Confederate States of America Civil War

I think it would be fascinating if a Confederate Civil war broke out due to irredentism. Say, for example, that Western Texas falls into Union hands and remains with the US post bellum. The Texan government, feeling sold out by Richmond,wanting its land back and unable to get Confederal support for a renewed war effort, allows militia groups to attack Union forces in West Texas.

Those milita groups are dealt with harshly, but rather than face war with the US at a time when the Confederacy doesn't feel itself strong enough, Richmond moves in to restore order in Texas, and the Texans start shooting back.

I don't find this scenario particularly likely, tbh, but it would be interesting.
 
There were several areas in the states that seceded that were minimally involved with slavery and were pro-Union. One area, now West Virginia, was able to break free due to Union military superiority in the area. Eastern Tennessee, Western North Carolina, and North Alabama were all areas of strong pro-Union sentiment, however until close to the end of the war there was never enough Union military presence in these areas to let them totally break free like West Virginia.

While there was a lot of pro-Union sentiment in northern parts of the Confederacy, I'd expect these areas to be regained by the Union before the end of the war or brutally suppressed by the Confederate government after the war. The most likely attempts at secession from the Confederacy are probably:

* Texas (or perhaps all of the TransMississippi), especially if the Union controls the Mississippi River at the end of the war, splitting the Confederacy in two.

* South Carolina if the more radical Fire Eaters gain power and object to "insults" to slavery, like the Confederacy's ban on the international slave trade.

* The Deep South of Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida if it looks likely that the majority of Confederate states will end slavery. I don't see this happening before the 1920s and only if the Deep South cant expel the offending free states first.

* If the Confederacy tries to invade Cuba, Spain seizes portions of Florida and sets up a puppet government that declares its secession from the Confederacy.
 
* If the Confederacy tries to invade Cuba, Spain seizes portions of Florida and sets up a puppet government that declares its secession from the Confederacy.

Them and what army/navy? There's a huge difference between defeating a Confederate invasion (very plausible) and invading mainland North America and enforcing a puppet regime on part of the CSA. Who's going to support the puppet state in Florida anyway? Poor whites? Blacks? Spain would never support either group to make their own state (especially not poor whites since it would undermine Spain's position at home), and the poor whites probably have their own political party and wouldn't support something like that anyway.

And the kicker--Spain is Catholic, attempting to impose their will on a state which OTL elected this wonderful example of religious, racial, and ethnic tolerance.
 
Just because slavery was the main cause of secession doesn't mean that the intellectual framework developed for justifying it doesn't hold power. With that framework in place, accepted as founding myth by the CSA, any grievance against Richmond can use the same existing framework. And the central government can't argue against the framework as they have already accepted state sovereignty.

Personally I can see a lot of tension arising between the cotton states paying a lot more money to the central treasury than the tobacco states. I can see the non-plantation states suffering badly under international boycott for an industry they don't need. I can see Richmond having rampant corruption and states a long way from Richmond resenting it as the capital. Etc etc.
 

Japhy

Banned
Like most events in history, there is not a single cause for the US Civil War. Slavery was a major cause, and much of "states rights" was about the right to own slaves. However going back to the Nullification Crisis thirty years before when South Carolina asserted the right to nullify federal legislation (a tariff) it did not like, the boundary between state and federal power was a bigger issue in the states that became the CSA than elsewhere. Furthermore during its brief existence the CSA had endless difficulties in state versus federal power issues, states restricting supplies to only their troops, difficulties in trying to extend railroads or rationalize gauges, and much more. It is true that the Confederate government became more and more centralized during the war, out of necessity, however these policies were only accepted as temporary wartime measures and not a permanent set of policies.
Nope.

Nullification was always framed as "If the government has the right to do X they can be strong enough to do Y."

Y always being "interfere with Slavery."
 

Greenville

Banned
I wonder if a surviving Confederacy would get embroiled into war with Mexico over its borders. They are ill prepared to sustain such a conflict and breaks up in the aftermath.
 
The Confederacy had a number of problems that could lead to it having a civil war of its own

1) Poor Whites vs Planters
2) South Carolina being South Carolina! :)
3) Texas decides to go its own way, particularly if the CSA doesn't have control over the Mississippi River.
4) Arguments over State's Rights by governor who for some reason took it seriously
5) States wanting to avoid paying the huge debt after the war
6) The fall into anarchy by one or more states

I don't think it is particularly likely but it is certainly possible.
 
Standard Oil offers Texas a better deal than they can get with the Confedracy. Standard Oil helps fund the Second War for Texas Independence and eventual return to the Union.
 
I wonder if a surviving Confederacy would get embroiled into war with Mexico over its borders. They are ill prepared to sustain such a conflict and breaks up in the aftermath.

It would range from pretty evenly matched to a curbstomp if the Confederacy industrialises to a decent degree. Not that the United States would like the CSA aggressively annexing territory.

If Mexico invades then the CSA will without a doubt win, since they're on the defensive, but wouldn't be allowed to do much besides gain an economic indemnity from the Mexicans.

The Confederacy had a number of problems that could lead to it having a civil war of its own

1) Poor Whites vs Planters
2) South Carolina being South Carolina! :)
3) Texas decides to go its own way, particularly if the CSA doesn't have control over the Mississippi River.
4) Arguments over State's Rights by governor who for some reason took it seriously
5) States wanting to avoid paying the huge debt after the war
6) The fall into anarchy by one or more states

I don't think it is particularly likely but it is certainly possible.

IMO number one is the most likely. That or a successful military coup by officers claiming to represent poor whites leads to an actual civil war.
 
Them and what army/navy? There's a huge difference between defeating a Confederate invasion (very plausible) and invading mainland North America and enforcing a puppet regime on part of the CSA. Who's going to support the puppet state in Florida anyway? Poor whites? Blacks? Spain would never support either group to make their own state (especially not poor whites since it would undermine Spain's position at home), and the poor whites probably have their own political party and wouldn't support something like that anyway.

And the kicker--Spain is Catholic, attempting to impose their will on a state which OTL elected this wonderful example of religious, racial, and ethnic tolerance.

I forgot to state my list was in order of probability. Spain attempting to seize parts of Spain is a low probability, but not impossible.

The phrase "and what navy" would apply to the Confederacy, not Spain. Period Florida had a smaller population than Rhode Island and almost half of the population were slaves.. Spain had a historical claim to the territory and if they offered Florida slaves their freedom in return for military service, they'd probably get some support.
 
Standard Oil offers Texas a better deal than they can get with the Confedracy. Standard Oil helps fund the Second War for Texas Independence and eventual return to the Union.

Why? If Texas gets up in arms over leaving the better deal they have with the CSA, why do they go and join the Union, where states have even less power? Texas going its own way is one thing, but being subservient to Washington is way worse than being second to Richmond.
 
I forgot to state my list was in order of probability. Spain attempting to seize parts of Spain is a low probability, but not impossible.

The phrase "and what navy" would apply to the Confederacy, not Spain. Period Florida had a smaller population than Rhode Island and almost half of the population were slaves.. Spain had a historical claim to the territory and if they offered Florida slaves their freedom in return for military service, they'd probably get some support.

Sparking a slave uprising would definitely be a great way to get the Confederacy pissed off at you and unify whites behind the Confederacy.

But I find it implausible that the CSA couldn't build a navy equal to late 19th century Spain. Look at Brazil's navy in the first decade of the 20th century. Plus the CSA would almost certainly be building a navy to prevent the USA from mass blockading them again, which would be quite useful against naval invasions and their associated logistical issues.
 
Why? If Texas gets up in arms over leaving the better deal they have with the CSA, why do they go and join the Union, where states have even less power? Texas going its own way is one thing, but being subservient to Washington is way worse than being second to Richmond.
Money talks.
 
Sparking a slave uprising would definitely be a great way to get the Confederacy pissed off at you and unify whites behind the Confederacy.

But I find it implausible that the CSA couldn't build a navy equal to late 19th century Spain. Look at Brazil's navy in the first decade of the 20th century. Plus the CSA would almost certainly be building a navy to prevent the USA from mass blockading them again, which would be quite useful against naval invasions and their associated logistical issues.

With what money? Late 19th century Spain is going to be richer than the CSA.
 
Coal, Alabama and Virginia iron and steel, cotton and tobacco (when prices are high), oil. There's no way the CSA can't equal Brazil.

Doubtful, in the 1890s the CSA will still be digging out of the rubble, so to speak. It took the South about 20 years after the ACW to get back to where it was in 1860, how long will it take without the rest of the US helping and having to pay for a large army? 30? 40? 50?
 
Coal, Alabama and Virginia iron and steel, cotton and tobacco (when prices are high), oil. There's no way the CSA can't equal Brazil.

In 1860, the states that formed the Confederacy mined 15% of bituminous coal in the US and none of the anthracite coal or iron. They manufactured 5% of pig iron and none of the steel. They grew just over half of the tobacco. Short term, cotton is their greatest source of income; it will take investment to develop their coal and iron.
 
Top