Successive British governments never had much success stamping out Irish nationalism, despite defeating (and hanging) any number of rebels.
WI: President Lincoln is not assassinated; what effects will it have on Reconstruction
- Thread starter dsp19
- Start date
Lincoln was actually friends with Karl Marx and regularly exchanged letters and Lincoln apparently picked up some of his views, so maybe he does some workers rights or pro labor union laws and influences the Republican Party in a somewhat socialist direction, ironically.
Lincoln and Grant were very close politically, so I feel like you can look to Grant for ideas on what Lincoln would do. 1865 would likely be spent trying to reconcile things only to realize that the Southerners weren't acting in good faith by 1866, which is where the real divergence with Johnson would begin. Johnson started swapping out Generals that were incline to equitable treatment for freedmen, Lincoln would not. Some sort of Reconstruction would be pursued, with Lincoln probably not being as radical as the radicals want but with a Republican in the White House the 1866 midterms are likely not to result in such a commanding victory for Republicans as per IOTL, so Reconstruction would still be firmly Presidential.
Why should that make any difference?
People believe what they want to believe. Truth or credibility has nothing to do with it.
We like to kid ourselves that we are rational beings, but most of us ain.t. We are governed by emotion, not reason.
Last edited:
There's an argument to be made that in many Southern states, prior to the Great Migration, the freedman are the Irish and the Southern elite are the British if one wants to make that comparison.
Sure, but that is not how the southern elite (or indeed *any* southern white, whether "elite" or not) would view it. And on anything like this it is opinions that count. Objective truth is irrelevant.
Of course it was vindictive. That tends to happen when you LOSE a civil war.
That said, it was VASTLY less vindictive than what could reasonably have been expected thanks to Lincoln's directions and Grant's expansion of those directions. That Jefferson Davis and Alexander Stephens, much less the governors of the seceded states were not straight hung for Treason (along with Lee and most of his senior commanders who had served in the U.S. Army) was astounding. That within three years of the end of the ACW ALL participants in the Rebellion were granted presidential pardons for the crime of treason remains, to this day, remarkable.
The same can be said for the general treatment of not just the officers, but the rank and file Confederate Army personnel. Personnel with horses were allowed to retain them, theoretically to act as draft animals to help with the harvest, and all troops were allowed to return home after making an Oath of Loyalty.
I honestly don't think the 15th amendment would come since I believe Lincoln wanted to give blacks just about every right but the one to vote and let the states decide on that one.
And even Congress didn't stay "vindictive" for very long. In 1872 it was still firmly Republican, but produced the required two-thirds vote to lift the political disabilities imposed by Sec 3 of the 14tth Amendment. It also declined to extend the life of the Freedman's Bureau.
Come to that, iirc as early as 1867 it rescinded the ban on Confederates claiming land under the Homestead Act.
At the start of that year the southern version was opened up to them. But, no capital and endless debt meant the numbers were limited that could take advantage of it.
The Southern Homestead Act of 1866 is a United States federal law enacted to break a cycle of debt during the Reconstruction following the American Civil War. Prior to this act, blacks and whites alike were having trouble buying land. Sharecropping and tenant farming had become ways of life. This act attempted to solve this by selling land at low prices so Southerners could buy it. Many people, however, could still not participate because the low prices were still too high.
The Southern Homestead Act opened up 46,398,544.87 acres (about 46 million acres or 190,000 km²) of public land for sale in the Southern states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
Southern Homestead Act of 1866 - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
When it comes to historical Civil Wars most don't impact the lives of ordinary people much. Maybe the new boss raises taxes after. Perhaps, they lop off a few heads of the ring leaders. Obviously, some in Washington wanted to do so of that including with Lee until they realized that idea was immensely unpopular in the North and would have triggered mass resignations from the US Army starting with its chief.
The American Civil War was very much a democratic attempt at a divorce which is unique in many ways such as being one of the few I can think of where few of the ring leaders even wanted it to happen. But, its also very unique in the level to which it economically impacted ordinary society. Focusing on a few leaders doesn't provide a great window into what the war did.
It lifted millions into freedom, but it also lifted millions into economic desolation. I have seen parts of the South where they lifted up to demigod status a northern judge who came down because he was having an affair with a local southern woman. He had a lot of capital and spread it around and didn't in their eyes attempt to rule them as some did who came down on their weekends.
The lack of capital was going to doom any reconstruction that attempted much more than to say you are in the Union now and can't leave. Agreed?
Last edited:
The crime for rebellion is death. Compared to that, talks of being barred from running for office is an excessively lenient response.
Though also an irrelevant one, since if the former CS leaders were barred from office, their places would simply be taken by other men of similar views
Lincoln was a master of compromise. His plan was nuanced. Get Unionism back on track, give space for States to accept the new economic and political reality. One thing I can see him doing is winning over more CSA generals for unionism. Historically some big names (Pickett and Longstreet and others) were willing to work on Reconstruction (see McDougall "Throes of Democracy"). Lincoln could get some more on, and yes why not even Lee or Alexander Stephens. I do think that he would had done more for securing Freedmen civil rights than people thing. But he would had preferred to do it in an "organic way" if that makes sense, and probably used expansion west to defuse some of the tensions.
What people seem to ignore is that Lincoln surviving and finishing his second term would have an impact on politics down-under. His very living presence would probably cast a long shadow on US politics. Would you still have the compromise of 1876? I am not sure. I think Reconstruction would take a gradual and longer form, and I do think the USA as a whole would be better for it. Unlike other posters I do not think you would see a reversal at the level of history. You would get segregation because unfortunately the US Constitution on the surface does not say no to it, as long as the equal part of separate but equal is met at a popularly reasonable standard. But I do not think you would see full Jim Crow.
Absent the OTL reconstruction I do not see Lost Causim being as popular as it was. Early would probably seen as a bitter old coot at loggerheads with most of the ex-CSA leadership. You would still get white supremacy attempts because this is the USA we are talking about, but I do see African Americans having voting rights in many more parts of the country than historically, and I see a Federal Administrative state more confident and more capable in reigning it those expressions of white supremacy that too openly contradict the Constitution.
What people seem to ignore is that Lincoln surviving and finishing his second term would have an impact on politics down-under. His very living presence would probably cast a long shadow on US politics. Would you still have the compromise of 1876? I am not sure. I think Reconstruction would take a gradual and longer form, and I do think the USA as a whole would be better for it. Unlike other posters I do not think you would see a reversal at the level of history. You would get segregation because unfortunately the US Constitution on the surface does not say no to it, as long as the equal part of separate but equal is met at a popularly reasonable standard. But I do not think you would see full Jim Crow.
Absent the OTL reconstruction I do not see Lost Causim being as popular as it was. Early would probably seen as a bitter old coot at loggerheads with most of the ex-CSA leadership. You would still get white supremacy attempts because this is the USA we are talking about, but I do see African Americans having voting rights in many more parts of the country than historically, and I see a Federal Administrative state more confident and more capable in reigning it those expressions of white supremacy that too openly contradict the Constitution.
That said this idea makes my uncomfortable a bit, no fault of the poster. Lincoln surviving would be a good thing for the country. But that means he would see his third child die (Tad 1871). I am not sure in my heart of hearts I would like him to go through that. It just breaks my heart to think of it. I mean I guess it would break him, and perhaps 1871 would see him recede from public engagement. I know he was made of sterner stuff, but still the thought...
And dying in the hour of victory was undoubtedly the ideal moment for him (as later for FDR) as regards his historical reputation.
The issue that led to the 15th amendment being enacted still exist with Lincoln: You just fought a war to preserve the union and end slavery. You are trying to make sure that the conditions that led to successionism-a southern planter class that had complete political dominance over the South and also enough representation to paralyze the federal government-cannot reassert themselves. Except now, the freed slaves do not count for 3/5 of a person for representation, but a full person-if those freed slaves remain disenfranchised, congratulations, the old south has even more power/influence in the federal government than they did before the war. Lincoln is not at all oblivious to this, and if resistance to his more lenient policies in the south grows (and it will, even Lincoln's policy is too much for the Confederates to swallow), he's going to recalibrate.
FDR by dying didn't have to deal with the fallout of trusting Stalin and backing him so much even when he was out of danger. Truman had to deal with the fallout and was blamed and hated for the post war spread of Soviet power and Communism in general.
In the same way Lincoln by dying didn't have to deal with the inherent conflict between what radical Republicans would have said was his minimalist war aims vs their maximalist war aims. Johnson had to deal with that conflict, and we know how that ended for him. Lincoln was probably too canny to end up like Johnson, but he would in the end have to deal with interests whose political desires could not be bridged.
We almost went to war with the French presence in Mexico in 1865. People forget Grant's 'Now onto Mexico' words at Appomattox. The northern press was at Lee's door within a month of the end of the war telling him northern opinion hoped he would once again agree to lead troops into Mexico.
Had Lincoln not been killed the Mexican expedition might have happened which would have had a major impact on allowing Lincoln to paper over the irreconcilable differences between the factions of the country and the Congress.
Last edited:
No I am sorry. Lincoln was clear. No more war under his administration. He has no intention to fight at Mexico and ge had no need.
As for Lincoln dying at the right time. Maybe I am too influenced by ToRs and ToD but bo I think he would had done well.
His great gift was the ability to make enemies friends. I just think Tad's death would had ended his political engagement after 1871. But that is after his second term and after the first term of his successor.
It turned out we had no need, but that wasn't necessarily what elite opinion was at the end of the war nor could they have known about how the French position would implode in Mexico.
We don't know how that matter would have turned out had he lived. I am not arguing I know how he would have gone, but I don't think anyone knows or even he knew for sure what he was going to do after the war, nor do I think Lincoln was particularly pacificist on such matters.