CS Victory: US Culture?

I doubt a large, standing army would be politically impossible. The reason Americans were historically against it OTL was there were few people who saw the need for one. All the Great Powers were across the ocean and would have a damn difficult time conquering the country. Now with its biggest enemy just across the border that would change and in a hurry!!

I still think it will difficult to justify, even with revanchanism, a near million man peacetime army comparable to that of turn of the century France, Britain, Germany, or Russia. That being said, an army 2 or 3 times the size of OTL's with a well orquistrated reserve system would probably be quite feasible.
 
You guys should start a new thread. Or maybe just look at the hundreds of other copycat threads on the civil war we already have.

Back to Culture: how would the development of the "Cowboy" as a cultural phenomenon work out? Without texas the major cattle drives seems like they would be disrupted. Chicago Meat packers after all relied on Texas cattle. I also think of the Cowboy as "southern" in alot of ways, from the accent to the blue grass, even to the politics.
 
Last edited:
I still think it will difficult to justify, even with revanchanism, a near million man peacetime army comparable to that of turn of the century France, Britain, Germany, or Russia. That being said, an army 2 or 3 times the size of OTL's with a well orquistrated reserve system would probably be quite feasible.

I agree a million man army would be quite unlikely, I was thinking more like 100-150 thousand or so. This is still much larger than the one of OTL.
 
Just as the USSR scrapped Communism and is currently the authoritarian union of states prevailing from the Baltic to Central Asia to the Pacific today, eh?

We're not arguing the CSA won't stay authoritarian. We're arguing that it will eventually end slavery.

The CSA deliberately rigged itself to have slavery forever when it was the only area aside from Brazil with a large slave population left in the New World.

And the United Kingdom was formed from an indissoluble union between Britain and Ireland, but oh look, Ireland left.

International isolation will only make the Rhetts of the Confederacy crazier and more self-righteous and monopolizing the CSA's discourse further. Think North Korea, not PRC.

But the North Korean situation is completely untenable if the country wasn't being bankrolled by China. Who's going to generously subsidise the only hated slave power left? The CSA would go bankrupt. I don't care how ideologically commited you are, a bankrupt state can't continue to enforce its constitution. Think France 1789.

This is not, however, the CSA of OTL or any recognizable Civil War scenario.

No, because we're not talking about the CSA of any Civil War. We're talking about a CSA a half a century and an almighty clusterfuck later.
 
We're not arguing the CSA won't stay authoritarian. We're arguing that it will eventually end slavery.



And the United Kingdom was formed from an indissoluble union between Britain and Ireland, but oh look, Ireland left.



But the North Korean situation is completely untenable if the country wasn't being bankrolled by China. Who's going to generously subsidise the only hated slave power left? The CSA would go bankrupt. I don't care how ideologically commited you are, a bankrupt state can't continue to enforce its constitution. Think France 1789.



No, because we're not talking about the CSA of any Civil War. We're talking about a CSA a half a century and an almighty clusterfuck later.


The CSA won't end slavery short of a revolution. That said a revolution is quite possible. Slavery would last no less than 40 years and probably more though.
 
You guys should start a new thread. Or maybe just look at the hundreds of other copycat threads on the civil war we already have.

Back to Culture: how would the development of the "Cowboy" as a cultural phenomenon work out? Without texas the major cattle drives seems like they would be disrupted. Chicago Meat packers after all relied on Texas cattle. I also think of the Cowboy as "southern" in alot of ways, from the accent to the blue grass, even to the politics.
Agreed. I'm sorry I helped feed the beast earlier:(
I wonder how US cuisine would be changed? I mean before the rise of Kentucky Fried Chicken. Would Peanut butter exist? Washington Carver might have escaped to the North or he probably wouldn't get to invent it in the south.

Coconut Cream Pie and Banana Cream pie would probably not exist. After all Coconuts and bananas both came from the New Orleans port's. But maybe los angeles would be a different route for Tropical foods.
Carver didn't actually invent peanut butter he just listed it as one of the many uses peanuts could have as a cash crop. If anyone invented peanut butter it was probably some mesoamerican fellow. Carver's life in a CSA victory TL is something that I have wondered to. I know that Carver was born in Missouri during 1864 and he lost his parents to slave raiders when he was still and infant. He was adopted by his owners who where German immagrants after the the 13th Amendment was passed. Since most CSA victory TLs involve Missouri staying in the union I don't think most of this would change unless the CSA wins long before 1864 and thus has butterflys that change his parents fate. Or if the union doesn't abolish slavery in a similar manner as in OTL. I also really wonder how it might change his chances of attending Iowa State Agricultural College where he learned many of his skills in organic chemistry. If he doesn't it could have long term affects on the use of crop rotation in America and cause further changes in american cuisine.
 
Agreed. I'm sorry I helped feed the beast earlier:(

Carver didn't actually invent peanut butter he just listed it as one of the many uses peanuts could have as a cash crop. If anyone invented peanut butter it was probably some mesoamerican fellow. Carver's life in a CSA victory TL is something that I have wondered to. I know that Carver was born in Missouri during 1864 and he lost his parents to slave raiders when he was still and infant. He was adopted by his owners who where German immagrants after the the 13th Amendment was passed. Since most CSA victory TLs involve Missouri staying in the union I don't think most of this would change unless the CSA wins long before 1864 and thus has butterflys that change his parents fate. Or if the union doesn't abolish slavery in a similar manner as in OTL. I also really wonder how it might change his chances of attending Iowa State Agricultural College where he learned many of his skills in organic chemistry. If he doesn't it could have long term affects on the use of crop rotation in America and cause further changes in american cuisine.

Thanks for the info, I only really know about him through elementary school. It would be interesting if he wound up in the Central Valley of California instead of Tuskegee alabama. I think that's the only place peanut cultivation is really economical in the Union. Though he might just work on soy beans in the Midwest.
 
I agree a million man army would be quite unlikely, I was thinking more like 100-150 thousand or so. This is still much larger than the one of OTL.

Yeah, I doubt the North would adopt Prussian style militarism although, I'd imagine an unhealthy obsession with reserve mobilization plans for multi-front conflicts.

I wonder how US cuisine would be changed? I mean before the rise of Kentucky Fried Chicken. Would Peanut butter exist? Washington Carver might have escaped to the North or he probably wouldn't get to invent it in the south.

Coconut Cream Pie and Banana Cream pie would probably not exist. After all Coconuts and bananas both came from the New Orleans port's. But maybe los angeles would be a different route for Tropical foods.

I don't think Northern cuisine will be dramatically different per-say. It will almost certainly have a heavier (pun intended) degree of German and Eastern European influences with wurst and sauerkraut becoming as "American" as apple pie. The Tavern local tavern is likely to remain as an important fixture of American cultural and political life throughout the northern industrial cities. Said watering-holes are also likely to serve and preserve the cuisines of their patron's respective ethnicity.
 
I don't think Northern cuisine will be dramatically different per-say. It will almost certainly have a heavier (pun intended) degree of German and Eastern European influences with wurst and sauerkraut becoming as "American" as apple pie. The Tavern local tavern is likely to remain as an important fixture of American cultural and political life throughout the northern industrial cities. Said watering-holes are also likely to serve and preserve the cuisines of their patron's respective ethnicity.

I don't think it will be very different at all. Northern cuisine is pretty different than Southern cuisine already, and the midwest has a lot of German influence in OTL and there are many of that type of Restaurants around here.
 
Yeah, I doubt the North would adopt Prussian style militarism although, I'd imagine an unhealthy obsession with reserve mobilization plans for multi-front conflicts.



I don't think Northern cuisine will be dramatically different per-say. It will almost certainly have a heavier (pun intended) degree of German and Eastern European influences with wurst and sauerkraut becoming as "American" as apple pie. The Tavern local tavern is likely to remain as an important fixture of American cultural and political life throughout the northern industrial cities. Said watering-holes are also likely to serve and preserve the cuisines of their patron's respective ethnicity.

Milwaukee might more closely resemble a standard US city. Being born there I can assure you that bratwurst and sauerkraut is bigger there than most areas of the country. Milwaukee is probably the most "German" of the major US cities.
 
I don't think it will be very different at all. Northern cuisine is pretty different than Southern cuisine already, and the midwest has a lot of German influence in OTL and there are many of that type of Restaurants around here.

I Concur, I happen to be from Wisconsin hence the suggestion. I'm arguing that said influence will be much stronger as the North is unlikely to be as fearful of hyphenated Americans and that Germans will consequently have less reason to completely assimilate during the early 20th century.
 
We're not arguing the CSA won't stay authoritarian. We're arguing that it will eventually end slavery.

Indeed we are, and I'm indicating why it will no more do this than the USSR would turn anarcho-capitalist.

And the United Kingdom was formed from an indissoluble union between Britain and Ireland, but oh look, Ireland left.

Chronology's all wrong. The Act of Union was in the 18th Century between the Kingdoms of England and Scotland. Ireland was put under direct rule only after Napoleon attempted to invade England through it.

But the North Korean situation is completely untenable if the country wasn't being bankrolled by China. Who's going to generously subsidise the only hated slave power left? The CSA would go bankrupt. I don't care how ideologically commited you are, a bankrupt state can't continue to enforce its constitution. Think France 1789.

Its neighbors will to forestall the inevitable crisis and power grab that comes with its collapse. Think DPRK and Zimbabwe, as this is what people will prefer rather than to chance civil war and the kind of massive expense required to garrison a region the size of Western Europe.

No, because we're not talking about the CSA of any Civil War. We're talking about a CSA a half a century and an almighty clusterfuck later.

The CSA's starting points are this. How it develops from them.....
 
Chronology's all wrong. The Act of Union was in the 18th Century between the Kingdoms of England and Scotland. Ireland was put under direct rule only after Napoleon attempted to invade England through it.

I don't think I mentioned any chronology. There were two acts of union: The Act of Union 1801 happened after an internal revolt. But this is all irrelevant. My point is that just because something is declared constitutionally permanent doesn't mean that can't be changed.

Its neighbors will to forestall the inevitable crisis and power grab that comes with its collapse. Think DPRK and Zimbabwe, as this is what people will prefer rather than to chance civil war and the kind of massive expense required to garrison a region the size of Western Europe.

The DPRK and Zimbabwe are completely different cases. One is a totalitarian state that's only affordable due to Chinese subsidies, and the other is a collapsed state where government authority is largely absent in opposition parts of the country. The latter is far more close to the CSA situation. It's also worth noting that Mugabe's authoritarian regime has lasted about twenty years and already senior ZANU-PF people are siding with the opposition.

This is what would likely happen in the CSA. There would reach a point where the moneyed elite in parts of the country realise that paying for the police state to maintain slavery is more expensive than the profits from slavery. At that point they'd like prefer blacks to work as poor labourers commuting to work from ghettos than maintaining the slave system.
 
I don't think I mentioned any chronology. There were two acts of union: The Act of Union 1801 happened after an internal revolt. But this is all irrelevant. My point is that just because something is declared constitutionally permanent doesn't mean that can't be changed.

And the unification of the UK with Ireland was not defined permanent so the point's moot.

The DPRK and Zimbabwe are completely different cases. One is a totalitarian state that's only affordable due to Chinese subsidies, and the other is a collapsed state where government authority is largely absent in opposition parts of the country. The latter is far more close to the CSA situation. It's also worth noting that Mugabe's authoritarian regime has lasted about twenty years and already senior ZANU-PF people are siding with the opposition.

Yes, any comparison will be imperfect. Both of these regimes get propped up by their neighbors to postpone the result of their collapse. People would prop up the CSA for the exact same reason: a CSA is huge, the USA won't like anyone stealing what it will claim is its territory, the other powers won't particularly desire it but everybody will be waiting for the Sick Man of North America to finally collapse while trying to forestall the inevitable competition.

This is what would likely happen in the CSA. There would reach a point where the moneyed elite in parts of the country realise that paying for the police state to maintain slavery is more expensive than the profits from slavery. At that point they'd like prefer blacks to work as poor labourers commuting to work from ghettos than maintaining the slave system.

No, this is what likely happens: the planters seek to perpetuate their monopoly on power and like the early USA screw the army, the only truly national institution in the Confederacy, an army that does not have the US Army's careful tradition of apolitical involvement (that really did exist more then than it does now). Ensue military dictatorship and the CSA becoming more stable after it than before it, the junta not any more interested in altering slavery than the planters themselves, the lower classes satisfied that they have a greater voice. Everyone's happy except the slaves and that's what the CSA was built on in the first place.
 
I Concur, I happen to be from Wisconsin hence the suggestion. I'm arguing that said influence will be much stronger as the North is unlikely to be as fearful of hyphenated Americans and that Germans will consequently have less reason to completely assimilate during the early 20th century.

I am not sure about that. Assimilation is pretty important to cultures as it tends to prevent infighting. Gestures that are complimentary in one culture may be insulting to another. Popular discussion topics in one culture may be a taboo subject in another. For these and other practical reasons people need to agree to cultural rules for society to function. Most societies in history, very much including the US, will shamelessly use ideas from other cultures if it works for them and reject others. If you move to another country you will have to adapt to them not they to you.
 
Top