Southern Victory 1864

Also regardless of the discussion of IF the CSA could scrape up a victory, I think that it is essential that massive reforms be made immediately following the war, as I can see the first drafted Constitution spewing problems for the fledgling nation initially. So I can see the OTL CSA Constitution being something more along the lines of the US's Articles of Confederation.

Now I'm not saying the CSA leaves the "Confederate" element of itself, but it would clearly need to edit and switch some things around if it plans to last more than a decade. I believe that a union type system that just focuses severely towards state's rights could take shape if it lasts past the 50 year mark.

Additionally, the issue of slavery is likely to work itself out as the international community completely ignores and refuses conversation with the CSA, as well as the agricultural element loosing its "mass" profitability by in large by the end of the 1870's if not far earlier for the region that is now the CSA. So just simply based on forced industrialization based off of a need for profit and its own industry due to its lack of international appeal, as well as the attempt to become a larger player on the world stage, coupled with its need for conversation with outside nations, would more or less lead them with no choice but emancipation by around 1880-90. However, that's not saying that "Civil Rights" in any way follows emancipation. I can imagine something along the lines of very low wage industrial workers and sharecroppers up until the 1920's-30's before any progress in this regard is made at all. With "Civil Rights" being gained by probably 1975-80 if not simply out of international influence and demand.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Yeah, it would be a stretch for the CSA to get Virginia north of the Rappahannock River, let alone Maryland, DC and Delaware.

True. Even though the United States may move the capital in a CS victory scenario, they are going to want to keep Washington City and make sure it is secure. And Delaware never showed any significant pro-Confederate sentiment, despite being a slave state.

Kentucky is iffy, depending on how the war goes.

In 1862, maybe. But not in any 1864 CS Victory scenario. Indeed, the Confederates might not even get Tennessee in peace-through-Northern-exhaustion scenario.

Missouri is not. Neither is West Virginia.

Agreed.
 
Also regardless of the discussion of IF the CSA could scrape up a victory, I think that it is essential that massive reforms be made immediately following the war, as I can see the first drafted Constitution spewing problems for the fledgling nation initially. So I can see the OTL CSA Constitution being something more along the lines of the US's Articles of Confederation.

Now I'm not saying the CSA leaves the "Confederate" element of itself, but it would clearly need to edit and switch some things around if it plans to last more than a decade. I believe that a union type system that just focuses severely towards state's rights could take shape if it lasts past the 50 year mark.

Additionally, the issue of slavery is likely to work itself out as the international community completely ignores and refuses conversation with the CSA, as well as the agricultural element loosing its "mass" profitability by in large by the end of the 1870's if not far earlier for the region that is now the CSA. So just simply based on forced industrialization based off of a need for profit and its own industry due to its lack of international appeal, as well as the attempt to become a larger player on the world stage, coupled with its need for conversation with outside nations, would more or less lead them with no choice but emancipation by around 1880-90. However, that's not saying that "Civil Rights" in any way follows emancipation. I can imagine something along the lines of very low wage industrial workers and sharecroppers up until the 1920's-30's before any progress in this regard is made at all. With "Civil Rights" being gained by probably 1975-80 if not simply out of international influence and demand.

Considering that slavery was written in as part of the Confederate Constitution, as a requirement for statehood, voting, and abolition is outlawed in the bill of rights, I doubt the CSA would or even structurally could abolish slavery. Chattel Slavery and King Cotton was the lifeblood of the South in the eyes of the Confederate Aristocracy - if you think the demands of foreign nations would get them to abolish it, when the pleas of their countrymen did not, let alone after fighting a war to preserve the institution, you're sadly mistaken.

Top it off with your previously mentioned structural concerns, and the CSA is up shits creek without a paddle very quickly - I'd give them two or three decades of infighting and stagnation tops, and by that point, or long before then, the CSA will collapse, whether it be to member states splintering off, getting curb-stomped by the USA in Civil War Mark II, or by the slaves or disenfranchised whites overthrowing the Confederate government. Look away Dixieland indeed.

True. Even though the United States may move the capital in a CS victory scenario, they are going to want to keep Washington City and make sure it is secure. And Delaware never showed any significant pro-Confederate sentiment, despite being a slave state.

In 1862, maybe. But not in any 1864 CS Victory scenario. Indeed, the Confederates might not even get Tennessee in peace-through-Northern-exhaustion scenario.

I'd even disagree that the USA would move the capitol - first, as it would be a sign of weakness, and second, DC was already the most fortified city in the Western Hemisphere at this point, so it's pretty secure. Especially if the Rappahannock is the new border - I would hate to live in TTL's Stafford or Fredericksburg though.

Wait, this is 1864? Yeah, the CSA is screwed post-Gettysburg - the Army of Northern Virginia has been gutted, and is fighting a losing war of attrition with General Grant. General Sherman is putting Georgia to the torch. Tennessee, Louisiana, the Mississippi River and most of Florida are in Union hands by this point. Plus, by this point, not only is the Union war machine in full order, but the Union is on the verge of victory and out for blood. As usual, Dixie is doomed.
 
once again, I could see the Confederate Constitution receiving heavy edits, or possibly even an entire re-drafting following the war when its major shortcomings show their faces.

and seeing as how slavery was in many ways kept for economical reasons for the richest of the rich in the region, when slavery begins plummeting their income instead of raising it, I do not see it lasting very long in the public opinion category even with those that heavily supported it. Especially when only the top percentage of the Confederate States even owned slaves, and when asking how many owned more than one or two is an even incredibly smaller figure. Im not saying even that small percentage was acceptable, but the amount of people that owned slaves and TRULY supported it it is much lower than people commonly accept.
 
once again, I could see the Confederate Constitution receiving heavy edits, or possibly even an entire re-drafting following the war when its major shortcomings show their faces.

Why? And the CSA Constitution is pretty much like the USA Constitution in

and seeing as how slavery was in many ways kept for economical reasons for the richest of the rich in the region, when slavery begins plummeting their income instead of raising it, I do not see it lasting very long in the public opinion category even with those that heavily supported it. Especially when only the top percentage of the Confederate States even owned slaves, and when asking how many owned more than one or two is an even incredibly smaller figure. Im not saying even that small percentage was acceptable, but the amount of people that owned slaves and TRULY supported it it is much lower than people commonly accept.

When is slavery going to plummet their income? Especially as free labor gets more and more costly (assuming it isn't rendered in a weaker and weaker position in the CSA thanks to entrenched slavery)?

I'm not sure what "truly supported it" is meant to mean. As opposed to the people who merely supported it because it was a fundamental part of the society of the time?
 

katchen

Banned
Check out tarpley.net/.../wrap-the-world-in-flames-the-us-russian-alliance-that-saved-the -union/ for an excellent analysis of the European politics around the US Civil War. More than anything else it was a combination of Russia's unreserved support for the Union cause and the worsening situation in Europe (the German-Danish Crisis was building toward the German-Danish War in 1863-1864), accordint to Webster Tarpley in 2011, that prevented Great Britain from intervening on behalf of the Confederacy. That and the very real risk of losing Canada.
For that reason, I would say that if the South had won, the North would not have let bygones be bygones and simply permitted good relations with Great Britain and France as if nothing had happened. Great Britain and France would be friendly to and allied with the South and the North would be allied to Germany and Russia through the rest of the 19th and perhaps well into the 20th Century.
 
Top