I was going to ask this on the NaNoWriMo site, but I figured you all know better, can answer faster, and some of you even read my "Getting It Over With" TLIAW about Washington winning at Brandywine.
Short version: If South Carolina, Georgia, and some of the rest of the Deep South, plus Cuba, tried to be their own nation starting in 1782, would it be realistic for them to escape domination by another country till the late 1900s, or would they likely be colonized?
Long version: I started a few Timelines In A Day/Week over on alternatehistory.com, one of which was about Washington winning at Brandywine. I had the states absorbed back into the Union, but I'm wondering here if I could have them not reabsorbed. Another possibility is to set my book in the 1830s and 1840s with intrigue about whether it does get reabsorbed into the Union or go into the British or some other sphere of influence (like the French) and the fact some int he US would be ambivalent about which they really want, given some of the personalities involved.
The crux for those who didn't read or don't recall the TLIAW is that Washington winning at Brandywine plus Saratoga 2 weeks later crushes the Britishs pirit and after they can't regroup and never even captured Philadelphia, they just let the colonies go in 1779. Without the Articles of Confederation ratified by everyone yet, and with john Adams not overseas, he uses his influence to get the states to agree on a firmer Constitution a few years earlier. But, with SC having different representatives, especially one named Laurents whose son was quite anti-slavery, there is no Fugitive Slave Clause and things are a bit less strict elsewhere, too; there is a 3/5 Compromise but NC, SC, and GA fail to ratify and form a loose Confederation of Columbia while waiting to see what the US does. Since Eli Witney doesn't invent the cotton gin TTL, slavery doesn't expand as fast, but this also means the US abolishes slavery in territories (almost happened OTL in 1784), which keeps Columbia separate as they want to be able to expand slavery.
Britain still keeps the Old Southwest and Florida TTL since Spain never entered the war to take them back, but they're backwaters and not see as important, so they are sold to the U.S. in the 1790s. But, the CCA can afford some, too. They also support a revolt inCuba which was put down OTL and it eventually joins as a state in the 1810s or early 1820s.
Now, in my very short TL I had NC eventually join the USA because their main beef was about there being no Bill of Rights, and since slavery wasn't quite as string in the western part, they can easily decide to join just to get the money for their slaves since compensated emancipation is going on in the US in the 1820s-1830s in other states. And, SC, GA, and some others end up splintering and coming back slowly to the US till the last rejoins by July 4, 1851, accepting abolition of slavery.
However, a few things happened that were a little more unusual to help them to splinter, so it's not a given that they would starting in the 1830s.(Most of it was due to Andrew Jackson and John C. Calhoun being in the same small country; if they don't end up dueling and a slave revolt doesn't happen, the CCA could stay together a while longer.) So, I'm considering that they might stick together, but they'd be really poor, too, even after the cotton gin in invented in 1800 or so.
I did a book 20 years ago or so that I could revise, but it seemed too unrealistic - just had NC, SC, and GA splitting at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 and sticking together very easily, and even getting New Orleans and OTL's LA/AR.
This is much more realistic, I think - the US is more powerful and will get New Orlean/Louisiana no matter what, for instance - but therein lies the question - how much would it even need to be viable in the long run? Would it be vital for them to have a port like Mobile or Florida in addition to Charleston and Savannah as ports? Should they have access to the Mississippi besides just having rights to send good down the Tennessee to the Mississippi? Or would SC, GA, and eastern AL be able to survive on their own with Cuba? Or, does it not matter because either way, they'd probably be dominated by Britain or someone else, anyway?
The more I think about it, a book set in the 1830s/1840s could be very interesting and full of intrigue. Of course, so could that 7-way election of 1852 in my one on Webster as VP in 1841.
I've got so many ideas, it's not a given it'll be written like the AH ones in my sig, but I thought I'd ask.