"Just let them go"

[Kevin Renner]

I am sure this has been done before, but

The idea is that with the election of Abraham Lincoln the Deep South still succeeds. But Linclon balks at use of force. The Confederacy is smaller due to Virginia, Tennessee and North Carolina deciding to reject Succession. Arkansas succeeds with the Deep South and Texas. There is no American Civil War but to some degree there is a type of Cold War between the North and South. The question is how long could the South of remained independent and how long before States in the Confederacy petion for rejoining the Union. The main problem I see for the South is the way its Constitution was written is the Internal Improvement Clause. Any internal improvement that would benefit the nation as whole would of had to of been handled piecemeal as Internal Improvements in one state could not be funded by taxes levied in a different state

 

[Lycaon pictus]

It would depend on what happened to slavery. If slavery was still the basis of the CSA economy, the People In Charge wouldn't care that they were presiding over an underdeveloped nation and wouldn't want to risk jeopardizing their "peculiar institution."

And if slavery were still legal but on the decline in the still-United states, the U.S. might not want the Confederate states back, for fear of breathing new life into a deservedly dying institution.

 

[Elfwine]

One might want to note that the governor of Tennessee was using means fair and foul to get Tennessee out of the Union. It would secede whether Lincoln responded to force with force or not, I think.

 

[iori]

First of all it's Secession and Secedes.
Succession deals with royalty and people in line for a throne.

Now, assuming Lincoln decides that this smaller South is'nt worth it (and without Virginia, Tennessee and N. Carolina it really would'nt be) the United States itself will likely develop faster and I would'nt be surprised if their were alot more Constitutional Amendments and laws passed that would make America look more like OTL Canada.

As for the South, well those in charge under the first system would most likely rather live in the period equivalent of a third-world country than ever re-integrate into the United States.

Now, of course that system would not last, and I suspect that their would either be a massive slave revolt or a Socialist Revolution (enslaved blacks and poor whites who were little better).

Now, by the time that happens, and assuming the 'Socialist Confederation of America' collapses I frankly don't see the United States wanting to re-incorporate the CSA states, with perhaps the exception of Arkansas (assuming it does'nt have a huge population).

 

[Kevin Renner]

First of all it's Secession and Secedes.
Succession deals with royalty and people in line for a throne.

Using a keyboard while two or three other things are vying for your attention does not make for good spelling or grammer

 

[Falastur]

As for the South, well those in charge under the first system would most likely rather live in the period equivalent of a third-world country than ever re-integrate into the United States.

Now, of course that system would not last, and I suspect that their would either be a massive slave revolt or a Socialist Revolution (enslaved blacks and poor whites who were little better).

Now, by the time that happens, and assuming the 'Socialist Confederation of America' collapses I frankly don't see the United States wanting to re-incorporate the CSA states, with perhaps the exception of Arkansas (assuming it does'nt have a huge population).

I'm curious, as someone who knows a little of this period but...not really a lot. Let's say all of what you said happens, and it all seems fairly logical so far. What next? Does the collapsed, rebel governed (ironically?) CSA fall apart into individual states, or perhaps something even more chaotic? But more importantly/interestingly for me, you said we have a situation here where the CSA doesn't want to join the USA and even if they did, the USA no longer wants them, even after abolition. That means no reintegration and economic reconstruction. Stuck with a failing system, an unstable social system and ruling government that probably isn't quite what the people even want, what happens then? You suggest that the USA wouldn't want to go in to fix the country, and likely they would complain about the *CSA, say, falling into the British economic sphere and becoming some kind of a satellite (not that that would happen under a socialist rebel govt. anyway...). Would those states be doomed for decades to have to pick themselves up alone on the back of a fragile economy, potentially to the tune of being the American version of, say, (no offence intended) Eastern Europe to the present day and beyond? Or do you anticipate some kind of reconstruction, somehow, bringing them back up to scratch?

Honestly, I was rather surprised by your suggestion that the USA would ever turn down the idea of reintegration, even if I couldn't really fault the logic when I thought about it. I had assumed that the logical scenario was that either the CSA would thrive as its own nation, or it would be reannexed in short order.

 

[iori]

I'm curious, as someone who knows a little of this period but...not really a lot. Let's say all of what you said happens, and it all seems fairly logical so far. What next? Does the collapsed, rebel governed (ironically?) CSA fall apart into individual states, or perhaps something even more chaotic? But more importantly/interestingly for me, you said we have a situation here where the CSA doesn't want to join the USA and even if they did, the USA no longer wants them, even after abolition. That means no reintegration and economic reconstruction. Stuck with a failing system, an unstable social system and ruling government that probably isn't quite what the people even want, what happens then? You suggest that the USA wouldn't want to go in to fix the country, and likely they would complain about the *CSA, say, falling into the British economic sphere and becoming some kind of a satellite (not that that would happen under a socialist rebel govt. anyway...). Would those states be doomed for decades to have to pick themselves up alone on the back of a fragile economy, potentially to the tune of being the American version of, say, (no offence intended) Eastern Europe to the present day and beyond? Or do you anticipate some kind of reconstruction, somehow, bringing them back up to scratch?

As I said, the system will last awhile, but likely fall apart completely sometime around 1900-1920, which in my opinion has a high chance of leading to a Socialist Revolution either inspired by the Russian Revolution (assuming butterflies don't effect that) or by European exiles in near-by states.

After that I'd say Russia itself is a good model, as while their's a big population difference, they have alot in common, little industry, an economy largely based on agriculture (including alot of sustenance farming) and until recently the use of slave labor.

Now, if they do go Socialist and it ends up collapsing (I would'nt be surprised in such a scenario they pull a Cuba and outlast the rest) I think OTL Ukraine, Belarus and Poland would be good examples of what it would probably look like.

Honestly, I was rather surprised by your suggestion that the USA would ever turn down the idea of reintegration, even if I couldn't really fault the logic when I thought about it. I had assumed that the logical scenario was that either the CSA would thrive as its own nation, or it would be reannexed in short order.

Well the United States at the time of the ACW was not really that unified of a country, so it would'nt take that long for the United States to really stop caring and for any revanchist attitude to die off, with the quicker the benefits becoming apparent the faster the idea disappears.

 

[Johnrankins]

Well the United States at the teim of the ACW was not realy that unified of a country, so it would'nt take that long for the United States to really stop caring and for any revanchist attitude to die off, with the quicker the benefits becoming apparent the faster the idea diseapears.

Doubtful, the North took secession as a personal insult. That takes a LONG time to disappear.

 

[Chengar Qordath]

As I said, the system will last awhile, but likely fall apart completely sometime around 1900-1920,

I would say that, if the CSA is still very dependent on cotton to run its economy, then the collapse would likely be tied to the arrival of the Boll Weevil. With no Civil War to demonstrate how necessary industry was, I don't see the rump-CSA doing much to break out of its agricultural economy.

 

[Revolutionary Avocado]

Now, by the time that happens, and assuming the 'Socialist Confederation of America' collapses I frankly don't see the United States wanting to re-incorporate the CSA states, with perhaps the exception of Arkansas (assuming it does'nt have a huge population).

I disagree with that. The United States would at least try to set up client regimes in each state, if not annexing them back into the USA. A coastline on the Gulf of Mexico, plus all of the South's agricultural land, plus the oil offshore, would make any re-integration costs and problems worth it.

 

[iori]

I disagree with that. The United States would at least try to set up client regimes in each state, if not annexing them back into the USA. A coastline on the Gulf of Mexico, plus all of the South's agricultural land, plus the oil offshore, would make any re-integration costs and problems worth it.

I was meaning decades, if not more than a century on from the initial secession.

 

[Derek Jackson]

When would the states that stay in the Union abolish slavery. At that point esecpe to them becomes a very attactive option to the deep South's Labour source.