As someone from North Carolina, one of our defining moments in history was the split between the Carolinas. We spent a a lot of time in school discussing colonial NC history, especially on the split. NC and SC get along fine as neighbors but North Carolina has far far more in common politically, economically, and even climatically with Virginia than it does South Carolina. NC is much more a mid-Atlantic state than it is a Southern state and frankly rather join Virginia before it rejoined South Carolina.
AHC/WI: North & South Carolina recombine
- Thread starter VioletRiver
- Start date
As someone from North Carolina, one of our defining moments in history was the split between the Carolinas. We spent a a lot of time in school discussing colonial NC history, especially on the split. NC and SC get along fine as neighbors but North Carolina has far far more in common politically, economically, and even climatically with Virginia than it does South Carolina. NC is much more a mid-Atlantic state than it is a Southern state and frankly rather join Virginia before it rejoined South Carolina.
Rather do agree overall.
So what exactly was the legal justification used to make West Virginia independent?
I suppose "District" could imply a federal military headquarters but still allow for Virginia to have a sovereign state government. In fact, many of the differences in the map could be Department of Defense jurisdictions, though one has to wonder why they'd bother finagling those labels in like that.
In fact, I personally have to take issue with the map I posted to begin with, because in the show we also see a passing reference to a West Virginia border, though some things like Midland and North Texas truly are canon as they're seen more than once. In regards to WV, clearly continuity is not this show's forte.
Also, I feel it's important to note that the alt-US flag in the show has 48 stars, so if you count the states on the map and add Alaska and Hawaii, that's 48. Of course, this brings into question whether Virginia, Louisiana, and Nevada for example are still states (AK & HI almost certainly are despite their absence from the map), but one might also wonder about Puerto Rico, Guam, or the US Virgin Islands.
I'm from Tennessee, by the way. Having been to North Carolina on several occasions, I have to say it's probably the most beautiful state I've ever visited.
Why thank you. I'd actually say the same about Tennessee. Although it might just be that the Blue Ridge is pretty no matter what state you're in.
The way I understand it, the convention that met in Wheeling in 1861 to cause the northwestern Virginian counties to secede from Virginia proclaimed itself the rightful government of the entire state of Virginia -- as the government in Richmond was in open insurrection -- and proceeded to elect an entire government for the state, at which point the "lawful" government of Virginia acceded to the secession of the northwestern counties into their own new state.
Except it wouldn't explain why big chunks of California and Michigan aren't on the map. And if the map showed only that world's US, it wouldn't explain why there's a state called Independent Nevada.
I read a few years ago that the second season of Fringe had a map of the US from the other timeline that showed different borders. Now that I actually see it, I'm pretty disappointed. This map is what the characters on Parks and Recreation would call a camel, because "A camel is a horse that was designed by a committee". My guess is that ten people in Fringe's props department were assigned to make a map, so they each wrote down one idea for a change without any discussion, and then they drew the map. Next, they splashed a bunch of red and blue blotches on there for color and moved onto the next prop.
So basically,the federal government can just 'elect' a group of people it claimed to be representative of the Carolinas and then merge the two together?
At any rate,is there actually any reason why the government would want to merge the Carolinas apart from possibly reduce the number of senators from the Carolinas in order to 'gerrymander' votes?
A legitimate question about a singular Carolina...if it were to exist from the Constitutional era, how would that affect the paired admission of slave states and free states? If it is admitted early on, then the balance would be thrown off by the time we got to the 1790s / early 19th century. There would have inevitably been more free states overall.
By my math it could go something like this:
By my math it could go something like this:
- Delaware - Slave (1)
- Pennsylvania - Free (1)
- New Jersey - Free (2)
- Georgia - Slave (2)
- Connecticut - Free (3)
- Massachusetts - Free (4)
- Maryland - Slave (3)
- Carolina (?) - Slave (4)
- New Hampshire - Free (50
- Virginia - Slave (5)
- New York - Free (6)
- Rhode Island - Free (7)
- Vermont - Free (8)
- Kentucky - Slave (6)
- Tennessee - Slave (7)
- Ohio - Free (9)...
Well, if we handwave how they unite and just make it fiat (the two are never split for some very odd reason, etc), then the presence of the Carolinas will, of course, upset any of the balance that comes along later, if the balance even arises. Once New York and New Jersey ban it (they were initially slave states, so you're going to have to count it in their column), we're going to have the balance swing to the Free States early.
The best immediate option might be to create another slave state. The best answer might be in Southern Illinois (Jefferson's famous Polypotamia) which shares some of those cultural relations to the south, akin to Missouri, while also being possibly open to the practice. That would restore the balance in the future while not expanding outside of the US's initial borders.
That might alter Illinois's northern border, though, and will likely cause further changes of development of the old Northwest, but it would be your best solution to restore the balance.
-
One thing I was going to consider: say we have a Carolina Union and an indepdendent state of Georgia not confirm the new Constitution and stay independent for a couple of decades. While slavery would likely persist in the region, how would it be affected in the North? The only major slave state would be Virginia (later Kentucky) so the practice would be very difficult to continue.
I had imagined in my mind that the Carolina's/Georgia continue along indepdent for a few decades, but tied at the hip to the US. The US proper manages to secure Louisiana at roughly the same time frame, blocking off the two smaller states from Western expansion, while the US also eventually accepts West Florida into the Union as well. Follow up with a similar Adams-Otis Treaty,, and the US has completely encircled the states.
Slavery itself might wither on the vine in the US, maybe not being officially outlawed, but with nobody supporting it, it becomes de jure forbidden in most states while in many parts of the slave states it falls further and further out of favor. The protective tariffs favored by the North make it more unprofitable as well.
And, in the end, while the Carolinas and Georgia would make a majority of their money with trade overseas (esp Britain), the two countries fall on hard times in a recession, or a glut of the overseas market, etc. The citizens have always felt themselves to be Americans of a different stripe and many of the statesmen that opposed the Constitution then have fallen away, looking at a newer, pragmatic concern. (There's also a big issue in the west, as West Carolina/Yazoo, AtL Tennessee and North Mississippi/Alabama, might vote to leave on their own if the state as a whole doesn't join). So, for an assumption of their debts and a few other concerns, eventually Georgia and, in the end, Carolina join as federal units under some of the same guidelines as Texas would later on.
Just the thought I had in my head. Wanted to outline it.