Until every drop of blood is paid - A more radical American Civil War

Oh, snap. I accidentally gave a clue away. Anyway, I'm guessing that there would not be such a big backlash against Garfield if he's the candidate. Breckenridge was even younger when elected VP, and now he's the leader of the rebellion. Also, when I say candidates, I refer to my candidates, so something like Stanton becoming President and Garfield succeeding him after he's incapacitated would count (not saying I'm gonna do that. I'm really liking the idea of Stanton as a political tutor).
I am surprised that there is a anti-Garfeild clique. I would hazard a guess its because Garfield is actually on the anti-Grant side, maybe. and also probably because he is Rosecrans man and held a personal vendetta against Grant for the rest of his life. Of course I could be reaching but anyone that seems to be on Garfields side seems to hate Grant a bit, especially after the Civil War.

And also, Garfield did come after Grant in the Presidency and campaigned on Reforming all of the corruption that started with Grant.

That said Garfield to me seems like the man who should be President because that Reforming platform I think was necessary. Plus his practice as a lawyer, and even the whole "writing Latin with the left hand and Greek with the right". He would definitely be one of the most smartest men to be President.
 
That said Garfield to me seems like the man who should be President because that Reforming platform I think was necessary. Plus his practice as a lawyer, and even the whole "writing Latin with the left hand and Greek with the right". He would definitely be one of the most smartest men to be President.
Someone upthread said Grant initially didn't really want to be president but unlike Sherman accepted the nomination. If a better candidate arises in this timeline then it could certainly go to that person. As I said, I am starting to warm to the idea of Garfield's directly after Lincoln. He is only three years younger than Chamberlain and I had begun to warm to him even before I read his Wikipedia article, he was elected to Congress during the war in 1862. Even more than Chamberlain he would need a mentor like Stanton just due to his age and could probably win the presidency without having to be vice president if the Republicans are strong enough and if he has made enough of a name for himself in the war. Chamberlain could then get his several terms as governor of Maine and run in 1876 and 1880.

Garfield would still need to distinguish himself in the war quite a bit but it looks very possible. Perhaps in this timeline he is involved in the capture of Chattanooga for instance.
 
What about Schurz and the other 48ers? Hopefully the XIth Corps won't have the "Flying Dutchmen" rep they unjustly had IOTL (you can thank Howard for Chancellorsville, and Barlow for Gettysburg).
 
Some would say he was better than Stonewall. Unlike Stonewall, he never had a bad day.
Plus, Cleburne thought the slaves could be very honorable soldiers and compared them to Spartacus. After the war perhaps he could become the Longstreet of this timeline and support reconstruction. Unlike Longstreet he is not tied to the planter class mentality, having been born in Ireland.
 
That said Garfield to me seems like the man who should be President because that Reforming platform I think was necessary. Plus his practice as a lawyer, and even the whole "writing Latin with the left hand and Greek with the right". He would definitely be one of the most smartest men to be President.
Garfield is definitely a front runner. His only flaw in my estimation is that he didn't like the prospect of further Federal intervention in the South. A more successful Reconstruction might make intervention unnecessary, but terrorism, resistance and racism will take a long time to die. Grant is better in that respect, though towards the very end of Reconstruction he also hesitated.

Someone upthread said Grant initially didn't really want to be president but unlike Sherman accepted the nomination. If a better candidate arises in this timeline then it could certainly go to that person. As I said, I am starting to warm to the idea of Garfield's directly after Lincoln. He is only three years younger than Chamberlain and I had begun to warm to him even before I read his Wikipedia article, he was elected to Congress during the war in 1862. Even more than Chamberlain he would need a mentor like Stanton just due to his age and could probably win the presidency without having to be vice president if the Republicans are strong enough and if he has made enough of a name for himself in the war. Chamberlain could then get his several terms as governor of Maine and run in 1876 and 1880.

Garfield would still need to distinguish himself in the war quite a bit but it looks very possible. Perhaps in this timeline he is involved in the capture of Chattanooga for instance.
I'd say that Garfield most likely fought at Dover and Corinth under Grant, then was transferred to Tennessee and saw action at Lexington and White Lily. So there is definitely potential for Garfield to be a war hero.

Just read the update. I wonder if Cleburne could be the "Stonewall Jackson of the West"
That's an interesting proposition. Cleburne is certainly talented, and Breckenridge has less qualms about bypassing hierarchies and Cleburne's peculiar views on slavery.

What about Schurz and the other 48ers? Hopefully the XIth Corps won't have the "Flying Dutchmen" rep they unjustly had IOTL (you can thank Howard for Chancellorsville, and Barlow for Gettysburg).
To be completely honest I have a bone to pick with Schurz. I just can't forgive him for being one of the architects of the Liberal Republican movement. I do feel for the 48ers, and plan to have the Germans take center stage in resistance to the Confederates in Missouri and Texas. Maybe I could make the "Dutch Corps" play a prominent part in the next campaign. Certainly, making heroes of the Union out of the Germans can help the Republicans to attract their votes, which would be very important in some areas.

I'm thinking that the Union answer to the Confederate shooting of Black Union POWs is the Union shooting Confederate POWs. And even beyond that..
Lincoln did threaten to do that OTL.
 
Garfield is definitely a front runner. His only flaw in my estimation is that he didn't like the prospect of further Federal intervention in the South. A more successful Reconstruction might make intervention unnecessary, but terrorism, resistance and racism will take a long time to die. Grant is better in that respect, though towards the very end of Reconstruction he also hesitated.
Given how LIncoln changed from 1861 to 1865 OTL, it seems plausible that Garfield would grow to support it, or at least grudgingly accept it. Plus, it makes him a better negotiator and diplomat, forcing him to try to get the South to act peacefully, and then only using more force when they don't. The South would only have themslelves to blame.
 
To be completely honest I have a bone to pick with Schurz. I just can't forgive him for being one of the architects of the Liberal Republican movement. I do feel for the 48ers, and plan to have the Germans take center stage in resistance to the Confederates in Missouri and Texas. Maybe I could make the "Dutch Corps" play a prominent part in the next campaign. Certainly, making heroes of the Union out of the Germans can help the Republicans to attract their votes, which would be very important in some areas.
why do you dislike the liberal republican movement?
 
Given how LIncoln changed from 1861 to 1865 OTL, it seems plausible that Garfield would grow to support it, or at least grudgingly accept it. Plus, it makes him a better negotiator and diplomat, forcing him to try to get the South to act peacefully, and then only using more force when they don't. The South would only have themslelves to blame.
Garfield and other Republicans are surely radicalizing too.

why do you dislike the liberal republican movement?
Mostly due to their role in the retreat from Reconstruction. I think some of their points were completely valid. Certainly, the corruption of the Grant era was an evil, and party machines are not really a welcome addition either. Neither were the Liberal Republicans as bad as the Redeemers, for at least they avowed themselves committed to the equality of Blacks. But they, even if unwittingly, helped bring about the end of Reconstruction and pushed forward the narrative of reconciliation that gave way to the Redeemers and Jim Crow. I think a version of the Liberal Republicans will eventually arise here, but focused on reform and economic change rather than too abandon Blacks to White terrorism in the name of tranquility. I don't hate Schurz or anything, but I cannot help but distrust men who think that Reconstruction was over by 1872, when the Klan was terrorizing and murdering Black people and elections in the South were won through violence and intimidation. I'm reluctant to push him to positions of power for that same reason.
 
@Red_Galiray seeing as you're in the market for cases to radicalise the North, may I submit to you the story of Colonel Vincent 'Clawhammer' Witcher.


Put simply, this man as of now ITTL is likely to be riding through Union-sympathising territories in the South, being a total murderous psychopath. You could barely ask for a better posterboy of Secess brutality.
 
I think a version of the Liberal Republicans will eventually arise here, but focused on reform and economic change rather than too abandon Blacks to White terrorism in the name of tranquility
One of the necessary condition would be prevent Greeley from taking the nomimation. Greeley's positions were more in line with the Republicans than Liberal Republicans (pro-tariff, pro-railroad subsidies...). His nomination forced the party to focus on attacking Reconstruction because they could not attack other corruption due to Greeley's own records.
 
@Red_Galiray seeing as you're in the market for cases to radicalise the North, may I submit to you the story of Colonel Vincent 'Clawhammer' Witcher.

Put simply, this man as of now ITTL is likely to be riding through Union-sympathising territories in the South, being a total murderous psychopath. You could barely ask for a better posterboy of Secess brutality.
And here I was, thinking that Custer never did anything good in his life.
 
@Red_Galiray seeing as you're in the market for cases to radicalise the North, may I submit to you the story of Colonel Vincent 'Clawhammer' Witcher.


Put simply, this man as of now ITTL is likely to be riding through Union-sympathising territories in the South, being a total murderous psychopath. You could barely ask for a better posterboy of Secess brutality.
maybe he can hang this timeline or better yet some from family he wronged bash his head open with a rock or he can have a witcher's parole
 
Last edited:
Put simply, this man as of now ITTL is likely to be riding through Union-sympathising territories in the South, being a total murderous psychopath. You could barely ask for a better posterboy of Secess brutality.
Most likely, yes. Thank you for sharing this video. I like the videos of these youtuber in particular. They are pretty good. I discovered the Outlaw Josey Wales thanks to him too.

One of the necessary condition would be prevent Greeley from taking the nomimation. Greeley's positions were more in line with the Republicans than Liberal Republicans (pro-tariff, pro-railroad subsidies...). His nomination forced the party to focus on attacking Reconstruction because they could not attack other corruption due to Greeley's own records.
I want to keep Greeley out of politics as much as possible due to his... erratic behaviour. I think Garfield or Chamberlain would have less trouble than Grant because much of the Liberal Republican movements was also an anti-Grant movement.
 
The Congress may then be willing to assign him a command to profit from Smalls' fame, thus paving the way for Black officers (commanding Black regiments of course. We're not there yet).
Interesting. In OTL Smalls became the captain when in December 1863 the white captain went and hid in the storage after the Planter came under fire and Smalls piloted her to safety. Maybe that can happen earlier? Are there any confederate forts that he could've tangled with during the peninsular campaign? I don't know how likely it would be for the union to just make him commander straight away (instead of just keeping him as a pilot), I doubt it but I know little about how the Civil War union navy worked.

On that note, I know the USS Planter's crew had some blacks, but i can't find any source saying that everyone except the captain was black. Do we know if there were any other white on the crew, and if so how they felt serving a Black acting captain?
 
Top