What Better CSA "Home Front" Performance Was Possible?

Been reading up a little about the (US) Civil War...but not about the military campaigns. These are the subject of much study and AH, but I am more interested in the civilian, or "home front" side of things. What could the CSA have (realistically) have done to prolong their resistance and better support the armies in the field? Some examples/discussion topics:
  • Too much blockade run cargo was for civilian consumption, with less shipping available for military needs. How soon (and how far) could the CSA restricted non essential shipping and increased the necessary military imports?
  • Rather than withhold the 1861 cotton crop, should they have sold it and built up some cash reserves?
  • I understand that the substitution of food crops for cotton was pretty successful. Could it have been done earlier? Better?
  • Besides direct military imports, what should have been equally high priority civilian goods? Machine tools? Railroad rails and/or locomotives?
  • Politically, who would have been better choices for CSA national government offices (State, War, Navy, Post Office...maybe even President)?
Not wanking anything but assuming that the CSA can avoid some/all of these unforced errors, how much longer do you thing that they could have held out?
 

marktaha

Banned
The CSA Constitution forbade protective tariffs. Leaving that.aside, the Northern blockade rather restricted imports.
Points two and three- fully agree.
Four - lack of resources.
Five - even if I were qualified I suspect it would take a long time to go into details. Suffice it to say that they should have listened more to Lee and Cleburne and shouldn't have replaced Johnson with Hood.
 
  • Too much blockade run cargo was for civilian consumption, with less shipping available for military needs. How soon (and how far) could the CSA restricted non essential shipping and increased the necessary military imports?
I can't actually agree with this one. In as much as one could argue that certain civilian goods were non-essential for the frontlines, don't forget that civilians aren't machines. The blockade running of the consumer goods helped keep morale up and put downward pressure on inflation by preventing a total scarcity of resources. Besides, I can't actually see how replacing this material with military imports is going to help the South win more. For all intents and purposes, the Confederacy never lost a battle due to a shortage in military equipment or inferiority. Adding X amount of cannon and rifles doesn't really do jack.
  • Rather than withhold the 1861 cotton crop, should they have sold it and built up some cash reserves?
Oh that was definitely foolish. It would have also been good for diplomacy with foreign powers.
  • I understand that the substitution of food crops for cotton was pretty successful. Could it have been done earlier? Better?
Cotton dropped from 4.5 million in 1861 to 1.6 million in 1862 to 0.4 million in 1863 and to 0.3 million in 1864. The thing is, in 1864, there were crops to feed the troops and cities, but the collapse of the Confederacy's transportation system meant that much of the food could not be distributed and rotted in the granaries.
Besides direct military imports, what should have been equally high priority civilian goods? Machine tools? Railroad rails and/or locomotives?
Railroad rails could have been useful to prop the dying infrastructure, but the problem is that it was high-bulk and low-value for blockade runners. Importing rails would have slowed down the decay incrementally and taken up vital space for other resources.
  • Politically, who would have been better choices for CSA national government offices (State, War, Navy, Post Office...maybe even President)?
Lucius B. Northrop, the Commissary-General of the CSA, was so utterly inept at his job of supplying food, shoes, clothing, and other necessities to the frontlines. While it is true that he faced a herculean task, the man was overwhelmed and took any suggestions as an insult of some sort. After he was fired, the supply situation actually improved slightly despite the continued deterioration of resources and infrastructure.

Another issue was that the Confederates never centralized their control of the railroads and the owners often failed to prioritize military necessity over civilian or coordinate with each other to ensure a steady flow of resources through the states. However, this is very strongly tied with the CSA's belief in state rights so...
 
Top