AHC/WI: North secedes

After 1850. First, how do we get this scenario? Do we have an earlier Dred Scott analogue? Maybe some equivalent of Lemmon Vs. New York makes it to the SCOTUS and uphold's the plaintiff's "right" to bring slaves into a free state? Maybe this causes Northerners to fear that slaveowners were going to come to their state and force farmers out to make way for a plantation? Maybe immigrants and other industrial workers riot for fear that slaveowners were going to use their massive labor force to steal their jobs? And if they do, what happens next? Which states secede? does California secede? Do the Nebraska, Oregon, and Utah territories secede? Is a northern secessionist state that also takes California, Nebraska Territory, Minnesota Territory, Orgon Territory/state and Washington territory plausible, or as wankish as a CSA that takes Arizona, Kentucky, and Missouri? Do the UK and France support them? Do they expand? Discuss.
 
Last edited:
First, how do we get this scenario? Do we have an earlier Dred Scott analogue? Maybe some equivalent of Lemmon Vs. New York makes it to the SCOTUS and uphold's the plaintiff's "right" to bring slaves into a free state? Maybe this causes Northerners to fear that slaveowners were going to come to their state and force farmers out to make way for a plantation? Maybe immigrants and other industrial workers riot for fear that slaveowners were going to use their massive labor force to steal their jobs? And if they do, what happens next? Which states secede? does California secede? Do the Nebraska, Oregon, and Utah territories secede? Is a northern secessionist state that also takes California, Nebraska Territory, Minnesota Territory, Orgon Territory/state and Washington territory plausible, or as wankish as a CSA that takes Arizona, Kentucky, and Missouri? Do the UK and France support them? Do they expand? Discuss.


Well, New England could secede, and nearly did during the War of 1812. I think that would count as northern secession, even if it wasn't motivated by slavery..
 
After 1850. First, how do we get this scenario? Do we have an earlier Dred Scott analogue? Maybe some equivalent of Lemmon Vs. New York makes it to the SCOTUS and uphold's the plaintiff's "right" to bring slaves into a free state? Maybe this causes Northerners to fear that slaveowners were going to come to their state and force farmers out to make way for a plantation? Maybe immigrants and other industrial workers riot for fear that slaveowners were going to use their massive labor force to steal their jobs? And if they do, what happens next? Which states secede? does California secede? Do the Nebraska, Oregon, and Utah territories secede? Is a northern secessionist state that also takes California, Nebraska Territory, Minnesota Territory, Orgon Territory/state and Washington territory plausible, or as wankish as a CSA that takes Arizona, Kentucky, and Missouri? Do the UK and France support them? Do they expand? Discuss.


If the North secedes it will take everything that you said outside maybe Utah. The South is unable to stop the North in doing whatever it wants to do.
 
The problem with the idea of a 'northern secession' is that the north is the stronger 'state' (at least in whole, if you're talking instead about component parts that's a different matter). A northern secession would instead be the north kicking the south out of the US.

As it is the idea of a northern 'secession' would be like England 'seceding' from the UK or Russia 'seceding' from the USSR.

You could have a situation where New England, or a group of northern states secede, but the whole would mean just a breakup ala USSR since the south is far outweighed wrt power.
 
The problem with the idea of a 'northern secession' is that the north is the stronger 'state' (at least in whole, if you're talking instead about component parts that's a different matter). A northern secession would instead be the north kicking the south out of the US.

I basically agree with you, but you may be underestimating the political and historical clout the South had, considering the critical role Southerners had in the founding and early development of the United States. Rather than "secession", or one side "kicking the other out" involuntarily, something like "dissolution" might possibly occur in this instance, perhaps incorporating a constitutional convention-like meeting of all the states and signing of trade and non-agression treaties between the northern states and the southern states. The question? If this was a peaceful separation, which group of states, if any, would deserve or retain the name "United States of America"?
 
The problem with the idea of a 'northern secession' is that the north is the stronger 'state' (at least in whole, if you're talking instead about component parts that's a different matter). A northern secession would instead be the north kicking the south out of the US.

As it is the idea of a northern 'secession' would be like England 'seceding' from the UK or Russia 'seceding' from the USSR.

You could have a situation where New England, or a group of northern states secede, but the whole would mean just a breakup ala USSR since the south is far outweighed wrt power.

The issue here is with the "core" American states secceeding and froming another country.

You wouldn't just see the northern seccessionists say "slavery is bad, so we are leaving the union." The break up of the union would have to be couched in terms of a refounding of America.

It would go something like this

"When the founding fathers gave birth to this American republic, they intended the succeeding generations of Americans to work together to form a "more perfect union." We have tried that, our efforts have been blocked by an autocratic slaveocracy that cares more about profits, and is insistent on keeping America "half slave and half free." What we are doing today is refounding the American Republic where all citizens are equal, and no man holds another as property. Today on (pick a date), we will declare the rebirth of the American Republic.

There you go, a patriotic speech to justify seccession, with numerous lines stolen out of Lincoln's repitoir.

Wishing you well, his majesty,
The Scandinavian Emperor
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
I do wonder what a New England-Mid-Atlantic v. South-Midwest would be like.

Battles in Pennsylvania, uprisings in New York, Kansas bleeding anew, "Hold the Hudson! Hold Hartford! The Slavocrats shall not triumph!"
 
I do wonder what a New England-Mid-Atlantic v. South-Midwest would be like.

Battles in Pennsylvania, uprisings in New York, Kansas bleeding anew, "Hold the Hudson! Hold Hartford! The Slavocrats shall not triumph!"

It is unlikely the Midwest will side with the South. Most of the sympathy for the South in the ACW was on the southern and less populous regions.
 
Top