Another Alternate TL-191-What if Stonewall Jackson accepted Wade Hampton IIIs coup offer against CSA President Longstreet ?

So all of this talk about wether or not the CSA could be successfully reintegrated with USA post Second Great War has made me wonder when it could have been done with much less bloodshed and actually done successfully ?
It occurs to me that if CSA President Longstreet had been overthrown in a successful coup attempt during the Second Mexican War that perhaps those events could have happened. The broad strokes of how it pans out is that the CSA is still successful in its war with the USA to purchase the northwestern Mexican provinces however as a result of the new leadership from the coup it refuses to honor its agreement with Great Britain and France to manumit its slaves for military assistance which leads to the end of the alliance between the two European powers and the CSA just as the USA moves into an alliance with Germany . Circa 1890s-1900s an aggressive party now in power in the CSA (not the Whigs-Freedom Party light) attempts to set things completely right namely by restoring land to the CSA that the USA has stolen-namely Arizona/New Mexico.Missouri.West Virginia,Maryland and Washington DC.What does the alternate South and North look like politically and socially in this new tl ? How does this early 3rd war between the USA and the CSA pan out ?
 
Last edited:
I guess the most likely scenario is a later manumission but nevertheless a manumission.
Longstreet is overthrown and replaced by his VP Lucius Q.C. Lamar, who was against slaves’ manumission. In 1885 Hampton is elected President but shortly after he faces humiliation during the “Nicaragua Canal Crisis”: US President Mahan sends US Navy to stop Confederate attempt to build an interoceanic canal and UK and France refuse to support Richmond due its practice of slavery. After that a more open-minded President is elected (Fitzhug Lee?) and amend the Constitution to make manumission real. The real change in this scenario will be the precedent set where a Confederate Army can coup a President if it thinks he is going against national interests. Maybe a coup could occur after the 1929 Crash to save the nation, either led by Featherstone or by an other group of officers. In this second case Confederacy will be more Imperial Germany-Marshall Hindenburg then Adolf Hitler.
An other possibility is that Confederacy refuses or fails to amend slavery even after Nicaragua, not wanting foreigners to dictate its laws. In this case I can see Entente give up America’s: Republican France has no sympathies for Mexican Empire and Great Britain prefers strike a deal with Washington to make Canada safe and concentrate its attention against Germany. In this scenario the American Theatre will be a separate conflict from the WWI: without the Northern Front and with only Mexico as Confederate ally, United States will destroy Confederacy decidedly just while slaves rise in revolt. By 1920 the Confederacy will be no more.
The last scenario is the most similar to OTL: Confederacy doesn’t give up slavery so it doesn’t align itself with Entente. As consequence US don’t ally with Germany to counterbalance Great Britain and France. Then German efforts in the Pacific area (Samoa Crisis, overtures to Hawaii, maybe even support to Habsburg Mexico) led to a colder relationship between Washington and Berlin.
During the WWI submarine warfare and the Zimmerman Telegram (directed to Richmond) led to US’s declaration of war against Germany and Confederacy. Their defeat will led to a Richmond-Berlin Axis during WWII but at least Featherstone will not have his bomb.
 
Their defeat will led to a Richmond-Berlin Axis during WWII but at least Featherstone will not have his bomb.
Since their Entente ally the UK helped them get the superbomb in the regular timeline doesnt this increase or not change the likelihood they get the superbobmb ? Featherston would still want it badly.
 
Since their Entente ally the UK helped them get the superbomb in the regular timeline doesnt this increase or not change the likelihood they get the superbobmb ? Featherston would still want it badly.
Yeah, but Nazis were not so good in this field, so maybe he couldn’t get one done for when Uncle Sam will start nuke Payton to surrender.
 
The CSA is significantly weaker and more unstable, more like what the Confederacy would realistically look like rather than Turtledove's fanciful major power.

They get chewed up and digested by the US in *ww1 and are relegated to the ash heap of history.
 
So interesting replies .I think the farther away you get from the War of Secession you get the harder it is to put the two back together.Once the USA view of the CSA changes from rebellious relative to hated enemy neighbor and the CSAs view of the USA from errant relative to hated enemy neighbor its hard to see the fracture being successfully mended with more history and time passing between the two.
 
The CSA winning the Second Mexican War is a minor miracle, them surviving the First Great War is simply absurd. That said, reintegration is probably a dead letter by the 1910s, given how two whole generations have grown up in the Confederacy. Even in the 1880s, a set of Southern puppets might be more likely than full integration into the Union.
 
The CSA winning the Second Mexican War is a minor miracle, them surviving the First Great War is simply absurd. That said, reintegration is probably a dead letter by the 1910s, given how two whole generations have grown up in the Confederacy. Even in the 1880s, a set of Southern puppets might be more likely than full integration into the Union.
They did it with the help of the Anglo /French ,their own decision to limit it to a defensive war and fairly incompetent and unprepared American leadership.Without all 3 of those there is a really good chance it would have failed. I agree with what you say about the 1910s and 2 generations had grown up in the Confederacy.But there were also 2 American generations who grew up without the South and that plays a big role with there being a lot of mutual unwillingness to see reunification and certainly not to fight and die for it.
 
They did it with the help of the Anglo /French ,their own decision to limit it to a defensive war and fairly incompetent and unprepared American leadership.Without all 3 of those there is a really good chance it would have failed. I agree with what you say about the 1910s and 2 generations had grown up in the Confederacy.But there were also 2 American generations who grew up without the South and that plays a big role with there being a lot of mutual unwillingness to see reunification and certainly not to fight and die for it.
The Union wouldn't want the South back, but they would definitely want to make sure it could never be a threat again. I wonder how many puppets might be carved out of the defeated Confederacy, though. Texas could be spun off on its own, maybe Florida. Possibly a country for survivors of the Population Reduction?
 
The Union wouldn't want the South back, but they would definitely want to make sure it could never be a threat again. I wonder how many puppets might be carved out of the defeated Confederacy, though. Texas could be spun off on its own, maybe Florida. Possibly a country for survivors of the Population Reduction?
Also possibly Cuba, Chihuahua and Sonora,Sequoyah even Louisiana.I use to think a separate black state in the South for the survivors of the Population Reduction would be a good idea but I have come to think Utah or someplace in Canada would be a better choice for that if it happened. Putting it in the South just asks for trouble especially if most if not all white Confederates werent removed from the area.Even if they were it would just be a rallying cry for the white Confederates to make trouble elsewhere in the South. Im loathe to have the white Confederates think they were successful at eliminating blacks from the South.The harsh reality is that they largely were successful at that odious goal.It isnt worth risking the lives of the surviving blacks not to mention American troops who would be in danger the whole time they were there. The very fact that the black people were still alive means that their goal wasnt totally met and it doesnt matter that they arent in the South any longer.More importantly the other Confederate goal of being a strong unified country has definitely not been met and as a cherry on top such people who have no desire to be Americans dont come back into the USA and possibly change its body politic and culture for the worse.Its the best outcome for everyone involved really.
 
Last edited:
Also possibly Cuba, Chihuahua and Sonora,Sequoyah even Louisiana.I use to think a separate black state in the South for the survivors of the Population Reduction would be a good idea but I have come to think Utah or someplace in Canada would be a better choice for that if it happened. Putting it in the South just asks for trouble especially if most if not all white Confederates werent removed from the area.Even if they were it would just be a rallying cry for the white Confederates to make trouble elsewhere in the South. Im loathe to have the white Confederates think they were successful at eliminating blacks from the South.The harsh reality is that they largely were successful at that odious goal.It isnt worth risking the lives of the surviving blacks not to mention American troops who would be in danger the whole time they were there. The very fact that the black people were still alive means that their goal wasnt totally met and it doesnt matter that they arent in the South any longer.More importantly the other Confederate goal of being a strong unified country has definitely not been met and as a cherry on top such people who have no desire to be Americans dont come back into the USA and possibly change its body politic and culture for the worse.Its the best outcome for everyone involved really.
I could see Sequoyah being split off. I feel like Sonora and Chihuahua would either be annexed or returned to Mexico, since they would have a hard time sustaining themselves. On that topic, the Union might buy Baja California, if only so the border wouldn't be as ugly.

Maybe Black Southerners could be encouraged to move to Liberia? Utah would probably be a good choice too, since the Mormons are still a problem.
 
The CSA becomes an unstable basket case in which both the UK and France put their heads in their hands at why they thought it was a good idea to even do business with the South.

Even if London and Paris don't start to cut ties with Richmond day by day and even the Union still allied with Germany, Great War 1 will see the Confederates get rolled by the Union.
 
I could see Sequoyah being split off. I feel like Sonora and Chihuahua would either be annexed or returned to Mexico, since they would have a hard time sustaining themselves. On that topic, the Union might buy Baja California, if only so the border wouldn't be as ugly.

Maybe Black Southerners could be encouraged to move to Liberia? Utah would probably be a good choice too, since the Mormons are still a problem.
Liberia would be a stretch as would Haiti or even Cuba in a way.There are too much like foreign countries other than being majority black.Most southern blacks as hard as it is to believe in a way are thoroughly Confederate-the type of Confederate that could feel at home in Utah or elsewhere in the US or Canada but no longer in the South/CSA.
The CSA becomes an unstable basket case in which both the UK and France put their heads in their hands at why they thought it was a good idea to even do business with the South.

Even if London and Paris don't start to cut ties with Richmond day by day and even the Union still allied with Germany, Great War 1 will see the Confederates get rolled by the Union.
Part of the reason the CSA was as industrialized as it was by the Great War is because it had long since manumitted the slaves.It the Great War rolls around and it still has slaves or had only recently manumitted them-well that would be a disaster larger than the Red Rebellion waiting to happen for the CSA. I agree the CSA loses badly and perhaps that would allow for a possible complete reunification BUT depending on how long the 2 were separated it could still be a bumpy affair...
 
Liberia would be a stretch as would Haiti or even Cuba in a way.There are too much like foreign countries other than being majority black.Most southern blacks as hard as it is to believe in a way are thoroughly Confederate-the type of Confederate that could feel at home in Utah or elsewhere in the US or Canada but no longer in the South/CSA.
Part of the reason the CSA was as industrialized as it was by the Great War is because it had long since manumitted the slaves.It the Great War rolls around and it still has slaves or had only recently manumitted them-well that would be a disaster larger than the Red Rebellion waiting to happen for the CSA. I agree the CSA loses badly and perhaps that would allow for a possible complete reunification BUT depending on how long the 2 were separated it could still be a bumpy affair...

It was ultimately the Population Reduction that horrdied the North, and the South's general, callous reaction to it (IE: 'It should have killed more blacks'.) that really push the Union to finished off the CSA once and for all.

An lack of a Population Reduction, or even a far more scale down version of it may see the Union annex the Upper South, break Texas off, and leaves what's left as a husk of the former Confederacy as a puppet state.
 
Top