RamscoopRaider
Donor
Yes but not moving back will say "we got our asses kicked and can't even retake our old capital with any degree of security", while moving back would say "The CSA got lucky once, they will not again". While there was near as no chance of European intervention IRL, Lincoln and the government were worried about it and wanted to look strong.I doubt moving the capital back to DC will cause the chances of intervention to decline much. You already lost the capital, moving back won't change perceptions much. If I were European I would think it idiotic. DC is worthless outside of being the seat of government. It is of absolutely no other importance. Without the capital it is about as important as Green Bay, WI which if it weren't for the Packers no one would ever hear about. I admit that even though I am from the state. In any case the chances of intervention are near zero. The CSA has nothing that GB wants enough to be worth the risk to the government.
Also it provides a symbol to the country that we are winning and can win this war, whereas not returning would say we are losing and would give the Copperheads more ammo. Regular Democrats too, politics are important and people will want the capital back it is a symbol
We had already lost the south and losing DC in this context but retaking it and moving back will not have changed perceptions much by 63 or 64, enough had happened before then
While logically the reasons you have said for not moving the government back logic is not everything, symbols and perceptions easily can overshadow logic and have done so in many cases in this war