Peaceful vs. victorious Confederacy

Or Ist Amendment to CSA Constitution.

It seems to me that it is very relevant for CSA development how CSA independence is achieved.

On one hand, you might have a Confederacy which seceded peacefully - the tensions were somehow resolved peacefully by negotiations in March to June 1861, and violence either did not break out at all or was resolved in a few weeks, without mobilizing large armies and fighting long campaigns, and without experience of long blockade in Confederacy and Britain.

Confederacy was founded by small agrarian oligarchy, who wanted to defend their position not only against Negro slaves they owned but also against masses of poor free whites and their democratic vote. If they achieve independence quickly and without requiring sacrifices from these poor free whites, they have kept their oligarchic position. If not...

Suppose that the Army of Virginia achieved decisive victories in 1862 or 1863, brings war to North and forces North to make a peace treaty and lift sea blockade. Or that they manage to grind Atlanta campaign to halt, McClellan wins in November 1864 on platform of negotiated peace and the peace negotiations are completed in March...June 1865.

The Confederate veterans go home. And now they will want their share of the government they fought to protect.

Churchill won Second World War. And lost the election even as war in Pacific continued - the Labour carried out practically a social revolution.

Assuming that in the few years after Civil War, the oligarchic elites of South are swept from power through getting voted out in respective state elections by the Civil War veterans. Davis is in office till 1867. Representatives are due for reelections exactly when? And how long will it take to change 2/3 of state legislatures, as necessary to approve Amendments of CSA Constitution?

The poor whites fought to preserve slavery, so they are not abolishing it straight away. But what would the constitution of victorious CSA look like by 1877?
 
Look at the state constitutions - I know that in a lot of states, only property-owners could vote. Of course, this might lead to an even more radical revolution...
 
The Confederate veterans go home. And now they will want their share of the government they fought to protect.

Churchill won Second World War. And lost the election even as war in Pacific continued - the Labour carried out practically a social revolution.

Assuming that in the few years after Civil War, the oligarchic elites of South are swept from power through getting voted out in respective state elections by the Civil War veterans. Davis is in office till 1867. Representatives are due for reelections exactly when? And how long will it take to change 2/3 of state legislatures, as necessary to approve Amendments of CSA Constitution?

The poor whites fought to preserve slavery, so they are not abolishing it straight away. But what would the constitution of victorious CSA look like by 1877?

For me the Confederation is an agrarian quasi-feudal society where even if poors people voted, they voted for the man who is rich, who have education, who have seen the world, and who was an officer, their officer, during the War...

I don't think the veterans will learn somewhere about quasi socialists/revolutionary ideas, which are born in urban and industrialized regions...
 
A victorious Confederacy would have quite a few problems regardless of when it wins. The legacy of bread riots and things like the Nueces Massacre would set a bad precedent for any future Confederate political evolution. An independent Confederacy would be an Anglo Brazil in the best case scenario, an Anglo Peru in the worst case.
 
For me the Confederation is an agrarian quasi-feudal society where even if poors people voted, they voted for the man who is rich, who have education, who have seen the world, and who was an officer, their officer, during the War...

Yes. But they are going to vote for rich and educated men who claim to represent their interests. And there are enough rich and educated men to give the poor people choices as to who and what policies to vote for. The Confederate leadership was never monolithic and would have been far from monolithic in the aftermath of victory.
 

Typo

Banned
Yes. But they are going to vote for rich and educated men who claim to represent their interests. And there are enough rich and educated men to give the poor people choices as to who and what policies to vote for. The Confederate leadership was never monolithic and would have been far from monolithic in the aftermath of victory.
I don't know but considering the fact that OTL's union victory brought about veterans who elected governments of the gilded age I think you are putting way too much faith into the class consciousness of the southern poor. Not to mention the fairness of the voting system at the time.
 
I don't know but considering the fact that OTL's union victory brought about veterans who elected governments of the gilded age I think you are putting way too much faith into the class consciousness of the southern poor. Not to mention the fairness of the voting system at the time.

After Reconstruction, the Gilded Age was relatively prosperous. The economy was ballooning, the poor were getting homesteads for free and prospect of jobs in the expanding industry. They could pursue American Dream and leave the government to the rich.

The southern poor are going home with arms and experience of organizing. They will demand something and get something.

OTL Union had factions, like radical republicans of Reconstruction time, who swept the elections in 1865...1867. TTL Confederacy will face a lot of pressing problems, like how to pay war costs. That will be major issues on the peacetime elections.

Was it true that the large part of CSA population that was slaves paid no taxes? If yes, one obvious proposal for any poor white populist voters would be to require the slaveowners pay taxes on their slaves as a valuable property. After all, the war was fought to preserve the property and had North won, the slaveowners would have lost the slaves without compensation as per Emancipation Proclamation - the popular agitators can demand that the war debts be paid with taxes on slaves.

Did Southern states individually on state bases ever tax slaves OTL?
 

Typo

Banned
After Reconstruction, the Gilded Age was relatively prosperous. The economy was ballooning, the poor were getting homesteads for free and prospect of jobs in the expanding industry. They could pursue American Dream and leave the government to the rich.
This is such a hilariously one-sided misrepresentation of that era I don't even know where to begin
 
A victorious Confederacy would have quite a few problems regardless of when it wins. The legacy of bread riots and things like the Nueces Massacre would set a bad precedent for any future Confederate political evolution. An independent Confederacy would be an Anglo Brazil in the best case scenario, an Anglo Peru in the worst case.

The problem with a failing CSA is that unlike Peru it has a very powerful neighbor just north of it, doubtlessly with a chip on its shoulder...

I could see a second war happening within 20 years if the CSA puts down pro unionist agitation hard or majorly screws up such that its economy or politcal systems fail and unlike OTL this WILL be a total war of conquest not reunification.
 
I am more interested about what happens, not 20 years after Confederate victory but in 2 years. In OTL victorious North, Radical Republicans won 1866 election. In TTL victorious South, who will win the first peacetime elections? And on what issues shall they win?
 
I am more interested about what happens, not 20 years after Confederate victory but in 2 years. In OTL victorious North, Radical Republicans won 1866 election. In TTL victorious South, who will win the first peacetime elections? And on what issues shall they win?

The most important thing for the returning veterans would be getting their homes back into shape. So I doubt you will see much difference politically in the two years immediately after the war, but over the following decade far more likely. For those that served in the ranks political involvement will probably be on the local or county level. Those that had served as officers, and not already politicians etc., will probably be those most likely to easily enter municipal or state level positions.
 
The most important thing for the returning veterans would be getting their homes back into shape. So I doubt you will see much difference politically in the two years immediately after the war, but over the following decade far more likely.
Paying for war costs and making the first peacetime budget will be hot issues right on the year after peace. And these will be the issues the first peacetime Confederate Congress elections and the first State elections will be fought on.
Davis, like Johnson OTL, is going to face a Congress elected after war, whether the first peacetime elections are November 1863 or November 1865.
 
Was it true that the large part of CSA population that was slaves paid no taxes? If yes, one obvious proposal for any poor white populist voters would be to require the slaveowners pay taxes on their slaves as a valuable property. After all, the war was fought to preserve the property and had North won, the slaveowners would have lost the slaves without compensation as per Emancipation Proclamation - the popular agitators can demand that the war debts be paid with taxes on slaves.

Did Southern states individually on state bases ever tax slaves OTL?

Yes, most (perhaps all) southern states had taxes on slaves. OTOH, many of the voters and most of the politicians were slave owners, so they're not going to raise taxes on slaves to pay for the war.
 
Yes, most (perhaps all) southern states had taxes on slaves. OTOH, many of the voters and most of the politicians were slave owners, so they're not going to raise taxes on slaves to pay for the war.
Yes, but many of the poor white Confederate veterans were not slaveowners. As far as they were concerned, they fought to protect the property of rich slaveowners, so it was reasonable to demand that they pay their share of the cost of protecting it.

In 1860 census, the slaveowning states of the South - Confederacy and border states - had roughly 8 million white inhabitants, out of whom 385 000 owned slaves. Of course, it was household heads, mostly adult males, who were slaveowners. Excluding children and women, the non-slaveowners still outnumbered slaveowners. Could someone give the numbers of voters? How many people were entitled to vote in the November 1861 elections of Confederate Congress?

Before and during the War, the non-slaveowning whites rallied to defend the institution of slavery. But after the war, as tensions arise on how to pay for the independence... could they vote to increase the taxes on slaves?
 
Top