Can the ACW be delayed?
- Thread starter Tocomocho
- Start date
Like what the previous post says, a later war ends faster with less bloodshed. The further you can push thing, the faster slavery will die of "natural," somewhat organic, causes. Fire-eaters will see their human stock in trade priced out of the market. The earlier the war, the weaker the White House will be in prosecuting it. If we're looking at a war from 1871 as the start date, it'll be wrapped up by 1873 most likely. No foreign intervention, and fewer states will bother seceding anyway.
Douglas attacked Buchanan for the Lecompton thing in Kansas, but he hotly disputed Lincoln on the slavery issue. He was one of the architects of popular sovereignty, which is neither for nor against slavery per se.
Switch seven or more votes in 1854 and defeat the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
Even the attempt to do it will case a row, but less than OTL, and with the Know-Nothings emerging as the main alternative to the Dems. But they'll be weaker than the Republicans, so the Dems probably stay in power a decade or two longer, witht he war correspondingly postponed
Even the attempt to do it will case a row, but less than OTL, and with the Know-Nothings emerging as the main alternative to the Dems. But they'll be weaker than the Republicans, so the Dems probably stay in power a decade or two longer, witht he war correspondingly postponed
Yeah, but he was still banking on most people going anti-slavery.
Even if Douglas got every vote that went to himself, Bell and Breckinridge; that's not enough to get him elected in 1860. Douglas had repudiated Popular Sovreignty, which the slaveholding states considered a betrayal. A Democratic party united around Douglas is a party too united to consider secession.
Could the North and West secede instead of the South?
A wacky thought but any attempts to delay the ACW seem to require "appeasing" the southern slave states. Given them a veto over admission of new states as Free or Slave, allowing escaped slaves to be returned and so on.
Is there some point at which the northern and western states decide they'd rather not be a union with the south? And form a New USA, capital at New York or Chicago.
At that point the south is left to its own devices, as I can't see it trying to conquer the Northern and western states. A cold peace along the border (to stop northern abolitionists helping slaves escape or support slave unrest) but with some trade. The CSA gets isolated, as can't compete with the USA for taking over the West.
Probably pretty much ASB but I'm to some extent wondering why the North didn't simply say "B****r off then" to the South in 1861 anyway. If secession was restricted to first wave, and the second not "inspired" by the attempts to coerce the Carolina's etc, the new CSA would probably have had a miserable life for a few decades until the states sought re admission to the Union
Or was maintaining the Union seen as a key priority for others than Lincoln? Was it in the "DNA" of the political class in the North?
A wacky thought but any attempts to delay the ACW seem to require "appeasing" the southern slave states. Given them a veto over admission of new states as Free or Slave, allowing escaped slaves to be returned and so on.
Is there some point at which the northern and western states decide they'd rather not be a union with the south? And form a New USA, capital at New York or Chicago.
At that point the south is left to its own devices, as I can't see it trying to conquer the Northern and western states. A cold peace along the border (to stop northern abolitionists helping slaves escape or support slave unrest) but with some trade. The CSA gets isolated, as can't compete with the USA for taking over the West.
Probably pretty much ASB but I'm to some extent wondering why the North didn't simply say "B****r off then" to the South in 1861 anyway. If secession was restricted to first wave, and the second not "inspired" by the attempts to coerce the Carolina's etc, the new CSA would probably have had a miserable life for a few decades until the states sought re admission to the Union
Or was maintaining the Union seen as a key priority for others than Lincoln? Was it in the "DNA" of the political class in the North?
A more decisive President than Buchanan who was not going to allow southern hooligans seize federal property would likely have discouraged the fire eaters as well.
There was a lot of fortuitous events that allowed the fire eaters to convince the entire Deep South to secede. If a few things had gone differently, any secession might have been limited to South Carolina, or even that South Carolina did not secede at all. Calhoun threatened that in 1832, and Andrew Jackson made it very clear that he was prepared to invade the state and hang Calhoun and anyone else. That put an end to any such talk because people knew you shouldn't mess with Andrew Jackson. A more decisive President from 1856-1860 could have stopped secession before it could build on early successes to convince everyone is was feasible.
There was a lot of fortuitous events that allowed the fire eaters to convince the entire Deep South to secede. If a few things had gone differently, any secession might have been limited to South Carolina, or even that South Carolina did not secede at all. Calhoun threatened that in 1832, and Andrew Jackson made it very clear that he was prepared to invade the state and hang Calhoun and anyone else. That put an end to any such talk because people knew you shouldn't mess with Andrew Jackson. A more decisive President from 1856-1860 could have stopped secession before it could build on early successes to convince everyone is was feasible.