The CSA wins: what next in the USA?

You have it on the nose... North Korea, but providing cotton, timber, and latter on, oil.
Would they even have oil? From what I remember most of the early major oilfields seem to have been either in Union states/territories or Texas. At what point in its history did Texas start getting its self-opinion of exceptionalism? If the rest of the CSA is starting to stagnate economically whilst they have a large cattle industry and then find themselves sitting on top of all this oil I do have to wonder if they might not try to secede as the Republic of Texas and strike out for themselves.
 
Would they even have oil? From what I remember most of the early major oilfields seem to have been either in Union states/territories or Texas. At what point in its history did Texas start getting its self-opinion of exceptionalism? If the rest of the CSA is starting to stagnate economically whilst they have a large cattle industry and then find themselves sitting on top of all this oil I do have to wonder if they might not try to secede as the Republic of Texas and strike out for themselves.

In fact, during the ACW, it was always Texas that was pointed to as the most likely state to break off post-CSA victory. Politically, they were to the CSA what the Antebellum South was to the USA. gimme-gimme-gimme or I secede!:mad:
 

frlmerrin

Banned
Rob,
I am going to have to ask for some clarification from you before trying to answer your last post directed at me.

I made the statement

2) I would point out that almost all whites in this period were committed to white supremacy, Union, CSA, British or French.

After some discussion you came up with 28 news paper articles which you seemed to think demonstrated that I was mistaken in my assertion. Having carefully read the anecdotes I am puzzled. Whist most (not all) would somewhat support the assertion that some sectors of British society might not be quite as in favour of white supremacy as I have suggested several of them make very clear that the authors believed that the USA/Union was completely committed to white supremacy.

So my question is, are you suggesting that my assertion is wrong in its entirety, in which case you have undermined your own argument or are you suggesting that it was just the British that were above such attitudes, in which case your posts make sense even if they don’t make your case. Please advise.
 
Please advise.

I provided you a demonstrative anecdote to show what happened to people in Britain at the time who advanced theories of white supremacy (to summarise: they were laughed at, hissed, and refuted). You then responded with:
very few British people were even exposed to this positive view… you have not shown this anecdote to be in anyway representative of the national feelings of the British people just one tiny part of the British polity

I then provided you with 28 different quotes and anecdotes from newspapers and individuals, taken from across the country and from all political persuasions. With an encouraging regularity, these either completely rejected the argument that black people were inferior for anything other than social reasons or expressed abhorrence at the manifestations of systematic racism which they perceived in the North. This, I felt, would put to bed the idea that, in Britain, “almost all whites in this period were committed to white supremacy”. May I remind you (once again) that the evidence you have provided for your assertion consists of two quotes 10-30 years (possibly 30-90) after the events we’re discussing, and your own suppositions about what may lie beneath a selection of British foreign policy decisions cherry-picked from the period 1790-1900. If “almost all whites in this period were committed to white supremacy” you should able to be overwhelm us with quotations from contemporary sources arguing that black people are inherently inferior and fully endorsing schemes of discrimination.

When I discussed Britain, I was making no suggestions about the relative levels of racism in the Union compared to the Confederacy. I would, however, point out that the quotations I provided show that the British were horrified by the fact that the North did not treat black people as equal to whites. This is a substantial improvement on keeping them as property as the Confederates did, a situation which their state was created in order to codify and entrench. I must admit that I thought this was such a blindingly obvious point that I would not have to state it fully as I am doing now. Indeed, contributions from Fiver and usertron2020 demonstrate that the median Confederate (as we might term him) possessed racist attitudes qualitatively different to his northern neighbour, and how this was fully reflected in the political discourse of the Confederacy. My posts about Britain do nothing more than confirm that the Confederacy was even further up the bell curve when a more global perspective is taken into account.
 
Top