Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-16-2008, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,578,960 times
Reputation: 11083

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
So you think he should have permitted the breakup of the republic?
ABSOLUTELY. The States had a RIGHT to secede whenever it was no longer to their advantage to remain a part of the Federal government.

 
Old 10-16-2008, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,049 posts, read 34,533,909 times
Reputation: 10610
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
ABSOLUTELY. The States had a RIGHT to secede whenever it was no longer to their advantage to remain a part of the Federal government.
You know something? It's too bad that Lincoln felt the way he did towards the Union. He should've let the Confederacy go and avoided a war that took so many lives. Between the way Jefferson Davis and the rest of his government were continually at each other's throats, and the bumper crop of Egyptian cotton that dealt the Southern market a body blow in 1862, Confederate independence wasn't going to last all that long anyway.

Then it would've been to their advantage to be a part of the Federal government, which would have had the option to accept those states back into the Union or not.
 
Old 10-16-2008, 02:59 PM
 
28,896 posts, read 54,045,943 times
Reputation: 46669
Harry Turtledove wrote a series of novels that had the successful Confederate secession as its premise. It was pretty entertaining, despite the awful writing and wooden characterizations.

Here's what I think would have happened. This is for entertainment purposes only:

The US and the Confederacy would have continued to fight wars, most likely over the disposition of the border states.

The Confederacy would have taken advantage of the chaos in Mexico to gain a Pacific port.

Hawaii would have remained independent or a British possession. Alaska would have either remained Russian or been absorbed into Canada.

The slaves would have all been freed about twenty years later, given the wholesale increases in farming productivity. After that, who knows what would have happened to them? Meanwhile, the CSA would have been forced to accept a more centralized government, just the way the United States had to do in 1788. However, there would have been a considerable expansion of industry in the South, particularly in cities such as Birmingham, Chattanooga, and elsewhere.

The South would have probably snapped up the tottering Spanish possessions in the Caribbean such as Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Dominican Republic.

Both the South and North, if they had not reconciled by the 20th Century, would have most likely been absorbed into opposing camps during WWI and WWII. Of course, that means that Germany probably would have overrun France in 1918. The French Empire would have crumbled in North Africa and Southeast Asia forty years earlier. Britain would have made a separate peace with German and retained their possessions, due to the close relationship between the countries' respective royal families. However, this means that there probably wouldn't have been a World War II.

Japan would have taken over French Indochina and overrun the Philippines and China. The United States would have been powerless to stop it.

So, today, rather than the United States and all the rest, there would have been several Great Powers, including the United States, Britain, Germany, Japan, the CSA, and Russia.

Last edited by cpg35223; 10-16-2008 at 03:10 PM..
 
Old 10-16-2008, 09:36 PM
 
Location: Iowa
3,318 posts, read 4,113,966 times
Reputation: 4616
Very interesting cpg35223, I think Harry made a pretty good guess about the world with CSA. I can't see the union having the extra money to buy Alaska, would hope that Canada fell into possession of it before 1900. Certainly the window would of shut fast on buying Alaska after the russians discovered gold there.

Hard to say if the US or the CSA would of done anything about Japan's expansion into SE asia or invasion of Hawaii. Could of been dire consequences for Australia.

Im not sure how the CSA would of dealt with it's newly freed slaves, imagine they would of had trouble providing enough jobs for all of them. Im sure jim crow would of been the rule, and many would of fled the country, or possible deportation to the Caribbean. I can't believe there would of been use of large scale genocide, but deportations would of been likely.

For those freeman that remained in the CSA, it would of been a long wait for equal rights, but this was the case in real history too. The CSA along with South Africa by the 1990's, might of been forced to grant them equal rights. (they certainly were not ready to do that of their own will in the 1960's)

To the poster that said the CSA would have collapsed because it was just too weak to exhist for any length of time....you've been eating feathers out of your hat, yankee doodle. They had plenty of time and resources to develope into a strong democracy. It took 4 years for the much stronger union to put them away, so I wouldn't say they were all that weak. Certainly the infant CSA was already stronger than Mexico in 1861. They would of had a pacific port in short order, and Nevada silver by the 1870's.

I have to think that the North would still develope to be stronger than the CSA. But I have to wonder where the north was going to get its oil? Would they have developed nuclear power or the bomb? Space exploration? Would of been alot harder to achieve.
 
Old 10-16-2008, 09:42 PM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,144 posts, read 42,061,062 times
Reputation: 3861
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford View Post
Very interesting cpg35223, I think Harry made a pretty good guess about the world with CSA. I can't see the union having the extra money to buy Alaska, would hope that Canada fell into possession of it before 1900. Certainly the window would of shut fast on buying Alaska after the russians discovered gold there.

Hard to say if the US or the CSA would of done anything about Japan's expansion into SE asia or invasion of Hawaii. Could of been dire consequences for Australia.

Im not sure how the CSA would of dealt with it's newly freed slaves, imagine they would of had trouble providing enough jobs for all of them. Im sure jim crow would of been the rule, and many would of fled the country, or possible deportation to the Caribbean. I can't believe there would of been use of large scale genocide, but deportations would of been likely.

For those freeman that remained in the CSA, it would of been a long wait for equal rights, but this was the case in real history too. The CSA along with South Africa by the 1990's, might of been forced to grant them equal rights. (they certainly were not ready to do that of their own will in the 1960's)

To the poster that said the CSA would have collapsed because it was just too weak to exhist for any length of time....you've been eating feathers out of your hat, yankee doodle. They had plenty of time and resources to develope into a strong democracy. It took 4 years for the much stronger union to put them away, so I wouldn't say they were all that weak. Certainly the infant CSA was already stronger than Mexico in 1861. They would of had a pacific port in short order, and Nevada silver by the 1870's.

I have to think that the North would still develope to be stronger than the CSA. But I have to wonder where the north was going to get its oil. Would they have developed nuclear power or the bomb ? Space exploration ? Would of been alot harder to achieve.
Yes and no.

Remember that both California and Oregon were parts of the Union prior to the Civil War.

And: had we let the South go its own way; with Europe collecting colonies during the latter half of the 19th Century----------the odds would have better than 50/50 that Virginia on down would have been gobbled up by Great Britain, France, etc.
 
Old 10-16-2008, 10:17 PM
 
Location: Iowa
3,318 posts, read 4,113,966 times
Reputation: 4616
Actually, Lincoln could of made it known to the european powers that invading the CSA would invite a war with the north. Any european power at that time would of had great difficulty defeating the CSA. It took the union 4 years to do it with every advantage (being next door with the troops and supplies helps) The CSA would of been able to take care of business.

As for the pacific port, they would of clipped it from Baja California in Mexico, not the US California. The nearest deep water port south of San Diego, is where they would of expanded the CSA border south of the US border into mexican territory. They probably could of bought it from Mexico without a war.

Last edited by mofford; 10-16-2008 at 10:40 PM..
 
Old 10-16-2008, 10:19 PM
 
Location: southern california
61,289 posts, read 87,253,323 times
Reputation: 55556
the attack was bad. what the south did not understand is that the invasion was just the 1st step. the rape of the south was to follow and not heal for 100 years.
probably the biggest mistake in judgement the south has ever made.
 
Old 10-16-2008, 11:22 PM
 
Location: Iowa
3,318 posts, read 4,113,966 times
Reputation: 4616
The south should not have attacked Fort Sumter. I don't know whom was advising President Davis on this matter. It should of been laid out for Davis what kind of peril a war with the north was going to bring. You have to bide your time when your vulnerable and just starting out, and build your strength. Davis should of been licking Lincoln's boots for a while. Fort Sumter was the excuse Lincoln needed to invade and get that missing cotton revenue back in the US treasury. Maybe Davis should of sent Lincoln a case of Jack Daniels to mellow him out, and bag of sugar to sweeten his coffee in the mornings.
 
Old 10-17-2008, 05:03 AM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,578,960 times
Reputation: 11083
The Union troops should have abandoned it peaceably.
 
Old 10-17-2008, 12:11 PM
 
28,896 posts, read 54,045,943 times
Reputation: 46669
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford View Post
The south should not have attacked Fort Sumter. I don't know whom was advising President Davis on this matter. It should of been laid out for Davis what kind of peril a war with the north was going to bring. You have to bide your time when your vulnerable and just starting out, and build your strength. Davis should of been licking Lincoln's boots for a while. Fort Sumter was the excuse Lincoln needed to invade and get that missing cotton revenue back in the US treasury. Maybe Davis should of sent Lincoln a case of Jack Daniels to mellow him out, and bag of sugar to sweeten his coffee in the mornings.
Yep. War fever had taken hold, and the South was just itching for a fight. They would have been better off mobilizing, arming, fortifying, and frantically developing an armaments industry.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:44 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top