who has overstepped his bounds, and marches the Army of the Potomac into Washington D.C and ousts Lincoln in a military coup. In the resulting chaos, the Confederacy is able to secure its' independence.
 
The Civil War becomes a 'hard war' faster than OTL due to British aid (supplies, but not outright intervention) to the Confederacy following the Trent affair. As a result, anti-war sentiment in the North increases, as well as incidents of sabotage. Lincoln reacts by cracking down slightly harder against dissidents, revoking the writ of habeas corpus over a larger part of the Union, polarizing the United States. In order to cut off British aid to the Confederacy, Lincoln calls for the Emancipation Proclamation earlier than IOTL, making politics in the Union even more polarized. Following more military defeats, Lincoln clashes with McClellan and starts looking for his replacement. McClellan, infuriated to the point of near insanity, decides that Lincoln is a tyrant who has overstepped his bounds, and marches the Army of the Potomac into Washington D.C and ousts Lincoln in a military coup. In the resulting chaos, the Confederacy is able to secure its' independence.

So how would a military-controlled US deal with CSA independence and British 'interference'?
 
Jefferson Davis challenges Lincoln to a duel to settle the war. Lincoln declines, but counter-offers a rail-splitting contest. Davis declines. The impasse is resolved when they agree that the first side to build a transcontinental railroad wins. The Confederacy wins, barely, but with massive infusions of British capital and with conscripted slave labor. The North cries foul. After sporadic border fighting, the two sides agree that the first one to build a Central American canal wins . . .

The year is 2100. Will the Robert E. Lee make it Alpha Centauri in time to preserve the fledgling Confederate States, or will the Emancipation Proclamation's Bussard ramjet work as well as advertised?

--

OK, semi-serious non-cliche would be if Davis undergoes a personality transplant and somehow avoids firing on Sumter. A phony war situation for years where the federal government continues to operate forts, deliver some mails, and collect customs offshore while the CSA operates de facto independence and eventually de jure because the continued pretense of federal control is just too ridiculous.
 
Jefferson Davis challenges Lincoln to a duel to settle the war. Lincoln declines, but counter-offers a rail-splitting contest. Davis declines. The impasse is resolved when they agree that the first side to build a transcontinental railroad wins. The Confederacy wins, barely, but with massive infusions of British capital and with conscripted slave labor. The North cries foul. After sporadic border fighting, the two sides agree that the first one to build a Central American canal wins . . .

The year is 2100. Will the Robert E. Lee make it Alpha Centauri in time to preserve the fledgling Confederate States, or will the Emancipation Proclamation's Bussard ramjet work as well as advertised?

--

OK, semi-serious non-cliche would be if Davis undergoes a personality transplant and somehow avoids firing on Sumter. A phony war situation for years where the federal government continues to operate forts, deliver some mails, and collect customs offshore while the CSA operates de facto independence and eventually de jure because the continued pretense of federal control is just too ridiculous.

O-K :confused:
 
In desperation over a few defeats, the C.S.A decide to attempt to have Lincoln impeached. Underestimating the threat and focusing on the war effort, Lincoln doesn't realise until too late that he has been sucessfully defamed in Congress to the point where impeachment actually goes ahead.

Somewhat ASB, but it's original...
 
Lincolns sickly child Willy who IOTL died from fever in February, 1862, instead dies in the darkest days of the Civil War in 1863.
In the middle of 1863, before Gettysburg, Lincoln was reported by friends as saying he was nearly insane from the setbacks and losses, and was almost hoping he would be forced out by his opponents.
So with his young son dying at the same time as things looked bleakest, Lincoln goes mad. He starts sending out contradictory orders, removes dozens of officers and generals with a stroke of a pen, rages to the press about his opponents, and generally makes a mess of things.
Lincoln is removed from office, or at least from any place he could make decisions and various opponents try to fight for power. With several of the early contradictory orders still in effect and officers unsure if they're still in command, both the army and the government grind to a halt as people try to sort things out.
The Confederacy gains some more victories and Union troops desert in droves as moral amongst soldiers and civilians plummet.
After a month or so of this chaos whoever manages to come out on top begins peace talks with the Confederacy, which quickly lead to the Confederates being formally recognized by the US.
 
Last edited:
Southern Victory Timeline - 2014

The attached map represents my thoughts on a modern day 21st century North America after the United States victory in the Second Great War (WWII). This being the world of Harry Turtledove's "Southern Victory Series" which ends in 1944 with the CSA's defeat at the hands of the United States and Germany.

The major departure from previous maps associated with Turtledove's work is that I’ve assumed that the United States has granted independence to Cuba as well as the former Mexican provinces of Sonora, Chihuahua, and both Baja California North and South. The latter 4 Mexican states were combined into a new country under American domination; The Republic of Arizona.

This action would serve the USA’s interests in several ways which I shall articulate below:
These territories were not part of the original USA in 1860 and if the history of the late 19th/ early 20th century taught American politicians anything, it is that diversity leads to disputes and rebellion (see Utah, Congaree Socialist Republic, Black Belt Republic, Canadian uprisings, etc). The conservative Dewey Administration would likely take steps to prevent future uprisings through the (mostly) non-violent deportation of ethnic and religious minority groups. And while both Socialist/ Democrat administrations toyed with the idea of exiling the Mormon population to the Sandwich Islands (Hawaii) this is simply not very feasible due to distance. A much more expedient, plausible, and cost effective scenario would be to expel the Mormons south and give them their own state outside of the USA.

Granting the former Mexican provinces their ‘independence’ would also give the USA a convenient spot to deport other undesirable/ potential troublemakers such as the Native American population of Sequoyah (renamed Oklahoma to further break Indian identity), as well as any Confederate POW/ sympathizer who refused to sign a pledge of allegiance to the United States.

The Dewey Administration would realize that Sonora and Chihuahua (and Cuba) were dominated by citizens who previously voted for the ‘Radical Liberal’ party. These ‘citizens’ would probably be much more likely to vote Socialist than Democrat, thus giving the new conservative administration even more reason to jettison them from the Union.

The Republic of Arizona: a new nation built by Mormons, Native Americans, and confederate Ex-Pats. For those of you who know your history the name ‘Arizona’ originated in the Mexican province of Sonora, and was popular with Confederates during the War of Secession (Civil War in OTL.) For strategic purposes the USA would permanently annex bases at Cabo San Lucas (at the tip of Baja California Sur) along with Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Along the same lines, and breaking with several previous posts, I rejected the idea of creating a “black republic” in the American South. The Dewey administration made it clear they intended to re-admit all former American states back into the Union. Creating a ‘Black Republic’ out of North Carolina (for instance) would prevent this complete re-unification. Additionally the animus of southern whites would make for a very hostile environment for returning Blacks. Lastly, it is doubtful many Blacks would choose to remain in the American south when they have such a terrible and recent memory of state sponsored genocide.

Instead I think it MUCH more logical that surviving blacks could be encouraged to emigrate to Cuba, which in Turtledove’s timeline is described as being much more ‘progressive’ and accepting of blacks; for example blacks were allowed surnames in Cuba whereas they had none in the rest of the confederacy. Thus thanks to an overwhelming influx of ‘Population reduction’ survivors, the Republic of Cuba would grow analogous to modern day Israel-- fiercely independent, militaristic, and pro-USA.

This concept of state sponsored migration (force deportation) parallels the action of the Soviet Union at the end of WWII in OTL when entire ethnic/ religious groups were re-organized/shuffled to preempt any nationalist threats to the USSR (see history of Baltic States/ Caucuses, etc). Combined with state sponsored immigration and land grants, veterans and American citizens would be encouraged to move into sparsely populated areas (Canada/ Sequoyah/Utah) and thus ensure favorable voting patterns in future elections and preclude plebiscite initiatives.

Lastly, the issue of Texas. In 1944 Texas declared Independence from the CSA and Governor Wright Patman became “President” Patman. Texas quickly sided with American demands to avoid complete occupation. Previous posts suggest a quasi-independent Republic. Again, based on previous assertions by the Dewey Administration to re-admit all former American states, combined with Texas’s role in the Population Reductions, I find it hard to believe the USA would allow true Texas independence. A more plausible scenario is that the Dewey/Truman Administration would strong arm Patman into once again guiding Texas to join the Union. The USA would accomplish this with the help of the following enticements: 1) offering to return the aborted State of Houston to Texas, 2) Allowing the Texas Rangers to remain the de-facto State Police, and 3) allowing the State Constitution to refer to a ‘Republic of Texas;’ require no federal income tax (instead a unique federal sales tax); and an allowance to fly the Texas flag at the same height as the American flag. Since this is how Texans behave in OTL I find it highly plausible that “Governor” Patman would acquiesce J
Any and all feedback appreciated.-Sanford1983

Republic of Arizona and Cuba.png
 
...how does that conform to the OP, exactly? All it does is piggy-back off of published AH as opposed to the scope of the forum, instead of developing its own "Southern Victory" during the Civil War. Your POD is way late, not to mention in the direct face of TL-191 canon, and doesn't even belong under the Pre-1900 subforum at all.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Die zombie DIE!

With Iron, Salt and Blood I return thee to the Earth to rise no more!
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top