Thats assuming everything else is the same as well. Which it won't be. With Virginia abolishing slavery, at least some other states will likely follow. And the various debates about slavery in congress will go differently, leading to different laws, leading to a completely different political system by the time 1860 rolls around.
Virginia abolishes slavery
- Thread starter Glass Onion
- Start date
Thats assuming everything else is the same as well. Which it won't be. With Virginia abolishing slavery, at least some other states will likely follow. And the various debates about slavery in congress will go differently, leading to different laws, leading to a completely different political system by the time 1860 rolls around.
The states likely to abolish slavery in the south following an emancipation in Virginia would be Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, and maybe Texas, the Deep South wouldn't be swayed that much by what Virginia did.
The ACW all really hinges on the Deep South. If they keep their slaves up to the 1860's and Lincoln still gets into government then the ACW is inevitable. Lincoln would bring in the Morrill tariffs*, to which the southern states would protest, and the Deep South, with the threat of invasion hanging over their heads*, would chose to seceede from a Union they disagreed with on many points and saw no benefit to staying with.
If Lincoln then demands soldiers from the remaining loyal southern states then those state would be likely to seceede.
Virginia would still be of the opinion that it would be well wthin the states individual rights to have slaves and to chose to leave the Union if they wanted, being a large federalist community, and would frown upon the Lincoln's attempt to force seceeded states back into the Union.
((*1 - The Morrill tariff was a protectionist tariff that harmed agricultural communities and allowed industrial communities to profit. Virginia probably would still be a mainly agricultural community by the 1860's and would protest those tariffs being brought in along with the rest of the agricultural south.
*2 - Lincoln said that he would invade any state that refused to pay the Morrill tariff.))
You're glossing over so much else that happened. We're talking nearly 3 decades here. Lots of time for things to happen. What happens with the various compromises? The votes on those will be different. Expect the outcomes to come out more in favor of the free states. That effects politics significantly.
And Lincoln's actions are also likely to be different in a different political environment.
And don't say anything's inevitable when you're dealing with a 28 year divergence in a republic.
I don't know that much about American politics in general and the American History I know is mostly from the ACW era so I thought that I would leave bits to interpritation. I was perhaps wrong to make a few assumtions and I will admit it and appoligize for doing so.
However Lincoln's actions regarding the Morrill tariff could well have been the same. To get into office he appealed to the Northern industrial states to back him and to get their backing he had to promise to bring in the Morrill tariff. As I previously stated the Morrill protectionist tariff did more harm than good for the agricultural communities and unless there is some drastic changes leading up to the 1860's we can pretty my be sure that the South is agricultural and would oppose the tariff.
The southern states may not seceed however I find that implausable, at least for the Deep South, because if more votes on compromises go against the Slave States then they would see themselves as being outnumbered and bullied in congress and wouldn't want to stay with the Union anymore than they did in the OTL.
Lincoln may not demand soldiers from the loyal southern states to invade the seceeded states and force them back however I could still see him invading the seceeded states simply because he wouldn't want to be remembered as the president who let the southern states leave.
I do think that a war of some kind is inevitable, and I will say it again, inevitable because the Deep South would not be swayed by what Virginia or any other State did of their own accord and no-one other than the Deep South's states themselves could chose what individual policies were and if more votes go against them in congress they are bound to feel boxed in and outnumbered and would see leaving the Union as their only hope to get their own way. Lincoln wouldn't want them to leave the Union and would interfer with their attempts to do so. Virginia may not be involved in that war as they were in the OTL but rather it would perhaps be a Union supply state or a neutral state.
Please, don't apologize. If we all had the same way of looking at history, well, there wouldn't be much history to begin with, let alone alternate history.
I find a Civil War over tariffs less likely than a Civil War over slavery. And, a Civil War over slavery less likely with fewer slave states left in the Union. The reason I don't think that tariffs are going to start it is because they almost did before, and it was the threat of force that kept anything from happening. Granted, Jackson was just a tad bit more popular down south than Lincoln.
The south knew how to fight tariffs without leaving the Union, they'd been doing it for decades. Although, Virginia might be more industrialized (and more north-sympathetic) in TTL by that point, but thats not certain.
Assuming that there still is a Civil War in this TL, Lee will definetly fight for the North.
No West Virginia
Virginia would likely remain politically intact with no cause for West Virginia to break away.
Virginia would likely remain politically intact with no cause for West Virginia to break away.
Please, don't apologize. If we all had the same way of looking at history, well, there wouldn't be much history to begin with, let alone alternate history.
I find a Civil War over tariffs less likely than a Civil War over slavery. And, a Civil War over slavery less likely with fewer slave states left in the Union. The reason I don't think that tariffs are going to start it is because they almost did before, and it was the threat of force that kept anything from happening. Granted, Jackson was just a tad bit more popular down south than Lincoln.
The south knew how to fight tariffs without leaving the Union, they'd been doing it for decades. Although, Virginia might be more industrialized (and more north-sympathetic) in TTL by that point, but thats not certain.
The tariff wouldn't be the cause of the war in TTL but it would be an important point. If the Deep South are the main states that still have slaves in the 1860's then they would have been painfully aware that were in the minority in many situations. The cause of this war therefore is more of a product of the increasing isolation of the Deep South and the frustraition felt by those states because they couldn't do anything to ease the pressure that isolation brought.
The Morrill tariff may have just been the final straw for the Deep South who were embittered with the perseved continueing attempts from anti-slave groups in the USA at the time to try and interfer with their way of life.
Whether or not any other states would side with them I couldn't say but Lincoln's handling of the situation would have to be much better than it was in the OTL or he would risk the secession of states in the process of chosing where their loyalties lay.
With less slave states to fight, maybe Lincoln (or perhaps a more saavy member of his cabinet) will decline to demand so much out of the free Southern states, and request more troops from abolitionist New England and New York. Then again, the states' rights Virginians and Carolinans might be annoyed with Union troops crossing their territories to fight their brother states.
Of course, this is assuming that there is a Civil War, that Lincoln is elected president, that the Republican Party is formed, that slavery is a powder keg issue, etc...
Of course, this is assuming that there is a Civil War, that Lincoln is elected president, that the Republican Party is formed, that slavery is a powder keg issue, etc...
Also, about the tariff, more of the free states will be agriculturally leaning, so any tariff will look very different.
Admiral Matt
Gone Fishin'
Why assume that the Republican Party will still for as it did in OTL, or that Lincoln will be elected President from it, in a TL where one of its major issues - slavery - is radically altered?
Without slavery it is damn unlikely Virginia would secede. Not only did no free state join the Confederacy the fact that Virginia was a free state would probably make it wealthier and more industrialized.
A large part of the reason was that the seceded states were slave states. Not one Free State seceded and it was no coincidence. Have slavery abolished and Virginia stays in the Union and is about as loyal as Ohio.
Most, if not all, of the free states were northern and the ideologies of North and South differed, in some subjects they were polar opposites. Virginia had always been southern and shared the ideologies of the south, not only slavery. It would be unlikely that they would change most of their ideologies regardless of whether or not they had slaves.
A slave free Virginia might consider secession as a betayal of the things the founding father had tried to achieve, as Lee himself did before Virginia seceeded, but I dont think they would have actively gotten involved in the war. Virginia would have prefered to take the standpoint of a neutral mediator to both sides rather than to turn against their country or their Southern bethrin.
It might be a similar situation to Kentucky who had far less slaves and slave holders in their state than free people, the slave-ocrisy of Kentucky was a minority, but they still didn't want to fight for the Union until they were invaded by the Confederates.
As it was Lincoln forced Virginias hand in the OTL and drove them to the Southern cause by blatently opposing the federalist ideals that Virginia held and displaying an attitude of domination that Virginia in any decade would oppose.
In a military sense without Virginia there could be no Confederacy, Virginia was the backbone of the CSA and donated more men to the cause than anyne else. If Virginia didn't seceed then they Confederacy would collapse quickly.
More then likely Virginia would have been more industrial as a Free State. A lot of ideologies of the South was wound up in slavery in any case.
Might other states, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri for isntance have followed a lead from Virginia.
If that happened does that not very sharply change the balance of things
If that happened does that not very sharply change the balance of things
Max Sinister
Banned
Very probably. Except for NC maybe, slavery was less important for those states than for Virginia.