NationStates Jolt Archive

Say that the Confederacy prevailed over the power of the U.S.A. back in 1861-1865....

How would the slavery issue be delt with in the Confederacy?
Would the loose nation last?
Would today's America still be as powerful minus Texas, Florida, and other key states?
What changes would the world see if the Confederacy had won?
etc etc.

I get the feeling that the Confederacy would invade the Union, trying to unify the nation and fight a war for "revenge"

Say that the Confederacy prevailed over the power of the U.S.A. back in 1861-1865....

How would the slavery issue be delt with in the Confederacy?
Would the loose nation last?
Would today's America still be as powerful minus Texas, Florida, and other key states?
What changes would the world see if the Confederacy had won?
etc etc.

Slavery was going out the door, eventually. If not because of morality, certainly because of economics. Slavery works really well in producing tobacco. It really sucks in producing steel.

I think the Confederacy would have eventually split. Confederacies don't work very well with Americans. They're just ineffectual ways to govern.

America wouldn't be as powerful, but I'd like to think of what would happen with WWII if there had been both USA and CSA. Good little historical sci-fi thing there.

It is highly doubtful the CSA could have ever won the war. Even if key battles such as Antietam and Gettysburg had been Confederate victories, the Union had many advantages, such as a vastly larger industrial base, a vastly larger infrastructure, and far more people. The Union army was also far larger than the Confederate, as was the Navy.

That being said, the Civil War (or, as the Southerners call it, the "War Between the States") was technically a Rebellion. The chances of the South invading the North after the war had been won would have been extremely slim, and their chances for success even smaller. However, there is a good chance the CSA, if having victored, would have invaded French Mexico, and deposed Maximilian.

Needless to say, it is true that Confederacies are a weak type of government. It is noted that even during the war, states such as Texas did not send divisions and kept them in the state, because it was not required to make them Federal as in the Union. If the CSA had victored, the "nation" of the CSA would have likely collapsed into disarray, and into many individual states.

Also, Davistania is correct. The CSA would never have become a powerful nation if having slavery existant. An agricultural nation does not have the industrial capacity to wage war, or to mount economic wars. The USA would have dominated them militarily and economically. Slaves are best used in agricultural methods, Hitler proved that slave labor is not a good substitute for hired workers for industrial purposes in World War 2.

If you have read the "Great War" series by Harry Turtledove, he has a good explanation as to what would have happened if the CSA and the USA had been existant during WW1.

The CSA would have most likely joined the Entente (the Allied powers), and the USA would have most likely joined the Alliance (the Central powers).

If the Confederacy won i think that there would have been little wars after the civil war ended between the union and the confederacy. Slavery would have been around for a long time, but in time due to other countries pressure slavery would have ended. Although that is just my thought. No one can be sure what would have happened. We should just except history the way it is and just live the present and not mess with the futre. :)

Harry Turtledove has a whole huge series of books on this topic. He takes the Civil War and a Southern Victory through a second war in the 1880's between US and CS, through WWI and th various European alliances the two nations get involved in, and now he's entered WWII with the CSA in control of a Nazi-KKK like group.

Having less people, less resources, and a less open society, the South would decline if they won the war, and sooner or later, some states would try to rejoin the union.

if the confederacy had won we would have had another 50? 100? years of war with them. border conflicts, runaway "property", what to do about the territories, states wanting to rejoin the union, pissy northerners wanting a second chance to reclaim the south, whatever.

large scale slavery might have ended fairly quickly.....say 25 years.... but private servitude would have lingered longest. even if its economically unsound to keep slaves for agricultural or factory work, there would always be some rich aristocratic types who liked the cachet of having house slaves.

until it became utterly repugnant to the rest of the world at least.

The whole thing would fall arpart since only afew families owned slaves the poor whites would rebel kill slave probly and evenutally be occupied

I got an idea:

Since "everybody" says that Europe would be speaking German if we didn't win WWII. . .
I bet you we'd all be speakin "Redneck" if the South won

and you're a reckonin' that's a bad thing? I figure it wouldn't be all that bad. YEEEHAW!!
I'm what most people would consider a redneck, and I think speaking redneck might not be too bad... No, rednecks don't have sex with siblings, parents, cousins, etc... You're thinking of hillbillies

I got an idea:

Since "everybody" says that Europe would be speaking German if we didn't win WWII. . .
I bet you we'd all be speakin "Redneck" if the South won

I'd reckon that, too. Yeeeeeeeeehaaaawwww

Slavery would have died out anyway, thankfully.
But the best result of a confederate win would have been the retention of state's right over central authority. Central authority equals less freedom, IMO.

Slavery was the smallest issue of the Civil War, the majority of that war was about economic sanctions and the North's need to tap southern natural resources. Lincoln used slavery as his political agenda to validate an attack.

Slavery would have died out anyway, thankfully.
But the best result of a confederate win would have been the retention of state's right over central authority. Central authority equals less freedom, IMO.
You wanna talk about less freedom resulting from the north winning?

LMFAO.

Say that the Confederacy prevailed over the power of the U.S.A. back in 1861-1865....

How would the slavery issue be delt with in the Confederacy?
Would the loose nation last?
Would today's America still be as powerful minus Texas, Florida, and other key states?
What changes would the world see if the Confederacy had won?
etc etc.
The confederacy would have eventually phased out slavery, in order to gain favor from Europe. The U.S. and the Confederacy would be hostile neighbors to this day.

Slavery was the smallest issue of the Civil War, the majority of that war was about economic sanctions and the North's need to tap southern natural resources. Lincoln used slavery as his political agenda to validate an attack.
dude...just, dude. :rolleyes:

I can kind of see how they would win but,then again.The North had the advantage from the very begining.They had factories to make weaponary for their men.Now it was a tight advantage because the south had the food.The blockade is one of the main reasons why the North won.Also as many said earlier in this topic yes slavery would've eventually died out.Anyhow they didn't which I'm glad they didn't even though I live in Texas. :D

SMALLEST?
Not smallest of course but,not the whole thing.

The South would eventually have adapted Yankee industrial ways, because the old cotton and tobacco methods were unsustainable long term. They would do this too late in the day to be economically competetive, and would suffer in the emerging global economy.Segregation and severe class distinctions would remain, and become stronger.

The North would eagerly accept all runaway slaves, abolish all proslavery legislation, conquer the South economically as a producer of raw materials and a market for dumping inferior goods.

The national capitol would relocate to New York City, and a tightly guarded border would run along the Mason Dixon line.

The whole thing would fall arpart since only afew families owned slaves the poor whites would rebel kill slave probly and evenutally be occupied

That is the least likely thing to have happened. The rich conned the poor whites into thinking the blacks were theri problem, so they would never rebel. They bought it. Think that's stupid? It's just like Incertus' post a couple days ago about how most Bush supporters think there are WMDs still, and that Sadaam was an ally and supporter of Al Quaeda and helped plot 9/11.

Karl Marx had a word for this process by which the class victims are tought to blame others rather than their masters: "False consciousness".

Some of you are still fueled with a highschool education. Your schools won't bother explaining the intricacies of the Civil War. Slavery was ending naturally as some have posted, and Lincoln used the hatred of slavery to rally support for a war.

Some of you are still fueled with a highschool education. Your schools won't bother explaining the intricacies of the Civil War. Slavery was ending naturally as some have posted, and Lincoln used the hatred of slavery to rally support for a war.


I suppose that's why the issue of whether to admit new western states as "slave" or "free" was such a fiercely fought one, eh? Because it was a dying institution?

Rebvisionist.