No Liberia, Greater Haiti

What if the colonization of Liberia never took off because of financial reasons?

At this time the Republic of Haiti supported abolitionist movements in the New World. Would many of the free blacks who would have relocated to Liberia instead move to Haiti. Would Haiti want them to come? Many of them brought numerous skills that Haiti could use to improve the nation. These skilled immigrants could help raise funds to pay back the dept the French government forced them to pay in order to recognize their independence.

Transportation to Haiti from the US would be at a lower cost and many more people who would wish to emigrate may be able to do so.

Would this different Haiti still invade Santo Domingo and unite the island under one rule?
 

HueyLong

Banned
If this Haiti participates heavily in slave colonisation and is seen as a Black Canaan, southern fears may make the US act against them.
 

Hendryk

Banned
If this Haiti participates heavily in slave colonisation and is seen as a Black Canaan, southern fears may make the US act against them.
If this greater Haiti manages to retain its independence into the 1860s, it could become an ally of the Union against the Confederacy. However, if, in order to avoid US occupation, it must put itself under the protection of France or Britain, it will likely remain neutral during the ACW.
 
Why would those freed slaves would want to go to Haiti of all places?
Its not an african country, its not really christian, and they speak FRENCH there?
 
It is christian - most are at least taking both the roman catholic church and voodoo believes withr espect, not unlike the chinese situation of the 'Three Plants". And not that there is voodoo also in Louisiana and surrounding lands...

And the language is just a factor - in freedom, they'd rather live free and learn french and the french creole than live in english and slaved. If they don't speak some french already, like the black creoles.
 
Haiti could be an acceptable place for free american blacks to move if the US recognized Haiti in 1823. With recognition would come a possible increase in trade and the retreat to a total agriarian society could have helped Haiti pay its debt to France. Of course most of this trade would probably be with the northern states. The southern states would probably have move slave rebellions, because of a free black nation in the south of them. Abolitionists would press the government and southern states to free the slaves. This could me an earlier ACW.

http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/haiti/history/earlyhaiti/recognition.htm
 
Haiti could be an acceptable place for free american blacks to move if the US recognized Haiti in 1823. With recognition would come a possible increase in trade and the retreat to a total agriarian society could have helped Haiti pay its debt to France. Of course most of this trade would probably be with the northern states. The southern states would probably have move slave rebellions, because of a free black nation in the south of them. Abolitionists would press the government and southern states to free the slaves. This could me an earlier ACW.

http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/haiti/history/earlyhaiti/recognition.htm

An earlier ACW could very possibly mean southern victory...less difference in populations and manufacturing which means the better southern leaders and soldiers could be enough to insure victory...

i also can't see the US asking Haiti for an alliance against the CSA...too much like recognizing CS independence...besides what help could Haiti possibly be? at most Haitian politicians might publically endorse US actions against the Confederacy
 
Recognition doesn't imply alliance with a nation, plus this recognition is happening around 1823, well before a possible war between the states.

I agree the US wouldn't ask for a Haitian alliance, but Haiti might clandestinely support rebellious slaves in the south during this earlier war. This would mean more soldiers watch CS coasts for smugglers, not just looking out for the US navy blockaders. More soldiers to put down uprisings, leading to Union troops having a better numerical advantage in combat. With Haiti as inspiration, it may also mean earlier black troops in the Union army.

During and after the war many slaves may try flee to the north and then to Haiti. Or maybe try and reach Cuba then Haiti.
 
Last edited:
Recognition doesn't imply alliance with a nation, plus this recognition is happening around 1823, well before a possible war between the states.

I agree the US wouldn't ask for a Haitian alliance, but Haiti might clandestinely support rebellious slaves in the south during this earlier war. This would mean more soldiers watch CS coasts for smugglers, not just looking out for the US navy blockaders. More soldiers to put down uprisings, leading to Union troops having a better numerical advantage in combat. With Haiti as inspiration, it may also mean earlier black troops in the Union army.

During and after the war many slaves may try flee to the north and then to Haiti. Or maybe try and reach Cuba then Haiti.

sorry about the alliance thing...i wasnt referring to you...i was referring to:

If this greater Haiti manages to retain its independence into the 1860s, it could become an ally of the Union against the Confederacy. However, if, in order to avoid US occupation, it must put itself under the protection of France or Britain, it will likely remain neutral during the ACW.

also, i cant see the Confederacy really having to station many troops to put down slave rebellions...believe it or not, a lot of slaves were loyal to their masters back then...slavery was all they had ever known and most slaveowners were not as brutal ppl think...besides...all the states had militias during the war that would be plenty to deal with any uprisings...again...i think the numerical advantage of the North would be much smaller...

I stand by what i said, an earlier ACW resulting from good US-Haitian relations could actually result in CS independence...although after the war, Haiti could see a population explosion as many of the CS states decide to end slavery and want to get rid of their former slaves...
 
The thing about this ACW is I can see a greater chance for CSA independence, but I can also see the north actually being able to take the south much easier politically, economically, and militarily. I could see the war coming around 1848.

Texas may not be in the union by this time. With a greater abolitionist movement blocking a pro-slavery Texas, the loss of supplies may hurt the CSA. I could also see Mexico eyeing Texas again if it tried to help the CSA. Mexico(anti-slavery), along with Britain and Haiti have interests in keeping Texas out of the CSA and the union both. I can still see Texas joining the union, but a few years later and after this ACW is over.

While there may not be allot of slave revolts, I think with Haitian agents and abolitionists stirring up enough trouble there would be more than OTL. This will use supplies, plus the south has even less rail lines, while the north can resupply their troops at least to the border of the CSA.

I definitely see an influx of emancipated slaves after the war. Britain may even transport many in the hopes of getting a reduction in the price of cotton. In the long run this may help in rebuilding the southern states.

It would be interesting to see how John Brown reacts in this TL.
 
The thing about this ACW is I can see a greater chance for CSA independence, but I can also see the north actually being able to take the south much easier politically, economically, and militarily. I could see the war coming around 1848.

Texas may not be in the union by this time. With a greater abolitionist movement blocking a pro-slavery Texas, the loss of supplies may hurt the CSA. I could also see Mexico eyeing Texas again if it tried to help the CSA. Mexico(anti-slavery), along with Britain and Haiti have interests in keeping Texas out of the CSA and the union both. I can still see Texas joining the union, but a few years later and after this ACW is over.

While there may not be allot of slave revolts, I think with Haitian agents and abolitionists stirring up enough trouble there would be more than OTL. This will use supplies, plus the south has even less rail lines, while the north can resupply their troops at least to the border of the CSA.

I definitely see an influx of emancipated slaves after the war. Britain may even transport many in the hopes of getting a reduction in the price of cotton. In the long run this may help in rebuilding the southern states.

It would be interesting to see how John Brown reacts in this TL.

I think Britain might be more interested in helping the CSA...less need for the North's foodstuffs (hadnt had the food shortages yet) and its colonies wouldn't quite be ready to replace the Confederacy in cotton production

Also, the north's superiority in rails is less than OTL

Finally, Texas would still be pro-southern even if still independent or part of Mexico
 
Top