"...near-destruction of most hillboy networks the previous summer and fall, into the void stepped local bosses, typically county sheriffs, judges and landowners who could organize small but effective cadres of relatives, friends and employees to protect their interests. Some of these "fiefs," as they quickly came to be known, were as small as a town; others covered multiple counties. In parallel, in the northwest of Mississippi just south of Memphis, the Yazoo League's numerous bosses consolidated into a unified command structure with its own uniforms, governing institutions and commercial base; fiefs were not just for the economically devastated rural white man, but for the free but struggling Negro as well.



- The Root of the Problem: The Tumultuous Term of America's 29th President
boss hogg.jpg I like the Fief idea! Not sure on the name, maybe County? Hazzard County?!
 
So what is the exact status of Kentucky btw? Is it still technically part of the CSA but governed by a US civil government and not subject to the terms of withdrawal as the other parts?
 
"...from both a political and military angle; Mayhew Wainwright may have been a committed champion of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments policy, but in his own words he "was no magician." Assessments from March or Pershing were no less blunt, and by the middle of 1919, with the world's attention focused upon the sudden eruption of a general war in Europe, Root was starting to worry that the basic facts on the ground aligned with what was increasingly becoming clear: the reduced occupation the United States traded in return for the Third Amendment was inconsistent with the enforcement of public order within the borders of the Confederacy and wholly incompatible with seeing the Fourth and Fifth Amendments actually implemented.

- The Root of the Problem: The Tumultuous Term of America's 29th President
I guess Fourth and Fifth Amendments are going to be added in later years, either in during Long's Reign or the Carter Protocol of the 1990s.

Narrative Suggestion:
Immediately after being elected president. Long makes a state visit to the US to meet Pershing. He offers the raftification of the Amendments and a civil rights law protecting confederate freemen in exchange for partial or total wavering of reparations in the treaty.
 
So, it seems that we are moving in the direction of a German-dominated SE Asia after the war. What will be interesting, of course, is that German policy in this region (based on the precedent of our Bavarian administration in Cambodia) is much more hands-off than that of the French. No doubt this region will get its independence eventually - but I wonder if the German way of handling things will mean that the independent SE kingdoms remain in the German economic sphere even once independence is attained. Certainly, there doesn't seem to be much anti-German sentiment in Cambodia and soon-to-be-ally Thailand.

I also wonder how long it is going to take for Japan to get itself involved. There is no way that, after the humiliation of the Phillipines, it isn't going to look at French colonies with some adore - especially once it becomes evident that Cambodia is putting up a fight and is likely to tie the French down. Though I do wonder if there won't be some leary members of government who point out "Yeah, we beat the Spanish and the Europeans stripped us of our rightful prize in that war. What's so say that they wont use ur soldiers and sailors as cannon fodder and betray us at the peace table yet again."

On an unrelated side note: I am STILL hoping Haiti throws its lot in with the Germans and is able to repudiate its debt to France and also some French carribbean lands. Though I suspect that the French navy is going to have to be bloodied before that happens - Haiti doesn't have a naval presence of its own and is going to need German naval support to get its troops on the ground in those places (though that would set up an interesting situaton: the US has a naval base in Haiti and isn't going to look kindly on the French actually threatening the island. Which means, Haiti in this situation would actually be pretty safe from invasion - the French try anything and the US will be mobilizing and sending strongly-worded diplomatic letters telling them to back off sooner than Nappy V can blink. Which means, Haiti would be in a very safe position to pursue its war aims: it can, with help, strike out but is safe from retaliation) Mind you this may jsut be pie-in-the-sky dreaming: but I just want to see a stable and prosperous Haiti, or, at least, a relatively stable and propserous one! :D
I support this endeavor as I have been jaded into the belief real Haiti will likely never be fixed in my lifetime so I just vicariously dream of it not being such a mess in other writers alternate history scenarios v:
 
OTL German colonial policy was a very mixed bag, ranging from genocide in Namibia to a very ahead of its time policy in East Africa. This Germany is even less focused on their empire, so that would probably be just as bad.

I doubt that they are cracking down on Cambodia, given that through their decent performance in the war they would’ve “proved their loyalty”, but that doesn’t guarantee anything for newly acquired colonies.
Bingo.

I’d also point out that if Germany ends up ascendant in Bietnam postwar, then the long-standing Khmer-Viet rivalry suddenly takes on a very different dimension, as we all know who Germany is likeliest to favor in that equation
Looks like we've arrived at full Warlord Era China. At this rate it will take decades for the central Dixie government to re-establish the same level of control they had over their territory pre-war.

This occupation was doomed from the beginning. Just an absolute shitshow.
Sticking around to enforce the Third made sense both as a practical matter and moral necessity, but with that done and the Insurgency plus economic malaise in the US, it’s increasingly nonsensical
I commented several months (years?) ago that the Heavily Negro areas along the Mississippi in the Northwest part of the state of Mississippi could be supplied with supplied along the Mississippi with weaponry equal to or exceeding the weaponry of the local governments until the 1950s or so and with the limitations on the Military in the treaty of Mt. Vernon, it could be even later than *that*. A fief where the relationship between White and Black is *only* a generation behind the relations north of the Ohio might not be a hiddeous place to live (as opposed to the coastal Carolinas)
Good point
Speaking of relationships. I presume that in the heaviest use of Miscegination laws ittl is on the pacific coast and largely written so that asians have to marry asians, with a marriage between a white and a black person being OK. It does lead to the question of whether a Chinese Man can marry a South Asian (India) woman and what grouping the Persians are in. (Does Britain have Burma ittl?)
Hmm that’s a good question. I don’t see why a Chinese could not marry an Indian under the miscegenation laws of the time.

And yes, Burma is British
The German government may be hands off but the German companies may be more involved., see banana republics.
Good example
Yeah, I suspect there is going to be a rather lively contraband trade going on between Northern African-American communities and Black Fiefdoms/rebel groups all up and down the Mississippi. After all, many in the North may have families down South (especially or those who escaped the South during the GAW) and even for those two don't, there are likely going to be many whites and blacks in the Union who are sympathetic to the Freedmen and their descendents in the South.

I wonder when sustained and organized civil rights movements will begin to form in the Confederacy. The 20s are potentially a bit early as people are still catching their breaths after the war and doing their best to hold on to what they have. The 1930s you are probably going to see a Long Consensus form - especially since Long is probably going to be supportive of the Freedmen community (albeit, not as supportive as he will be of poor whites - but certainly better than any CSA politician before him and likely many after). So it won't be until the Long Consensus breaks down during the 1950s or so that we really see things pick up steam: though its going to be a long fight as it seems legal segregation doesn't end until the 1980s/90s if I remember correctly.
You’re remembering correctly.

And, with the US able to enforce their will on the river at will, the Yazoo League in particular will be difficult to dislodge
Once the Southron learns to behave himself then the occupation should end and not a moment before. History will vindicate Lodge.
As I said - the US position on the CS is “learn your place you fucking hillbillies”
I think that the black fiefdoms while it might be unofficially independent in all but name for at least a generation I think they will be brought into line less by weaponry than playing them against each other. Black warlord states after all might share some common struggles but would compete over cash land ect...that is till they get a reminder of how bad the CSA is when they reconquer a area.

At least that's what I think might be dynamic that occurs, ironically any CSA group wishing to unify the nation has to go ''mask on'' for a bit to have the hope, to remove the need to rely on black labour for example you need good relations with the US to try and develop mechanised agriculture, to try and retake the black mini states ideally you need them divided and fighting each other both because the US would tolerate them expelling their rivals more and to reduce the amount of casualties the CSA would face breaking the area and subsuming it.

Of course when the CSA actually does take some land I imagine horrific atrocities take place because the CSA are the CSA leads to pushback as black warlords unite against their common foe, aid and other supplies start surging and the CSA core faces eruptions from dissent at these actions which might be enough to discredit that CSA revivalist clique only for a new one to try the same method a few years later.
It’s going to be very, very bad.
Poor Cabot Lodge, the stodgy stubborn old reactionary fighting a forlorn battle for the rights of the emancipated in the lame duck days of a rudderless administration. You can't say he's not living up to the example set by Sumner and Hoar.
I wouldn’t feel too bad for him considering his racial views about anybody other than freedmen and shenanigans over the previous thirty years, but the irony of this in contrast to his sinking the LON Treaty iOTL is… quite rich.
View attachment 911785 I like the Fief idea! Not sure on the name, maybe County? Hazzard County?!
heh
So what is the exact status of Kentucky btw? Is it still technically part of the CSA but governed by a US civil government and not subject to the terms of withdrawal as the other parts?
It both is and is not part of the CSA.

It is Schrodinger’s Kentucky
I guess Fourth and Fifth Amendments are going to be added in later years, either in during Long's Reign or the Carter Protocol of the 1990s.

Narrative Suggestion:
Immediately after being elected president. Long makes a state visit to the US to meet Pershing. He offers the raftification of the Amendments and a civil rights law protecting confederate freemen in exchange for partial or total wavering of reparations in the treaty.
Long will definitely need to find a way to unshackle the CS economy from its neocolonial status
I support this endeavor as I have been jaded into the belief real Haiti will likely never be fixed in my lifetime so I just vicariously dream of it not being such a mess in other writers alternate history scenarios v:
Haiti was more or less ok even IOTL until Papa Doc and the AIDS epidemic killed its booming tourism industry
 
Good point
I still say that the Yazoo and Gullah states manage to retain considerable autonomy through to the present, and a “New Africa” black belt state in AL and MS limps across the finish line to lose its autonomy only in the Carter-era reconciliation process.

Kentuckian and American weapons and financial backing, US dominance of the Mississippi and Atlantic, and the sheer bloodbath the Confederates would both face and inflict to bring them fully to heel virtually guarantee the survival of the first two, at least.
 
I honestly don't expect the president of the CSA to be able to walk the streets of Frankfort with less than 500 troops until the Carter era Reconciliation. Take what ever issues the CSA has pulling the blacks along the Mississippi back into the Confederacy and multiply them by 100.

Actually, thinking about Kentucky and its Shroedinger status, it will probably become the equivalent of the maquiladoras ittl. Want cheap labor relatively close to US suppliers, build factories in Kentucky, just across the Ohio. You only have to worry about Confederate safety standards (which are not only weak, they won't be enforced in Kentucky). It will be interesting to have efforts to unionize Kentucky.

The equivalent iOtl would be if Mexico didn't really control either Baja or Sonora.
 
I honestly don't expect the president of the CSA to be able to walk the streets of Frankfort with less than 500 troops until the Carter era Reconciliation. Take what ever issues the CSA has pulling the blacks along the Mississippi back into the Confederacy and multiply them by 100.

Actually, thinking about Kentucky and its Shroedinger status, it will probably become the equivalent of the maquiladoras ittl. Want cheap labor relatively close to US suppliers, build factories in Kentucky, just across the Ohio. You only have to worry about Confederate safety standards (which are not only weak, they won't be enforced in Kentucky). It will be interesting to have efforts to unionize Kentucky.

The equivalent iOtl would be if Mexico didn't really control either Baja or Sonora.
I don’t think the US will allow the CSA to reclaim Kentucky, period. I’d expect de jure independence by the present.

FFS it’ll be majority black by 1920-25.
 
I don’t think the US will allow the CSA to reclaim Kentucky, period. I’d expect de jure independence by the present.

FFS it’ll be majority black by 1920-25.
I figure Kentucky would be a ready source of enforcers for US business interests in the CSA. I imagine it would be impolite to send in the USMC to "negotiate" with unruly orange farmers in Florida on behalf of United Fruit I'm the Kentucky State Militia wouldn't mind.
 
I think that it’d be reasonable that the strange unofficial “Free Commonwealth of Kentucky” be increasingly legitimized by the chaotic years of the Confederate Fiefdom Era. To the point where even some white Kentuckians want nothing to do with the chaos on the other side of the Tennessee border. And it also makes sense that the US wouldn’t want Confederate chaos to affect the Ohio.

Naturally the Confederate government wouldn’t recognize Kentucky’s independence even after the Confederate national government returns to Richmond and gets its shit back together. Either it’s a breakaway like Taiwan that’s never recognized or they recognize it around the point where black Confederates get their rights in the 90’s. Plenty of food for thought here.
 
Kentucky's status could also be determined via referendum. I can see the US weasel wording the terms of the treaty to claim that a referendum on US annexation was perfectly within the rights of the sovereign Commonwealth of Kentucky, pointing to Texas and the CSA itself as examples, and the CSA would be mostly powerless to stop it, even if they don't officially give up the claim to Kentucky.
 
Kentucky's status could also be determined via referendum. I can see the US weasel wording the terms of the treaty to claim that a referendum on US annexation was perfectly within the rights of the sovereign Commonwealth of Kentucky, pointing to Texas and the CSA itself as examples, and the CSA would be mostly powerless to stop it, even if they don't officially give up the claim to Kentucky.
The US wont even have to contort itself this far to justify its continued presence in Kentucky after pulling out everywhere else. Officially, Kentucky is still part of the CSA, which means that under the terms of Mount Vernon, as long as the CSA doesn't pass the remaining gunbarrel amendments (i.e. no time soon) the US's continued occupation there would be 100% legal under international law. This would have the added benefit (from the US perspective) of not having to take any stances that could potentially be risky with the domestic political audience - it would be a can that could safely be kicked down the road for a future administration to have to deal with.
 
A future Long may allow the various fiefdoms to exist for now in return for a portion of revenue. Also, Kentucky may have several private security companies that can serve nationally.
 
Battleship: The First Arms Race
"...what the next phase of naval warfare would look like. The Navy was strongly split internally - the Naval Chief of Staff, Admiral William Sims, was strongly supportive of the so-called "Heavy Navy" doctrine, which would double-down on capital ship production while reducing the number of cruisers and destroyers in the fleet, while much of the Naval Design Bureau and a number of Sims' rivals within the Navy - such as the hero of Hilton Head, Reggie Belknap - were in favor of the "Light Navy," a position more in line with the Jeune Ecole of the late 19th century in France.

The Light faction's position was, on paper, understandable as a pivot for the needs of the USN for the 1920s. The Confederacy had seen their entire navy sunk or captured, as had Chile's. Mexico and Brazil still retained formidable surface fleets but had suffered sufficient damage that rebuilding them to pre-war strength (the so-called "1913 Standard" in internal Navy memoranda) would require time and money that neither former belligerent would have for quite some time, and they were likely to be reliant on surplus and outdated vessels from Europe to re-equip. With no threat to the near-abroad, the USN could pivot to a lighter, faster navy, one built around patrol submarines for the Caribbean, speedier cruisers that could deploy rapidly to new areas of interest across Latin America, and also save a more frugal Treasury and Congress quite a bit of money in the meantime, in particular through selling postwar surplus vessels to China, Korea, and the Philippines (there were very few open to the idea of selling vessels to the rapidly-industrializing Japan).

Sims' opposition to the Light Navy was well-known, and ironically, it was due to him looking at the exact same circumstances that the Light faction observed and drawing very different conclusions. Yes, the CSN and Chilean Navy were at the bottom of the ocean, and yes Mexico and Brazil were no longer immediate threats and likely would never be again, but the Great American War had created a new class of threat for which the USN needed to be prepared. The American victory, and the size of its postwar Navy, announced the United States as a Great Power on par with those of Europe, and such a Great Power had interests it would need to defend. Sims, like many of New England upper-middle class stock and Liberal Party sympathies, drew a straight line between the failure of the Monroe Doctrine in 1863 and the Great American War, and believed that a Light Navy would be insufficient to keep European interests (and, potentially, those of Japan) out of the Americas long term, and also took the view that an American confrontation with another Great Power was at some point likely, though not inevitable; in a world where Europe's navies were sprinting to build as many dreadnoughts and, by 1919, battlecruisers as possible, the United States could not take a step back and congratulate itself with a smaller, lighter Navy that could not compete.

This Heavy Navy position was a hard sell, at least initially, to a Congress staring at the postwar economic depression in the United States that lasted well into late 1920, but as 1919 advanced, the bipartisan love for the Navy began to show its face again, especially thanks to concerns about the loss of technical knowledge at mothballed American shipyards. Despite being a Democrat, Senator George Turner of Washington, probably the most powerful figure in the upper house at that time (and representing a state with a large and advanced shipbuilding base) drafted in September 1919 the "Naval Review Act" which charged the Navy to find a middle-ground between the Light and Heavy factions and even called the advisory Navy General Board to testify before the Senate on the matter. The concluding Naval Act of 1920 would split the difference - the United States would forego the development of battlecruisers in favor of massively expanding her submarine fleet, but also would deploy the first so-called "super-dreadnought," the USS Dakota in honor of the second-largest state in the Union by land area, which was to be laid down by the end of the year and ready by 1924 and be the first of a four-ship class that would be ready by 1930, with a new Dakota-class laid down every two years and built in roughly forty months.

The Dakota announced two things: that the United States was not going to wait for European designers (especially Britain) to out-innovate her in vessels with greater tonnage and armament, and that the USN also intended not to retreat but rather retrench after the Great American War. For a country that had pivoted from being awash in nationalism as 1916 drew to an end and then left in a state of myopia and anger three years later, the announcement of the Dakota became a point of pride, and the position of the Navy as the more beloved of America's branches of the armed forces continued on..."

- Battleship: The First Arms Race
 
Assuming these are similar ships to the irl never completed 1920s South Dakota class (not the ones that did get built in the 30s), then these things will be beasts. Twelve 16" guns, 23 knot top speed, they'll be able to overpower even a Queen Elizabeth or German Bayern class super dreadnought. And if they're being built over a longer period like this, I expect the later ships might adopt design changes to make them even more formidable.

A major escalation. If this provokes a naval arms race I wonder if some kind of mid 20s arm control treaty might end up happening to save everyone from bankruptcy.

NH_44895_South_Dakota_class_battleship_(BB_49-54).tif.jpg
 
Last edited:
Assuming these are similar ships to the irl never completed 1920s South Dakota class (not the ones that did get built in the 30s), then these things will be beasts. Twelve 16" guns, 23 knot top speed, they'll be able to overpower even a Queen Elizabeth or German Bayern class super dreadnought. And if they're being built over a longer period like this, I expect the later ships might adopt design changes to make them even more formidable.
I don’t think we have gone to such size inflation just yet. These are IMO at best Tennessee or Colorado equivalents if not New Mexicos, the war and its aftermath would had put a severe delay in American construction. America went to war in 1913. The US had the equivalent of Nevada laid down and building and was about to lay down Pennsylvania... which likely got delayed indefinitely from the war mobilization. No way anyone goes from Nevada, which may or may not have been completed in time for the war to 43,000 ton ships while skipping the four intermediate designs.

Same thing likely applies to the other great navies. IMO the British without war and Jackie Fischer built a full 8 Resolutions and a sixth Queen Elizabeth, plus almost certainly the 3 Canadian Queen Lizzies, and are likely building now the equivalent of the OTL Design A: 760ft x 104ft x 23½ft (23½ft deep), 31,000 tons, 75,000 SHP, 26.5 to 27 knots, with 8x15in guns and 12in stopped armork probably slightly heavier for machineryto ensure 27kts and to accommodate 5.5in secondaries instead of 5in ones. Given the Germans have been NO fast ships and the French have built only a single class of relatively mediocre ones with 13.4in guns there is no pressure to inflate size to anything like Hood.
 
I don’t think we have gone to such size inflation just yet. These are IMO at best Tennessee or Colorado equivalents if not New Mexicos, the war and its aftermath would had put a severe delay in American construction. America went to war in 1913. The US had the equivalent of Nevada laid down and building and was about to lay down Pennsylvania... which likely got delayed indefinitely from the war mobilization. No way anyone goes from Nevada, which may or may not have been completed in time for the war to 43,000 ton ships while skipping the four intermediate designs.

Same thing likely applies to the other great navies. IMO the British without war and Jackie Fischer built a full 8 Resolutions and a sixth Queen Elizabeth, plus almost certainly the 3 Canadian Queen Lizzies, and are likely building now the equivalent of the OTL Design A: 760ft x 104ft x 23½ft (23½ft deep), 31,000 tons, 75,000 SHP, 26.5 to 27 knots, with 8x15in guns and 12in stopped armork probably slightly heavier for machineryto ensure 27kts and to accommodate 5.5in secondaries instead of 5in ones. Given the Germans have been NO fast ships and the French have built only a single class of relatively mediocre ones with 13.4in guns there is no pressure to inflate size to anything like Hood.
So at this point, after the CEW, we expect 5-7 Navies that will attempt to keep up with the bleeding edge:
US, UK, DE, IT, JP and *maybe* RU & ES (Spain).
 
Top