Confederate Victory: When does the Confederacy become a pariah state?

If they want to like having a labour shortage and like they don't want to alienate Britain If they are to open the trans Atlantic slave trade again. So they instead go for Haiti and like it's nearer and etc
I always assumed that slavery would gradually die out, maybe I was wrong though as it exists today in some countries, but at least in the name they would've gotten rid of it
 
I always assumed that slavery would gradually die out, maybe I was wrong though as it exists today in some countries, but at least in the name they would've gotten rid of it
That's not what I mean. What I mean is invading a sovereign country recognized by France, and other European powers alongside maybe the us recognize them and enslaving all of it's populace.
 
I always assumed that slavery would gradually die out, maybe I was wrong though as it exists today in some countries, but at least in the name they would've gotten rid of it
This is a common idea, but it doesn’t really have any support. The CSA was ideologically built on slavery. It is embedded into everything. It was the basis of their iseas and lifestyle, it was in the words of one Confederate politician “the very idea of the Revolution.”

Setting that aside, it also would represent catastrophic economic disaster for the owner class, as vast sums of their wealth was tied up in slaves, and getting rid of slavery would annihilate that wealth.
 
That's not what I mean. What I mean is invading a sovereign country recognized by France, and other European powers alongside maybe the us recognize them and enslaving all of it's populace.
My understaning of the Haiti situation is that until ww2 it was a North Korea like parah state by virtue of how it came into being - a slave uprising that killed all the slavers, and then some more. Nobody wanted anything to do with it, even the European countries that weren't friendly to France and did not utilize African slaves. And the French only cared about the indemnity they were extorting out of Haiti. If the CSA wants Haiti they can just buy it from the French.
 
My understaning of the Haiti situation is that until ww2 it was a North Korea like parah state by virtue of how it came into being - a slave uprising that killed all the slavers, and then some more. Nobody wanted anything to do with it, even the European countries that weren't friendly to France and did not utilize African slaves. And the French only cared about the indemnity they were extorting out of Haiti. If the CSA wants Haiti they can just buy it from the French.
Technically during the 1860s to the early 1900s they experienced unpresidented growth and development and etc if i read my sources right due to the stability in that time. Also they cant like buy it from france as they recognize the place as independent. Aside from other europena countreis and soon the USA


Aside from that, I read sources that Haiti during that time if i remember correctly or I am right is like the 4th largest producer of coffee during that time. Aside from the what it seems like the rebirth of the Sugar industry. Even becoming a model of growth to Latin America. I think the problem is most of the money went to funding the army which is not contributing to the growth and development of Haiti. Instead if they redirect that to social services, infrastructure, education, economy or other things that would result into growht and development you'll see historians in another tl in present day calling it an economic miracle. Instead also go to the indeminity that would benefit them alot. problem is it went to the army instead

1652535022435.png

See the period of like the debt going downhill then going back up again,

Also there are conflicting reports that Hait alrady paid like its indemnity completely in the 1870s or 80s or the most likely 1940s.
 
It wouldn't. It'd just be seen as an ordinary country.

The "confederacy would have been a third world pariah state" trope is really overdone. It was extremely overdone a decade ago.
 
That's not what I mean. What I mean is invading a sovereign country recognized by France, and other European powers alongside maybe the us recognize them and enslaving all of it's populace.

Well, the Confederacy would be very unlikely to invade Haiti. For starters, the Southern interests in the US Congress and Senate had been key to why the US did not even recognize Haiti as an independent nation until 1862. Secondly, as a nation of freed slaves, it is anathema to what the Confederacy was all about. It was a reason that slaves were not allowed to read and why rebel slaves in the South were, almost without exception, executed and why anyone who seemed to be thinking about rebelling was executed or treated to such casual brutality, and even if you weren't thinking of rebelling you were whipped just to make a point. The idea of trying to absorb that into the Confederacy would definitely not go down well.

This is a common idea, but it doesn’t really have any support. The CSA was ideologically built on slavery. It is embedded into everything. It was the basis of their iseas and lifestyle, it was in the words of one Confederate politician “the very idea of the Revolution.”

Setting that aside, it also would represent catastrophic economic disaster for the owner class, as vast sums of their wealth was tied up in slaves, and getting rid of slavery would annihilate that wealth.

It's not out and out impossible. For the life of me I can't find the book I'm looking for right now on my shelves but one interesting book does offer reasons on why the Confederacy may desire to end slavery on the basis of compensated emancipation. It goes that with slaves being illiquid wealth, that the government could actually generate an economic boom in a suffering economy by negotiating emancipation based on compensation as it would simultaneously put a huge shot of wealth into the general economy and also create an enormous, cheap underclass that could be used and abused without consequence while also providing a release valve that now they can leave the country without consequence as well. The author also pointed out that there would be opponents (one example was that smallholders who owned slaves would probably be more opposed than big landowners because the landowners get an enormous payout and the smallholders get relatively zilch and lose their free labor), but did make a decent economic case for why it might be doable as well.

If I can find where I put the book I'll try and elaborate on it.
 
And the French only cared about the indemnity they were extorting out of Haiti. If the CSA wants Haiti they can just buy it from the French.
Well, it would depend on how the CSA comes out of the war, because a late war means that the CSA would have been economically destroyed and left with massive inflation and a worthless currency.
 
Well, it would depend on how the CSA comes out of the war, because a late war means that the CSA would have been economically destroyed and left with massive inflation and a worthless currency.
The CsA can’t win a late war. By the mid-late 1863 it was just a matter of how long until the south stopped kicking.
 
This is a common idea, but it doesn’t really have any support. The CSA was ideologically built on slavery. It is embedded into everything. It was the basis of their iseas and lifestyle, it was in the words of one Confederate politician “the very idea of the Revolution.”
But states are built never on ideologies, but on territory, population, strength and ability to defend themselves, and ideology is just a nice addition and can change over time - if at some point slavery becomes more harm than good or maybe there's an industrial revolution and the country shifts away from agriculture slavery can be done with - I should've added that while slavery exists today in many places nowhere it's official
 
But states are built never on ideologies, but on territory, population, strength and ability to defend themselves, and ideology is just a nice addition and can change over time - if at some point slavery becomes more harm than good or maybe there's an industrial revolution and the country shifts away from agriculture slavery can be done with - I should've added that while slavery exists today in many places nowhere it's official
So basically the same, “yeah they’ll totally ban slavery for reasons, just don’t ask what those reasons are or evidence for those reasons.”
 
I said they'll ban it IN NAME, just like many states IOTL do
And there’s no evidence they would do so, its supposition that goes against what we know of the pre-war South. And also relies on the idea that industrialization would cause slavery to be less desireable, which is nonsense. Slavery has no lack of compatability with industry, and slaves were heavily used in what industry did exist in the south even OTL.
 
The CsA can’t win a late war. By the mid-late 1863 it was just a matter of how long until the south stopped kicking.
I'd argue the Confederate Army was afforded many opportunities for 'decisive victories' even after the infamy of July 1863 and its popular/romantic connotations, all of which could have contributed towards the reality of a 'negotiated peace' in 1865. The North, after all, experienced its greatest crisis of the war in Summer 1864. For examples of lost Southern opportunities after the tripartite strategic reverses of Gettysburg/Vicksburg/Tullahoma:

Proper Attack at McLemore's Cove

Coordinated Assault at Chickamauga/Hood Avoids Wounding

Siege of Chattanooga Not Lifted

Lee Fully Outmaneuvers Meade, Bristoe Campaign

Longstreet Maintained at Missionary Ridge/Outmaneuvers Burnside at Campbell's Station

Meade Attacks/Lee Counterattacks, Mine Run

Taylor's Flanking Assault at Pleasant Hill, Banks/Porter Effectively Pursued (Red River Campaign)

Longstreet Not Wounded/Gordon Attacks Earlier, the Wilderness

Beauregard's Plan for Drewry's Bluff

Hood Attacks at Cassville

Lee Not Debilitated at North Anna

Lee's Offensive Plan at Cold Harbor

Johnston's Napoleonic Strategy for the Defense of Atlanta, Forrest Operates Against Sherman's Supply Line

Lee Reinforces Petersburg Before Grant Completes His Crossing of the James

Early (Briefly) Captures Washington

Johnston Directs Peachtree Creek, Capture of Atlanta Delayed
 
I do not understand, what does Yair Lapid have to do with this.
Sorry I got drunk yesterday
this is most likely what will happen. A combination of increasing costs, and the British will lead to a gradual "emancipation", with very little in practice changing.
I agree with you, do you think that the blacks may start a guerilla war, funded by the North maybe? I think they would've been the majority of the population
 
This is a common idea, but it doesn’t really have any support. The CSA was ideologically built on slavery. It is embedded into everything. It was the basis of their iseas and lifestyle, it was in the words of one Confederate politician “the very idea of the Revolution.”

Setting that aside, it also would represent catastrophic economic disaster for the owner class, as vast sums of their wealth was tied up in slaves, and getting rid of slavery would annihilate that wealth.

Things change. USA was founded on tax evasion and the right to rebel against the central power, if it benefitted the regional elite. The whole tax evasion thing lasted to like 10 minutes after USA had become independent and the whole right to rebellion lasted until someone tested it.
 
It wouldn't. It'd just be seen as an ordinary country.

The "confederacy would have been a third world pariah state" trope is really overdone. It was extremely overdone a decade ago.

One of the major justification for Scramble for Africa was to end slavery and some of the first push back in Europe and America over European control over Africa was the mistreatment of the natives. CSA will start out as a pretty normal state, but in the 1910s it will a major embarrassment for the Western world, if WWI still happens it will likely give CSA breathing room, but in 1920ties it will be seen as South Africa was seen in the 80ties and we can easily imagine the first boycotts of CSA exports at that point.
 
Last edited:
Top