Autumn in America: A TL-191 Continuation

I agree.

For one thing, Gabriel Semmes was able to get a bill passed giving black veterans full citizenship - it was before the Red Rebellion, but it does indicate that there are at least a few CSA members who can accept the idea of giving black people weapons or the vote.

For another, the Confederate Socialist Party, and to a lesser extent the Radical Liberal Party, supported racial equality. A lot of them ended up imprisoned in concentration camps.
There would be a certain number of white Confederates like the ones you describe and some others who would actively work with the Americans to reform the Confederacy or even integrate it into the USA.The sad reality though is that their numbers would be pretty light on the ground-maybe even less of them than the number of surviving blacks or at least not many more. A big part of the reason for this is that many such people likely ran afoul of the Freedomites themselves and are no longer in the land of the living.
 
Last edited:
There would be a certain number of white Confederates like the ones you describe and some others who would actively work with the Americans to reform the Confederacy or even integrate it into the USA.The sad reality though is that their numbers would be pretty light on the ground-maybe even less of them than the number of survivng blacks or at least not many more.
I think a bigger problem is that the US is rounding up hostages and murdering them as part of its occupation. That's going to alienate a lot of people who might be otherwise willing to consider cooperating with the US.
 
I think a bigger problem is that the US is rounding up hostages and murdering them as part of its occupation. That's going to alienate a lot of people who might be otherwise willing to consider cooperating with the US.
Very true but that has become ingrained standard procedure and if Im not mistaken practiced by the Germans and most of the great powers in the world.It sets up a real vicious cycle where every time there is an act of violence or resistance by the Confederates the USA responds in that kind and on and on and on.Its a big part of the reason why a harsh reintegration is as likely to fail as a lenient one would be,
 
Very true but that has become ingrained standard procedure and if Im not mistaken practiced by the Germans and most of the great powers in the world.It sets up a real vicious cycle where every time there is an act of violence or resistance by the Confederates the USA responds in that kind and on and on and on.Big part of the reason why a harsh reintegration is as likely to fail as a lenient one would be,
Yeah, it basically kills any incentive to cooperate with the US beyond what's absolutely necessary. Why should you help them when they have murdered, or could murder, your friends and family?

IMO if the US is set on using collective punishment as a weapon, it should do things like fines or taxes.
 
Yeah, it basically kills any incentive to cooperate with the US beyond what's absolutely necessary. Why should you help them when they have murdered, or could murder, your friends and family?

IMO if the US is set on using collective punishment as a weapon, it should do things like fines or taxes.
Killing hostages as collective punishment is one way that HT lets us know these are different people in a different world. I think most of us did a double take the first time we read about that and said wait a minute say what? We can hope they would come to realize how self defeating and damaging it is but there is just as good and maybe a better chance they never would since its just how it has always been done..
 
We can hope they would come to realize how self defeating and damaging it is but there is just as good and maybe a better chance they never would since its just how it has always been done..
I think at some point somebody's going to suggest, at the very least, offering exemptions to collaborators and their families. And it'd be much easier to pursue a 'divide and conquer strategy' if you don't treat the former CSA as a monolithic bloc that should be punished as a whole every time an individual misbehaves.

Plus the people in charge of PR and propaganda are probably going to keep complaining about how it makes their jobs impossible.
 
Last edited:
I think a bigger problem is that the US is rounding up hostages and murdering them as part of its occupation. That's going to alienate a lot of people who might be otherwise willing to consider cooperating with the US.

Honestly till WWII (included) it was more or less the de facto answer of any army to insurgent and perfectly on line with international agreement (if you follow the procedure)
 
The TL-191 US is willing to commit ethnic cleansing with a white population if its small enough to move without causing a massive body count and there is a decent place to move them to but if it involves genocide or a relocation to an area that is unsuitable to human existence and kills off lots of people as a consequence its not willing to do that.

I am begging people to read a book on the Indian Wars and what the reservations were actually like. "Decent place to live" my ass.

For one thing, Gabriel Semmes was able to get a bill passed giving black veterans full citizenship - it was before the Red Rebellion, but it does indicate that there are at least a few CSA members who can accept the idea of giving black people weapons or the vote.

It seems to have been after the Red Rebellion, per the summary of Walk in Hell? https://turtledove.fandom.com/wiki/Walk_in_Hell


Yeah, it basically kills any incentive to cooperate with the US beyond what's absolutely necessary. Why should you help them when they have murdered, or could murder, your friends and family?

One thing this thread is showing is a lot of people do not actually know what it was like to live in occupied countries. The success (or lack thereof) of the resistance movements in Western Europe are good examples.
 
One thing this thread is showing is a lot of people do not actually know what it was like to live in occupied countries. The success (or lack thereof) of the resistance movements in Western Europe are good examples.
I haven't said that they'd succeed in overthrowing the US. Just that they have no real incentive to cooperate with the US more than they can avoid, since keeping their heads down and doing what they're told is no guarantee that they or their families won't be rounded up and shot.
 
I haven't said that they'd succeed in overthrowing the US. Just that they have no real incentive to cooperate with the US more than they can avoid, since keeping their heads down and doing what they're told is no guarantee that they or their families won't be rounded up and shot.

And that, my dear fellow, is why I think you should read something about how the Nazis ran occupied Europe. Like this isn't some abstract hypothetical.
 
And that, my dear fellow, is why I think you should read something about how the Nazis ran occupied Europe. Like this isn't some abstract hypothetical.
I'm not sure what your point is. It's not like the Lidice Massacre led to the Czechs throwing in the towel.

My view is that the hostage taking policy is going to result in a massive version of the Troubles: sure, the British weren't driven out of Northern Ireland, but they gave the British government a massive headache, and made life in Northern Ireland unbearable for everyone.
 
I'm not sure what your point is. It's not like the Lidice Massacre led to the Czechs throwing in the towel.

My view is that the hostage taking policy is going to result in a massive version of the Troubles: sure, the British weren't driven out of Northern Ireland, but they gave the British government a massive headache, and made life in Northern Ireland unbearable for everyone.

To give one example, French newspapers blamed the resistance for making the Germans take hostages through their brutal actions.

One might ask why Britain faced the Troubles but the Soviets, who used far more brutal methods to run Eastern Europe, did not. Or why China had no issues with Tibet.
 
I am begging people to read a book on the Indian Wars and what the reservations were actually like. "Decent place to live" my ass.
Except the decent place was a reference to the Mormoms being moved to the Sandwich Islands which was probably some of the best land the USA had.It was suggested by another member who agrees with you that the TL191 USA might move white Confederates to nasty swamps and useless land in the South .So if the USA was really interested in a harsh and punitive form of ethnic cleansing for whites as it did with Native Americans why not also move all Mormons to the shores of the Great Salt Lake and into the Wasatch Mountains and all Canadians onto the Canadian Arctic tundra ?
 
Last edited:
So if the USA was really interested in a harsh and punitive form of ethnic cleansing for whites as it did with Native Americans why not also move all Mormons to the shores of the Great Salt Lake and into the Wasatch Mountains and all Canadians onto the Canadian Arctic tundra ?
Mainly because of TD making them Al-Qaeda knock-offs and “people-bombing” by the numbers. Honestly I have issues with how the Mormons practice in real life, but TD wanting to find another parallel to Japanese kamikazes in 191 by making the Mormons (of all people) as their replacement is retroactively distasteful, and that it is extremely ludicrous that actual Mormons would think becoming a suicide bomber is “Christianly”.

Anyway in the books the Union saw exiling the Mormons to the Sandwich as the only option to get rid of them. It was later discuss by some Union characters about the repercussions of dealing with the occupied Johnny Rebs and fearing they will do like the Mormons do.
 
Last edited:
Anyway in the books the Union saw exiling the Mormons to the Sandwich as the only option to get rid of them.
Well why so?Surely there were other options to get rid of them available.We are being told by some that the TL191 US was willing to engage in harsh ethnic cleansing up to and including genocide.Why wouldnt those be done since they would clearly be cheaper and easier to accomplish ?
 
Last edited:
Well why so?Surely there were other options to get rid of them available.We are being told by some that the TL191 US was willing to engage in harsh ethnic cleansing up to and including genocide.Why wouldnt those be done since they would clearly be cheaper and easier to accomplish ?
I guess they would have until Featherstone’s crimes were made public. The Union feared of the massive PR repercussions if they did follow what the Nazi red necks did.

I believe HT would have made the Union more authoritarian (under the very puritanical Christian Presbyterian neat-freak Gordon McSweeney) and got away with “pay unto evil with evil” mentality in what he originally planned before his publisher told him to drop that because it would not make good sales to have readers who will drop their books of reading about America being Nazi-like for being “extremely offensive”. Though HT later admitted that he never plan to have the US go fascist.
 
Last edited:
I guess they would have until Featherstone’s crimes were made public. The Union feared of the massive PR repercussions if they did follow what the Nazi red necks did.

I believe HT would have made the Union more authoritarian (under the very puritanical Christian Presbyterian neat-freak Gordon McSweeney) in what he originally planned before his publisher told him to drop that because it would not make good sales to have readers who will drop their books of reading about America being Nazi-like “extremely offensive”.
Isnt it possible he wanted to make the CSA Nazi like and perhaps show the USA getting dangerously close as well until it was thankfully turned away from it by the CSA actions ? Also its been stated many times that the US couldnt care less about worldwide pr because presumably the Germans and just about everyone else are capable of such actions in TL191.Thats probably far from true but its what they say.Either way the USA was clearly not like the CSA-there were certain steps it wasnt willing to take and didnt take.
 
regarding the TL 191 US ending up in a similar situation to Russia historically there needs to be a NATO equivalent in South America that is entirely hostile to the US they keeps advancing up to its borders and reacts by intervening in the former confederacy to keep it from joining it
 
regarding the TL 191 US ending up in a similar situation to Russia historically there needs to be a NATO equivalent in South America that is entirely hostile to the US they keeps advancing up to its borders and reacts by intervening in the former confederacy to keep it from joining it
The closest equivalent to NATO here is the Reichsbund, but the strategic situation is still very different between TTL and OTL. While the WARPAC of OTL was restricted to Eurasia, both the Reichsbund and the PHILPAC exert much more significant influence over several continents, though only the PHILPAC has member states outside of its home continent.
 
Top