It's more of a cross border event. In the 30s a thawing of relations between north and south allows for greater movement between the two countries. Bush's family heavily involved in the railway business move to the south after a massive railroad boom in the interior of Oklahoma and Texas.
Davis's memoirs state that the one term was supposed to be a temporary measure until the remnants of the constitutional loopholes could have been dealt with. After 'dealing' with them (will expand on them in some coming chapter) a fixed two term limit is created by constitutional amendment.
I also think 1972 is a bit early for the end of Jim Crow in an independent Confederacy. South Africa held on to Apartheid until 1994, and they had a black majority, so an independent CSA with a white majority could hold on to Jim Crow at least as long, possibly to the present. I also think 52,000 USD is a bit high of a GDP per capita for an independent CSA.
MLK was born in 1929 IIRC, so he'd be in his 60s during the 1990s. I think he'd make it at least to the year 2000 if he wasn't assassinated. I could see the CSA and South Africa ditching their respective apartheids around the same time, with South Africa desegregating in 1994 and the Confederacy following at some point in the remainder of the 90s. Granted, that's assuming TTL's history parallels our own.
MLK had the heart of a 70 year old man when he was examined after his assassination. Like JFK, he'd have probably lived only a few decades past his assassination. I'd imagine MLK could possibly die of a heart attack in his mid-50s/early 60s from what I've read IIRC.
With that info, I'm guessing he'd pass at some point in the 80s or 90s, Early 2000s at the very latest.
I don't think 1972 is THAT unrealistic. Then again, it also depends on whether or not Kentucky and Missouri (and Arizona Territory) join the CSA. Those three areas would likely vote in favor of supporting an analog of OTL Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts (along with Oklahoma) in the 1960s and 1970s. I expect there to be three blocks: Arizona, Kentucky, Missouri, and Oklahoma being in favor, the states that voted for Strom Thurmond or George Wallace being against, and everyone else being swing votes or at least having a significant minority supporting it. I'm basing it on the Congressional breakdown of the voting of these acts IOTL. A black Confederate president is a different story though. And as far as the GDP goes, having Kentucky and Missouri could make a difference with regards to how it industrializes as they would have significant manufacturing bases.
I've seen a TL where the CSA tries to get Cuba and it horrifically backfires to say the least. So that could happen here.
It is more of a context of the circumstances scenario. The CSA from 1951 - 1969 underwent what can be called something not exactly a civil war, but not exactly just simple troubles either, exacerbated by Thurmond's hardline segregation policies which led a near state of civil war, which basically forced the hand of the government to loosen some segregation policies, including office rights, which allowed the Reformists to come to power in 1971 after two decades of basically chaos.
Don't let the numbers deceive you. Think of it like a Saudi Arabia or UAE or Kuwait or Bahrain or Qatar analogue. The CSA is heavily dependent on its natural resources - oil, mineral, natural gas, and agricultural resources for its economy, and is tied to the resource curse, making Income Inequality extremely high.
Oh it came to pass. But the CSA were thrown out of Cuba in the war and Spain didn't have the manpower to do anything but conduct a small blockade so both sides called it the quits and left. Cuba is tied to Spain in a Canada-Britain analogue ittl.
Does the CSA ever try to get Kentucky, Missouri, and Arizona Territory by any chance?
they did try in the alt civil war, but they failed to do so. Arizona was basically traded for Oklahoma.
