That Gray Wreck

HueyLong

Banned
A speculative essay on what might have been in the post-Victory Confederacy. It will deal almost entirely with events in the Confederacy and deviate little from that arena(forthcoming)

Expect updates by the weekend.

I. The Founding Father Effect
a. That Peculiar Institution
b. State's Rights and the Bloody Shirt
c. Favorite Sons and the "Useless Appendage"
d. Cited Articles of the Confederate Constitution

II. Politics
a. Po' Buckra- The Forgotten Whites
b. Less Corn and More Hell- On Populist Politics and Violence At The Polls
c. I Brought You Into This World- The Threat of Secession
d. Hang that Sambo High!- Negrophobia and its effects upon the polls

III. Economics
a. Cotton is a Bankrupt King- On the decline of cotton
b. The Atlantic Gap- Disparity Between the States
c. The Savage Years- Slave Prices and Slave Violence
d. Baron's Empty Moors- The Stunted Industry of the South

IV. Foreign Affairs
a. Conspiracies Abroad- The Slavery "Wedge"
b. The Giant to the North- US-CS Relations
c. Gray Eyes of Prophecy- On Filibustering

V. Conclusion
 
Last edited:
Hank Williams on the old gray whistle test?

The south had a backward economy, slavery was is an inefficient use of labour as Adam Smith pointed out, it would have had to slowly die otherwise the CSA would be in danger of lagging behind Czarist Russia

Maybe Lee is acclaimed as a war hero and elected President and abolishes slavery as in Ward Moore's Bring the Jubilee. There would be no KKK and no carpet baggers. The rest of the USA would have secesh problems. Maybe parts of New England would join Canada.

The United States would not be a world power and Teddy Roosevelt would not be leading the rough riders and building the Great White Fleet. No American intervention in cruicial stages in two world wars

Hank Williams presented a rosier picture in If the South had won the war or should I say rosier for bigots. By the way, has anyone told you Huey Long detested the KKK. Harry Turtledove presents a rather far fetched picture. I think Ward Moore had the more plausible scenario although maybe it was wishful thinking about abolishing slavery
 
Maybe Lee is acclaimed as a war hero and elected President and abolishes slavery as in Ward Moore's Bring the Jubilee.

I for one welcome President Lee's efforts to amend the constitution. Alas, they are probably doomed.
The rest of the USA would have secesh problems. Maybe parts of New England would join Canada.

Why? Neither New England nor California have any desire to be British puppets.
 

HueyLong

Banned
@AndrewHudson: That was an odd rant. Got a point? I addressed most of your ideas already in just the titles......

@Faelin: JD's presidential term ends in 1867. Even assuming Lee takes it, he is old and cannot live through that term. I think its much more likely for him to be a Franklin type.

And no one is going to be amending the Constitution- especially not one of the first ideals.
 
Northern Manufacturing Interests and the South

With the failure of the North's efforts to win the war, within ten years northern manufacturing interests have begun to enter into contracts for the agricultural goods and materials of the south. In the Age of the Robber Barons, there is no commonality holding the rapacious capitalists of the North back, and the deep south would quickly find itself in a subservient economic position.
 
That Grey wreck

I for one welcome President Lee's efforts to amend the constitution. Alas, they are probably doomed.


Why? Neither New England nor California have any desire to be British puppets.

New England was unhappy about the war of 1812 and was fiercly abolitionist. Canada gained its own government in 1867 and a lot may depend on the attitude to slavery in the North as after the Dred Scott act fugitive slaves would have been returned. Would the North return freed slaves? This may have some effect. The war of Independence was a close run thing, many Americans were Tories and ended up in Canada whilst Canadian patriots went south. Britain wasn't so much defeated militarily, the government fell and the Marquis of Rockingham's Whigs formed a government on condition that there was a negotiated settlement. Had the Whigs been in power before 1776 there may have been no war.

I can't see California wanting to be British maybe Mexico would annex it or rather the French backed regime as France would have had a free hand in Mexico had the United States split. There were successionist feeling in the Mid West and rioting in New York during the war. There would also be the question of the various wars with the Indian nations who were defending their land against white settlers. Maybe no Battle of the Little Big Horn maybe the Candians would have joined forces with their Lakota allies from the war of 1812
 

HueyLong

Banned
New England was unhappy about the war of 1812 and was fiercly abolitionist. Canada gained its own government in 1867 and a lot may depend on the attitude to slavery in the North as after the Dred Scott act fugitive slaves would have been returned. Would the North return freed slaves? This may have some effect. The war of Independence was a close run thing, many Americans were Tories and ended up in Canada whilst Canadian patriots went south. Britain wasn't so much defeated militarily, the government fell and the Marquis of Rockingham's Whigs formed a government on condition that there was a negotiated settlement. Had the Whigs been in power before 1776 there may have been no war.

I can't see California wanting to be British maybe Mexico would annex it or rather the French backed regime as France would have had a free hand in Mexico had the United States split. There were successionist feeling in the Mid West and rioting in New York during the war. There would also be the question of the various wars with the Indian nations who were defending their land against white settlers. Maybe no Battle of the Little Big Horn maybe the Candians would have joined forces with their Lakota allies from the war of 1812

No offense, AH, but you need to restrain yourself in these threads. Most of the time you go way off tangent and talk about things only remotely connected to the topic at hand. Interesting thoughts nonetheless, but take them elsewhere.
 

HueyLong

Banned
Preamble

"The interval between the decay of the old and the formation and establishment of the new constitutes a period of transition which must always necessarily be one of uncertainty, confusion, error, and wild and fierce fanaticism."- John C. Calhoun

I. The Founding Father Effect


There is a marked tendency in both American histories to take those few Great Men of their respective Revolutions and disseminate their ideas and myths, to idealize, to whitewash and to emulate. [1] First, there were two figures shared as Founding Fathers. Those men were George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

George Washington, a Virginian by birth if you asked the Confederacy and a Unionist by action if you asked the United States, was a figure idolized in both histories.

To the South, he was the First Leader of the First Revolution, a benevolent slaveholder (and in fact, an active defender of it), a Virginian patriot, a brilliant statesman aware of the dangers of faction and a military genius. He knew the limits of central power, denying himself a third term. His slaves at Monticello were treated well and were brought all the virtues of Christian Civilization. His stance on "faction" in government were cited as a cause for the Second American Revolution. His ideas on "entangling alliances" were widely disseminated during the "Wedge" years, to spur up support for the "Anti-Tangle" movement. He was often identified with Robert E. Lee, the Second Revolution leader.

To the North, he was much the same, but with some key differences. He was a man of the Union, even if he came from a treasonous state. His slaveholding was mostly ignored, but his few anti-slavery utterances were not. He was idealized for his quick and efficient actions towards Shays' Rebellion, a what-might have been had there been a Washington instead of a Lincoln in 1861. His thoughts against "faction" were used to damn the erring sisters of the South.

Thomas Jefferson was a less clear-cut fellow. A Virginian much the same as Washington, he slowly grew detached from the Union's Founding Fathers and was never easily identified as a Unionist.

In the South, he was the intellectual forebear of the Second American Revolution. "The tree of liberty," he said "must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Only the fears of the Hell Years diminished his image somewhat. He was a staunch slaveholder, believing it to be the only moral good for the Negro. Accounts of his affair with Sally Hemmings were widely ignored, if accepted with tongue in cheek. He was the president to usher in the entrance of the common man to federal politics. He was the cultured planter with civic virtue, immune to urban and Northern vice.

In the North, he was somewhat of an anti-hero, a figure to be used against the establishment. His calls for revolution were never really idolized, but were brought up by reformers and radicals, a waving of the bloody shirt to remind Washington that secession was just across the Potomac. His agrarian emphasis was sometimes pushed but more often Federals hearkened back to him as an inventor and scientist, a man committed to what would be the future of the United States. Still, his stature diminished following the Second American Revolution. His rebellious stances were too distasteful for the bitter defeats that had just occurred.

There were two figures hailed throughout the Confederacy who would never see her blood-stained independent soils. Those men were John C. Calhoun and Preston Brooks.

John C. Calhoun was the epitome of the pre-Revolution statesman. A staunch defender of state's rights, a hoarse-throated defender of slavery, he was a political martyr for the South of the pre-Revolution era. A Southerner first, an American second, and never likely to fall back from the first anyways, Calhoun's image was one of the elderly statesman, for the Confederacy was lacking in any likable ones by the end of the Revolution. He died nearly 13 years before independence, a fact lamented in the much later bambo [2] song "Calhoun's Walkin' Down Freedom Lane".

Preston Brooks, meanwhile, was the fiery Southerner, committed to honor and chivalry and not afraid to oppose the North on any question. Some have compared his image to that of the Fenian, and Brooks' image and name was constantly used to justify a bellicose attitude towards the North or a flippant attitude to British demands. He was the eternal rebel and one of the few men to realize what need to be done before it was done.

Needless to say, neither of the men got much notice and even less praise in the United States. Funnily enough, Preston Brooks' "Cane-Breaker" would go on to be President of the United States, an occurrence considered to have raised the Southern Senator's own Founding Father status, an incidence of "twisting the lion's tail."

And finally, the Founding Fathers who participated in the Second American Revolution. Many of the men were "favorite sons" idolized in only one state or another, and they will be dealt with later in this text.

There is a peculiar characteristic among all of the Founding Fathers with broad appeal. Certainly not Jefferson Davis. Not a single Confederate Representative, with Alexander Stephens and John C. Breckinridge lone among those so admired to hold a Confederate level post. No, most of the heroes of the South were military men.

First and foremost, Robert E. Lee. The man who won the War. His benevolent household at Arlington, with smiling slaves and well-tended graves for the patriots slain at the hands of the North. [3] His moral qualms about slavery were ignored, whitewashed in favor of his benevolent slaveholder statements. Much was made of his conflicts with the administration, of his own military prowess kept in check by the incompetent Federal president. He was a man who succeeded despite the many things tying him back. He was the image of Southern chivalry and the Confederate Washington, who denied himself power to live out his life on a plantation. He was pushed to run for President in the Election of 1867, but refused, citing his bad health and his general reluctance to run a government.

Perhaps that was his saving grace. James Longstreet, the "Old Warhorse" did not achieve as prominent an image due to his participation in politics. Splitting the Democratic ticket (the only ticket there was, really) with his "Redeemer" faction, he would go on to win the Presidency in 1867. Afterwards, he was damned for being a "second Davis", for being a "negro lover" and a "harlot of the United States". Despite all of this, he was an able corps commander, a trusted subordinate of Robert E. Lee and generally well-liked by veterans. But the stain of politics remained upon him, and he is generally ignored as an idol, except as a warning that not all good soldiers make good presidents.

John C. Breckinridge, the Secretary of War for the post-revolutionary years somehow avoided the tar of the Confederate Government. Remembered favorably for his near defeat of Lincoln in 1860 and seen as an able commander tied down by men like Bragg, he, like Longstreet, tried for politics but did not reach that level of popular failure. Bowing out of the convention after the Redeemer faction split with Longstreet, he handed the nomination to Alexander Stephens. He is generally seen as a man who abandoned all he had for the Confederacy, leaving his home of Kentucky. In fact, following his time as Secretary of War, there were a number of charitable donations made to him by prominent Confederates to, as he put it, "get a free start in this free land." He, like Lee, left politics up to others, retiring to a new home in Tennessee. There was a "Draft Breckinridge" movement in 1873 that failed when he declared he would not serve.

Stonewall Jackson was the martyr who died too young. Almost in eulogy, he received nearly 100 votes on the first ballot of the 1867 Democratic Nominating convention, and it became a tradition in his home district and elsewhere to first include his name (or some similiar young martyr) on the ballot. Stonewall Jackson was the perfect Founding Father, for no flaws could be seen and any opinion could be attached to the dead soldier. He was the idol of veterans and war widows, a stalwart man lost for the cause.

Benjamin Palmer, the spiritual defender of secession and state's rights did much with his Thanksgiving sermon, [4] and would continue to do well in his often political speeches. "The abolition spirit is undeniably atheistic," he preached. "The demon which erected its throne upon the guillotine in the days of Robespierre and Marat, which abolished the Sabbath and worshiped reason in the person a harlot yet survives to work other horrors." Only during the Hell Years did he suffer a drop in popularity, due to his opposition to the Redeemers and even then, he remained a popular read and a town-stopping preacher. His name is still known today as one of the men to most mobilize the spirits of Southerners during the hard times leading up to and during the Second American Revolution.

Alexander Stephens, the most distinguished statesman and eventual President of the Confederate States. "You should never view Liberty as subordinate to Independence," he said. "The cry of Independence First, Liberty Second is a fatal delusion." He was the ideologue of the Second Revolution, and one of the first to declare a split with the government of Davis over issues of passports and conscription. A firm state's rights and slavery supporter, he would try for the presidency in 1867 and achieve it in 1873. His presidency did not alter his status, no, he was remembered rather fondly, mostly because he did nothing. He remained popular until his death, never abandoning the Confederate Government by serving out his last days in the Confederate Congress.

All of these men were idealized for their supposed virtues- those of slaveholding and state's rights. Where the man was found wanting, stories were embellished, quotes fabricated or the man was struck form the list. The Founding Fathers of the Confederate States were almost without exception men of certain values and it was those values the nascent Confederacy would follow for so long.

[1] Only going to do those of national prominence now, then on specific issues and the Constitution's implicit bias, then on to people with weird names like Zebulon. Basically, these are the people like Ben Franklin etc.... that are well known and well liked, even if most people don't know much about them.
[2] Made up term for some future jazz equivalent
[3] Yeah, I know. Too parallel. But humor me and besides, Lee seems the type to do that thing for ANV vets.
[4] the text of the sermon can be found here
 
Last edited:
The Founding Fathers of the Confederate States were almost without exception men of certain values and it was those values the nascent Confederacy would follow for so long.

And they're all military men... I'm not sure whether the Confederacy is going to go for filibustering or juntas, but I suspect (especially with the phrase "Hell years") that it's in for some trouble.
 

maverick

Banned
That was quite interesting...

What ever happened to men like Nathan Bedford Forrest and Judah P. Benjamin? might they be explored in the future?

Also, any chance of referrence to events in the USA? such as who succeeds Lincoln and what happens to the northern parties?
 
I think what needs to be adressed is state power vs. Federal power. Jefferson Davis wanted a USA-style government set up in the South that had most of the power concentrated in the Central Government. However, the Southern States had broken from the USA because they wanted the states to have more power than the Federal Government. Of course during the war I believe Georgia threatened to break away from the CSA if the Federal Government became to strong. So the CSA somehow has to fix these two conflicting ideals or else another civil war would break out within the CSA.
 

HueyLong

Banned
That was quite interesting...

What ever happened to men like Nathan Bedford Forrest and Judah P. Benjamin? might they be explored in the future?

Also, any chance of referrence to events in the USA? such as who succeeds Lincoln and what happens to the northern parties?

Nathan Bedford Forrest is out due to later political activities during the Hell Years. James T. Longstreet only got on the list because his FF status got him into the presidency- the highest rank Forrest gets ITTL is Commander-at-Arms of the White Vigilance League. Much the same with Jeb Stuart, for example.

As for Judah P. Benjamin, do Americans remember John Jay? And do they really exalt Benjamin Franklin's diplomatic achievements? Not really. Judah P. Benjamin becomes too associated with the Wedge and also, some embarassing documents suggesting emancipation for peace (and foreign support) So, he does not escape the spectre of the Davis presidency.

As for who succeeds Lincoln, its already been hinted at (But who is between Lincoln and the Republican successor has not been said, but can be guessed.)

Also, as to the state v. Confederate split, look at the low status of the Confederate government and the statements of Alexander Stephens. And the chapter titles.
 
The south had a backward economy, slavery was is an inefficient use of labour as Adam Smith pointed out, it would have had to slowly die otherwise the CSA would be in danger of lagging behind Czarist Russia

On this board that is a commonly accepted school of thought. However, having fought a war (or broken away peacefully, which is the best way to get a free confederacy) in effect to retain slavery (somebody here will debate this, but it boiled down to their right to keep slaves), actually getting rid of it will be difficult (the confederate constitution aside).

Maybe Lee is acclaimed as a war hero and elected President and abolishes slavery as in Ward Moore's Bring the Jubilee. There would be no KKK and no carpet baggers. The rest of the USA would have secesh problems. Maybe parts of New England would join Canada.

President Lee is a staple of ACW AH. However, remember, if elected, he would die halfway through his term at the age of 63. Then their is the problem of the Confederate Constitution specifically banning the abolition of slavery. To quote Article I, Section 9.4 of the confederate constitution:

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed

the full text can be found here.

as for New England breaking off, that would require a crushing military defeat of the rump US. And as many posters here have noticed, New england had little desire to become a puppet for the british empire.

The United States would not be a world power and Teddy Roosevelt would not be leading the rough riders and building the Great White Fleet. No American intervention in cruicial stages in two world wars

The US would almost certainly rise to prominence in spite of the South seceeding. Roosevelt may or may not rise to power (I agree there will be no rough rider exploits, but a parallel adventure is possible, and Roosevelt was well prepared to rise to greatness), and President roosevelt implies that the USN will expand. However, the main focus will be the army, in preparation for the inevitable war with the ailing CSA>

Hank Williams presented a rosier picture in If the South had won the war or should I say rosier for bigots. By the way, has anyone told you Huey Long detested the KKK. Harry Turtledove presents a rather far fetched picture. I think Ward Moore had the more plausible scenario although maybe it was wishful thinking about abolishing slavery

I never read if the south had won the war. Huey Long is interesting, but due to the butterfly effect is probably irrelevant to this discussion, at least at the present time. As for Turtledove and Moore, both of who I have read, they are both rather implausible. turtledove was intentional, because he wanted to set up a parallel for World war Two in North America. However, he gives the South way to much power. Ward Moore's Bring the Jubilee is horrible in terms of plausibility. He really goes to far with his CSA wanking, as I discuss here.
 
How does the South view Southern unionists like Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, Zachary Taylor, and Andrew Johnson in this world? In fact, has anyone dealt with what would happen to Johnson in a "South wins" scenario?
 

HueyLong

Banned
The Unionist statesmen of the South (those who remained loyal to the Union even if their state did not) are never seated under Lincoln, just like in OTL. The McClellanite Democrats, after winning big but not big enough in 64 try to reseat a number of them, even if their state isn't technically still part of the Union. These "illegal senators" are removed in the Republican sweep of '68.

Jackson is mostly reviled, especially as some Confederate areas (Texas, Georgia and Sequoyah) try to revive some image of Indians as noble ancestors. He is especially hated in the Carolinas. His reputation in the North isn't much better either.

Johnson becomes an "illegal Senator" under McClellan. He was never nominated for a Union Party, because there isn't one ITTL. The 1864 Republican Nomination goes to Fremont, not to Lincoln.
 
What about Clay and Taylor? For that matter, what about Madison, Monroe, Marshall, Hamilton, Van Buren, Harrison, Hancock, Burr, and the Adamses?
 
Top