Union Army Coup During Civil War

[Cris Smith]

I have been pondering this idea for a little while now, but Civil War history is not exactly my forte, so I wanted to see if I could gather some discussion/input.

My premise for a Union Army coup is that Lincoln loses to a Peace Democrat in 1864 because the Fall of Atlanta does not happen in September like OTL due to butterflies. However, in this TL, Atlanta falls shortly after the election, and many citizens begin to express that they now regret their votes and would like to see the war continue to its conclusion.

As a result, a Union Army General stages a coup to prevent the Peace Democrat from taking power. My questions for potential discussion are as follows, and I am obviously open to additions and/or corrections to my premise:

1. Who could potentially be the alternate Democratic nominee who would abide by the convention's peace platform?

2. Would Abraham Lincoln allow the coup to keep him in power, or would he abdicate anyway due to respect for democracy?

3. Which Union general would orchestrate the coup? I imagine that it would be someone close to D.C., possibly someone fighting in Virginia. And if Lincoln abdicated, would that general stay in power or possibly pass the job to a more senior officer or another politician?

4. What would some of the potential implications be for the remainder of the Civil War, Reconstruction, and a potential return to democracy?

 

[godofcoc]

Terrible idea.

 

[Cris Smith]

Terrible idea.

Thank you for your input! Very insightful.

 

[The Tai-Pan]

Terrible idea.

What? I think it's a fun idea. Lots of good story telling here.

As a result, a Union Army General stages a coup to prevent the Peace Democrat from taking power. My questions for potential discussion are as follows, and I am obviously open to additions and/or corrections to my premise:

What kind of coup exactly? The election is held without much trouble or debate, the votes are counted and then a General just decides to move on DC?

I can't see it happening, it's too sharp a break. A coup needs more...uncertainty, more confusion to really flourish. I can't see troops wanted to just overthrow democracy and impose some random general. I am sure, doubly so in this TL, many of those soldiers might have voted for the Peace guy!

 

[Karl der Große]

The president isn't a dictator. A Peace Democrat president wouldn't have the support of Congress, so the war (in the Union's view, legally, technically, it's not a war, rather suppression of rebellion) would continue whether the president wants it or not. Legally, in the Union's view, there is literally nobody to send peace terms to as the Confederacy isn't a legitimate government. Lee's surrender at Appomattox for example wasn't surrender of government, but surrender of the "rebel" army.

 

[Cris Smith]

What? I think it's a fun idea. Lots of good story telling here.


What kind of coup exactly? The election is held without much trouble or debate, the votes are counted and then a General just decides to move on DC?

I can't see it happening, it's too sharp a break. A coup needs more...uncertainty, more confusion to really flourish. I can't see troops wanted to just overthrow democracy and impose some random general. I am sure, doubly so in this TL, many of those soldiers might have voted for the Peace guy!

Again, Civil War history is probably the part of U.S. history that I know the least about, but I do know that, going into the 1864 election, Lincoln was almost certain that he was going to lose because the war was stalling out and the Confederates had won a string of strategic victories, and it seemed as though the electorate was tiring of the conflict and may prefer a candidate that would end the war on more favorable terms to the Confederates. However, after the Fall of Atlanta (and probably other events as well), it became clear that the Union Army would win, and the electorate ended up backing Lincoln by a large margin. Also, I don't remember the exact number, but Lincoln won a commanding percentage of the veteran vote even against George Mcclellan.

However, I'm positing here that those key events that turned the tide of the war clearly to the Union side are postponed by a few months, which allows a Peace candidate to win the election, as Lincoln feared, but once those key events happen a few months later, we see the same shift toward the pro-war position, but the election is already over, hence the potential for someone wanting to stop the president-elect from taking office.

I understand if this is a little in the ASB territory, but I was thinking about potential situations post the founders that could lead to a coup of the U.S. government, and this one was an idea that I thought would be the most fun to discuss.

 

[Karl der Große]

Again, Civil War history is probably the part of U.S. history that I know the least about, but I do know that, going into the 1864 election, Lincoln was almost certain that he was going to lose because the war was stalling out and the Confederates had won a string of strategic victories, and it seemed as though the electorate was tiring of the conflict and may prefer a candidate that would end the war. However, after the Fall of Atlanta (and probably other events as well), it became clear that the Union Army would win, and the electorate ended up backing Lincoln by a large margin. Also, I don't remember the exact number, but Lincoln won a commanding percentage of the veteran vote even against George Mcclellan.

However, I'm positing here that those key events that turned the tide of the war clearly to the Union side are postponed by a few months, which allows a Peace candidate to win the election, as Lincoln feared, but once those key events happen a few months later, we see the same shift toward the pro-war position, but the election is already over, hence the potential for someone wanting to stop the president-elect from taking office.

I understand if this is a little in the ASB territory, but I was thinking about potential situations post the founders that could lead to a coup of the government, and this one was an idea that I thought would be the most fun to discuss.

I think a coup is more likely at the beginning of the war. If the Confederacy hadn't attacked Fort Sumter (or any fort) and Lincoln insisted on war, he might face opposition from the army who may view the secessions as legal.

 

[Cris Smith]

The president isn't a dictator. A Peace Democrat president wouldn't have the support of Congress, so the war (in the Union's view, legally, technically, it's not a war, rather suppression of rebellion) would continue whether the president wants it or not. Legally, in the Union's view, there is literally nobody to send peace terms to as the Confederacy isn't a legitimate government. Lee's surrender at Appomattox for example wasn't surrender of government, but surrender of the "rebel" army.

Still, though, I imagine that the conduct of a Commander-in-Chief with a Copperhead mindset would pretty greatly influence the conduct of the war?

 

[Cris Smith]

I think a coup is more likely at the beginning of the war. If the Confederacy hadn't attacked Fort Sumter (or any fort) and Lincoln insisted on war, he might face opposition from the army who may view the secessions as legal.

That's fair, and probably true. I had just thought that the idea of a Union Army coup would be more interesting and nuanced if that could be mapped out in any way that makes sense.

 

[godofcoc]

Thank you for your input! Very insightful.

It is my talent giving such enlightening insights within such few words.

 

[Daylight Savings]

I'm not an expert, but I would see the election of a peace Democrat leading to escalation on both sides. The new president can't offer a treaty without the Senate, but he doesn't need one. He only needs to order the army to leave the south. Lincoln and the Union commanders may scramble to make as many gains as possible before that can happen. They would want to make ending the war seem too foolhardy for the president to try it, by removing the Confederate's ability to resist. At the same time the Confederates could want to make the war appear too costly to continue. They'd get more aggressive attempting to rack up Union losses. With both sides escalating I imagine the fighting could get much more brutal.

Your coup could come as the new president looks at the cost of southern attacks and chooses to withdraw and Union commanders wanting to justify their losses and seeing victory within reach refuse the orders. Of course the crux of this is that these are not pure hypotheticals. There are very specific politicians and commanders on both sides that would be involved in these events and they have known positions and attitudes. This is where you need that deep knowledge to identify who (if anyone) could make these events happen.

I don't know that I've seen many threads on here discuss what the Union commanders in the south would do if given the order to withdraw. How many would simply obey orders and pack up and leave peacefully? How many would mimic Sherman and burn their way back to Union territory, or from the Deep South burn their way back to the nearest Union controlled port and then torch the city on the way out? Would a significant number of rifles and munitions be "lost" into the hands of blacks before the soldiers left? And is there anyone who would straight up disobey and continue fighting?

 

[Lalli]

Candidate who openly supports peace would lose election massively. In OTL McClellan supported continue war but he wasn't even close, not even on states where he managed to win for himself. Open peace Democrat has not any chances unless war is going really badly.

And even then that president would have deal with Republicans and war Democrats on Congress. He can't just go to negotiation and recognise CSA. So military coup hardly is needed. Andnot sure if US army would even do that.

 

[Cris Smith]

Candidate who openly supports peace would lose election massively. In OTL McClellan supported continue war but he wasn't even close, not even on states where he managed to win for himself. Open peace Democrat has not any chances unless war is going really badly.

And even then that president would have deal with Republicans and war Democrats on Congress. He can't just go to negotiation and recognise CSA. So military coup hardly is needed. Andnot sure if US army would even do that.

Or it could just be that McClellan comes around a little more to the Democratic platform that year. As I've said, at least in Lincoln's view, he thought he was in great danger of losing the election before the Fall of Atlanta and other events because many thought that the war was not going well and wanted to see it end.

But as the Commander-in-Chief, could the president not just order the troops to stand down?

 

[Lalli]

But as the Commander-in-Chief, could the president not just order the troops to stand down?

Wouldn't Congress impeach president who just gives up?

 

[Daylight Savings]

Wouldn't Congress impeach president who just gives up?

What crime would they charge him with? Would they argue treason?

 

[mrmandias]

Getting a Peace Democrat elected would take a miracle.
To get a coup, I think you need shenanigans or allegations of shenanigans on part of said Peace Democrat. You aren't just going to get a straight up coup.

 

[Polish Eagle]

I think a coup is more likely at the beginning of the war. If the Confederacy hadn't attacked Fort Sumter (or any fort) and Lincoln insisted on war, he might face opposition from the army who may view the secessions as legal.

Actually, when Lincoln pulled McClellan from Army of the Potomac command, there was genuine fear in Washington that he'd turn the army on the government--and apparently a lot of his own men wanted him to. So an 1862 coup by the Little Napoleon (...darn unfortunate nickname both ITTL and IOTL) might be an interesting scenario.

But in 1864, one of the issues that makes a coup unlikely is that the new President won't even be inaugurated until March 4, 1865. That's 4 months that the Army and Lincoln have to clean up the rebels--take Atlanta, take Richmond. Unless Lee wins a truly stunning victory against Grant and sends the Army of the Potomac running for its titular river, the Federals basically already have Richmond under siege. Sherman should be in Charleston by that date. At which point the new President would have a damn difficult time persuading anyone that the war can't be won--so a coup is pointless.

 

[SWS]

Lee winning decisively in the Wilderness, keeping-up the Rappahannock-Rapidan status quo, might be the POD you need. The Southside and Carolina divisions locked-into the defense of Bermuda Hundred and Petersburg IOTL could then reasonably be dispatched to Atlanta when the city is invested in July 1864, providing sufficient veteran manpower for the defense of the Macon and Western from East Point to Jonesborough when Sherman's turning-movement is executed, if timely intelligence can be obtained, that is. The Confederacy is doomed once the Federals gain foothold in the Chattahoochee Valley, however. If Atlanta is still under bombardment in November 1864, and a Democrat elected to the U.S. executive office, Sherman will likely raid to the Gulf, via West Point and Montgomery. The conquest of Mobile, which would entail the practical loss of Mississippi and Alabama to the Rebellion, would ensure continuation of the War until Southern surrender and (lenient) presidential Reconstruction in 1865, even if lengthy sieges follow in the Confederate heartland from Hanover Junction to Demopolis.

Military officers on both sides generally prevented much mischief by civilians.

 

[Eigengrau17]

I feel that even for the Peace Democrats to win, you need the American Civil War to be going far more poorly for the union. Which at that point, the army may very well be in favor of the peace.

 

[GuildedAgeNostalgia]

Idk about a coup but I could see a mutiny by the AotP if Grant keeps ordering assaults at Cold Harbor.

Soldiers just refuse orders and demand both Grant and Lincoln's resignations and McClellan reinstated.

Not likely but still something worth thinking about.