Early Civil War

I want to know the net positives and negatives about an earlier Civil War. With Early I mean a PoD of 1815, after the end of war with the British, although I prefer one in the late 1840s with Texas included.

Will the USA industrialise faster? Bigger population? Earlier emancipation? A great power by over the globs by the 1860s? In threat of a new war with Britain?
 

Starforce

Banned
An earlier civil war will probably mean the Union is less developed and would mean they would have a harder time fighting the south.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
The nullification crisis is a bad POD for a successful war, because it's obvioys to everyone that Jackson is going to respond very aggressively. It'll just be South Carolina seceding, and then getting its ass kicked. (ETA: ninja'd by @Historyman 14)

PODs with an earlier secession of most Southern states are conceivable. You need some decisions going against the South, to increase the feeling that the North is really threatening the Southern interest. A bolstered Northern confidence as a result of this could lead to something like the Republicans forming earlier (and getting a President earlier), and the South opting to bolt. Conceivably, the alt-Republicans could form in the 1840s, and get a President elected in 1848 or 1852. That would be enough for the South to bolt.

General rule of thumb is: the earlier this happens, the better for the South. Every year of delay decreases the parity between North and South, to the latter's detriment. A Southern secession in 1848, involving approximately the same states as in OTL, has a very good chance of succeeding. (ETA: also ninja'd, by @Cantra)
 
What if Jackson wins in 1824? John Quincy Adams goes to the House of Representatives in 1826 and Jackson serves his two terms, Nullification Crisis as usual right near the end of his term, Van Buren wins In 1832 over clay the John Quincy Adams sees the problem of Southern slaveocracy growth and runs in 1836 because clay has already lost a couple times. He wins because the financial Panic is moved ahead some since Jackson was in earlier.

So, instead of being when Congress to continue fighting against the rule that they couldn't discuss slavery, Adams is President. Yes he's older, but he's pretty spry. He goes on against the south in the Amistad case, with his secretary of state Daniel Webster being asked to argue for freedom in it. He also puts the dampers on any Prospect of Texas entering the Union because it would be a slaveholding state.

You could possibly see the south in enough of an uproar that they secede in the middle 1840s with one of their goals to Annex Texas once they secede. The fire eaters in our timeline were already very active by 1850 in some states and could be more so here as they see presidents actively going against their power.

The thing is that you need to figure out which states would secede. In my timeline on Webster being vice president and then becoming president after Harrison dies, I have William Seward becoming president in 1852 and Missouri is run by someone who supports the session and they wind up seceding but Tennessee doesn't because of who is in control of that state. You could have a few different scenarios based on who is running what.

Of course, Adams died in 1848 in our time line, I don't know if he would want to serve two terms if he is elected in 1836 but if not maybe Webster runs and wins in 1840. However, because Adams did seem to see the dangers of the growing slave power in Congress in our timeline and fought hard to opposed the gag order, so to speak, on the discussion of slavery, it is possible that he could sense something and decide that he needed to try again.
 
I always thought about the possibility of civil war erupting over the trail of tears incident. Not so much because of treatment to native Americans, but more of Jackson going in open defiance to the ruling of the supreme court. Maybe the coastal, middle Atlantic new England States go against Jackson with Davey Crockett leading the anti-jackson faction?

Probably a bad idea/scenario, but thought I might contribute
 
I don’t know if this is a scenario the OP would want but would Northern secession from the Union (like in Decades of Darkness) be something considered as an earlier “civil war”?
 
Last edited:
Top