Is New England secession even possible post-War of 1812?

[Strategos' Risk]

I recall reading a Stephen Abbott "classic online AH era" (late '90s/early '00s) Southern victory timeline where New England secedes, or at least tries to, after the South wins. Deseret subsequently secedes successfully.

The thing is, the NE was full of abolitionists. It doesn't make much sense for them to want to leave. Sure there were draft riots in NYC... but that's one single city.

I don't see how New England would secede unless in the Victoria 2 "Free States of America" scenario- the U.S. either becomes dominated by pro-slavery interests. Rebuttal?

 

[Strategos' Risk]

Here's the Stephen Abbott timeline, by the way:

Part 1
Part 2

 

[Umbric Man]

By that point Yankees colonized the Upper Midwest/Great Lakes and have patched up their differences with the Lower North/Mid-Atlantic and Ohio Valley, as the Lower North became not just anti-slavery, but more commercial, industrialized, and immigrant-infused.

New England political culture and to a somewhat lesser extent culture in general dominated the North by then - they'd be casting themselves out of a powerful block, that they built up, which reflected them writ large.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

Good point, New England would have been a solid aspect of Yankeedom. Though I'm not sure about the Ohio Valley (and not sure where the Lower North is). Looks like most of the Copperheads were from Ohio. Though sure, Vallandigham aside, most were more interested in controlling the U.S. than leaving it.

 

[The Uchronian]

I recall reading a Stephen Abbott "classic online AH era" (late '90s/early '00s) Southern victory timeline where New England secedes, or at least tries to, after the South wins. Deseret subsequently secedes successfully.

The thing is, the NE was full of abolitionists. It doesn't make much sense for them to want to leave. Sure there were draft riots in NYC... but that's one single city.

I don't see how New England would secede unless in the Victoria 2 "Free States of America" scenario- the U.S. either becomes dominated by pro-slavery interests. Rebuttal?

It would be difficult, but it's not impossible, and, in fact, with the right set of PODs, a somewhat later secession(ending by ~1850 at the very latest), may, at least in certain scenarios, actually be more doable than a slightly earlier secession, at least after the late 1780s anyway.

Also, it's not set in stone that a New England-less America will necessarily be totally dominated by pro-slavery interests(As I recall, the *U.S. in Jared's Decades of Darkness, in particular, pretty much the best known "Breakaway New England" TL, was pretty heavily "steered", if I may use a TV Tropes term, to get where it ended up); it's at the very least quite possible, perhaps even likely, that some anti-secession Yankees may simply just leave the area and go settle the Midwest just as people IOTL did.

Edit: Also, forgot to add another point I wanted to make-when TTL's *Civil War happens, should the Union ask for neighbors' assistance.....they may find that their Yankee brothers may just be all too happy to assist them-remember, New England was perhaps *the* stronghold of abolitionism IOTL.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

What is even the core of the North without New England, by the 1860s? New York and Pennsylvania aside, all you have are the border states, and the western states, which are still considered somewhat peripheral, and the border states, which are definitely peripheral and were up to grabs with the South. I don't see Ohio, Indiana, or Illinois upholding the abolitionist spirit or the same zeal for preserving the Union as much as New England and the rest are.

It's no wonder that Decades of Darkness had the U.S. dominated by the South, given that their NY goes with New England. Penn can't hold up the old-school Thirteen Colonies spirit all by itself.