Alternative names for the Confederacy

[Makemakean]

Ladies, gentlemen and folks of other labels!

I've been working on this timeline for a couple of years that feature, among other things a secession of the southern states in the 1840s, over various issues, but slavery isn't one of them. Not because southerners in this timeline are magically comfortable with the notion about abolition, but simply because in this timeline, the abolitionist movement haven't grown enough by the 1840s for the notion of abolition to really be on the table as something the federal government may one day bring about.

Anyway, seeing these states are basically the ones that made up the Confederacy (minus Texas), in my notes so far I have simply called it "the Confederacy". However, the more I think about it, the more uncomfortable I feel about calling it that, as I don't want to be seen as glorifying the OTL Confederacy or anything of the sort, as I really have nothing but distaste for everything the Confederacy stood for. Cool flag, I won't deny, but everything that flag stood for is worthy of contempt.

Is there any good original-sounding name anyone can think of that doesn't sound as bland as simply calling it "The Federation of States" or as weird and contrived as "The Dixiean Alliance"?

 

[Umbric Man]

In many ways an alternate secession US IS just 'the Confederacy'.

Even the Essex Junto who wanted all the northeast to Maryland and not merely New England to secede if possible called their would-be state the 'northern confederacy'.

 

[Zheng He]

The Federated States of America or the United Republic of America. You could have the founders of the "Confederacy" for want of a better term deciding that their reason for secession is that the USA has strayed too far from the republican ideals of the founders and that the USA is no longer the constitutional republic it was intended to be.

 

[TFSmith121]

You do know that the southern states ran the place

I've been working on this timeline for a couple of years that feature, among other things a secession of the southern states in the 1840s, over various issues, but slavery isn't one of them. Not because southerners in this timeline are magically comfortable with the notion about abolition, but simply because in this timeline, the abolitionist movement haven't grown enough by the 1840s for the notion of abolition to really be on the table as something the federal government may one day bring about.

You do know that the southern states ran the place from 1783 to 1860, right?

Best,

 

[Makemakean]

You do know that the southern states ran the place from 1783 to 1860, right?

Best,

Yeah. Slavery just isn't the issue. Not because the Southerners have all suddenly become abolitionist. Rather the contrary. It's the Northerners that are not abolitionist. The abolitionist movement has been weaker in this timeline for a variety of reasons, and consequently, the very notion of abolitionism as a movement becoming so powerful that they would abolish slavery on a federal level just isn't politically probable to most Southern politician's minds.

The secession occurs before abolitionism has grown enough in the North for it to be an issue.

 

[606jae]

how about the republic of dixie

 

[shiftygiant]

how about the republic of dixie

But that suggests everything is centralized, something the Confederates opposed.

United Republics of Dixie has a nice ring to it, as does the acronym.
*United Republics of America.
*Constitutional Union of American States
*Confederated Union of American States
*Confederacy of Dixie

 

[TFSmith121]

But what is there to secede over, then?

Yeah. Slavery just isn't the issue. Not because the Southerners have all suddenly become abolitionist. Rather the contrary. It's the Northerners that are not abolitionist. The abolitionist movement has been weaker in this timeline for a variety of reasons, and consequently, the very notion of abolitionism as a movement becoming so powerful that they would abolish slavery on a federal level just isn't politically probable to most Southern politician's minds.

The secession occurs before abolitionism has grown enough in the North for it to be an issue.

But what is there to secede over then, especially as early as the 1840s? The south got everything it wanted, including multiple presidencies, either by southerners or dough faces

It would be like England seceding from the UK or Ontario seceding from Canada.

Best,

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

Southern Empire.

American Empire.

Free States of America.

 

[Mr. Right]

I have two suggestions: one serious, one less so.

The Federation of Dixie - The name implies a less centralized government than the USA, and it is a way of emphasizing the north/south cultural differences.

Association of Southern States - The name implies a return to a government more in line with the Articles of Confederation. Plus, the acronym for Association of Southern States is ASS.

 

[Makemakean]

But what is there to secede over then, especially as early as the 1840s? The south got everything it wanted, including multiple presidencies, either by southerners or dough faces

It would be like England seceding from the UK or Ontario seceding from Canada.

Best,

Well, there was the fact that many people at the time of Nullification Crisis of 1832-33 could lead to the secession of states over something as simple as South Carolina not liking tariffs passed by the federal government. I can assure you that that no one at the time thought that Andrew Jackson was a rapid abolitionist, and indeed nobody since that time has thought that that dispute had anything to do over the issue of slavery.

And, I've got my PoD in 1769. I can allow for quite a couple of ripple effects over the decades. Essentially, regionalism, disputes over political powers, authorities, etc.

 

[Makemakean]

But that suggests everything is centralized, something the Confederates opposed.

This fellow is thinking in the same lines as I do! I like this!

United Republics of Dixie has a nice ring to it, as does the acronym.
*United Republics of America.
*Constitutional Union of American States
*Confederated Union of American States
*Confederacy of Dixie

I can't say any of those names really are as a catchy and "obvious" as "The Confederated States of America", but it's not like we have a lot to work with. United Republics of Dixie might well be what I have to end up going with, as it does seem the best of the bunch.

Thanks.

 

[Johnrankins]

But that suggests everything is centralized, something the Confederates opposed.

Not really, the side that nationalized the salt industry, took over the alcohol industry, dictated rates for railroads requiring to run at a loss, instituted internal passports, required shippers to carry government goods for free was not the North. Richmond also had more bureaucrats than Washington DC. "State's rights" was just a smokescreen to try to fool the Brits, nothing more.

 

[TFSmith121]

Yeah, and Jackson mobilized almost as many troops

Well, there was the fact that many people at the time of Nullification Crisis of 1832-33 could lead to the secession of states over something as simple as South Carolina not liking tariffs passed by the federal government. I can assure you that that no one at the time thought that Andrew Jackson was a rapid abolitionist, and indeed nobody since that time has thought that that dispute had anything to do over the issue of slavery.

And, I've got my PoD in 1769. I can allow for quite a couple of ripple effects over the decades. Essentially, regionalism, disputes over political powers, authorities, etc.

Yeah, and Jackson mobilized almost as many troops within South Carolina to exercise federal power as the nullifiers did to defeat federal power....

Good luck, but secession came about in 1860 for a reason. It was not pique or caprice.

Best,

 

[xerex]

Commonwealth of American States

Union of American States

American Federation

 

[shiftygiant]

Not really, the side that nationalized the salt industry, took over the alcohol industry, dictated rates for railroads requiring to run at a loss, instituted internal passports, required shippers to carry government goods for free was not the North. Richmond also had more bureaucrats than Washington DC. "State's rights" was just a smokescreen to try to fool the Brits, nothing more.

Well, I'm a Brit and that appears to have fooled me, though I know that the whole 'States Rights' was to cover the slavery debate.

I still stand by United Republics of Dixie.

 

[TFSmith121]

When would those times be?

Not really the Northern states gained complete power before 1860 and also had gained it a few times before even that.

They could secede over tariffs, states' rights, direction of government funding, maybe no Indian removal, etc. The OP could easily make more seeing as his POD is early.

When would those times be?

Tariffs were never an issue when the Democrats were in power (considering Harrison was the only Whig, that's pretty much all the time after JQA); state's rights is slavery; direction of government funding was never an issue because the Whigs were never in power; and Indian Removal was national policy under Jackson and Van Buren.

So other than that, what exactly are you suggesting?

Best,

 

[Cloudesley]

League of American Commonwealths
Meridian Union
Allied States of America
Federated Dominions of America
Union of Sovereign Southern Republics
Austramerica
Fraternity of Agrarian States
Free Association of American Republics

 

[Makemakean]

When would those times be?

Tariffs were never an issue when the Democrats were in power (considering Harrison was the only Whig, that's pretty much all the time after JQA); state's rights is slavery; direction of government funding was never an issue because the Whigs were never in power; and Indian Removal was national policy under Jackson and Van Buren.

So other than that, what exactly are you suggesting?

Okay, okay, I'm open to constructive criticism.

I've got the PoD in 1769. I want secession in the 1840s over an issue other than slavery.

How would you go about accomplishing this? Or would you say that it's impossible with a PoD in 1769, that is prior to the Constitution having been drawn up, prior to the Articles of Confederation having been drawn up, prior to the Revolutionary War having even started, to bring about secession over an issue other than slavery?

 

[Flashman]

The Liberated States of America