StarDestroyer.Net BBS

In a previous thread, convincing arguments were made that Nazi Germany, even if it had survived WWII, would not have had the economic stamina to survive past the '50's.

My questions involves the other staple of alternate history, the Confederate States of America. If the CSA had been allowed to peacefully leave the Union, would this new nation have the economic wherewithall to survive (or even thrive)? I've heard several different viewpoints from different people, and I'm just curious as to your opinions...

not very long all of Europe was anti-slavery, even if they had broken away soil depletion, war debt, & Political oppinion would have killed thenm

not very long all of Europe was anti-slavery, even if they had broken away soil depletion, war debt, & Political oppinion would have killed thenm

Much in the way that Nazi Germany's economy was sustained by booty from conquest, the agriculture of cotton in the antebellum South required new territory with new soil to grow the cotton. As the new CSA would look to expand (into Cuba, Mexico, or other neighboring areas), they would rapidly acquire some powerful enemies.

Any survival scenario for the CSA requires some major changes in the very issues and institutions that motivated its very founding.

This really doesn't belong in Othe Sci-Fi. Off to Off Topic with you.

Assuming Racism and bigotry was still around in the CSA if they were around today.... Im guessing that they would have been and continued to be a periah state just as S. Africa was back during its control by the Racist/Bigot Afrikanners.

I think that economic realities would have forced the Southern states to get rid of slavery eventually (not after a few decades, though), plus without the Union government acting under the Fugitive Slave Law to return escaped slaves, it would be much harder to maintain the institution of slavery. That being said, the South would have needed to industrialize in order to stay alive economically.

I thought it qualified as an Alternate history thing Stormbringer. (The What if's are a Sci-Fi genre) <Mostly because it usually involves time travel, or alien intervention, just to make suspension of disbelief liekly in many cases.

Well, slavery was going to be phased out anyways. Most people already saw its death. The big question over slavery was, whose right was it to decide its legality? The Union as a whole? Or individual states?

Most of the great commanders of the Southern armies had no problem with blacks. Robert E. Lee viewed it as abominal on the issue of slavery. General Jackson believed God had a plan over slavery and it would be dealt with in time. There were actually a lot of black men that marched with the Southern armies, there is some debate whether or not if some of them fought. Nearing the end of the war, the CSA was considering arming black troops to fight the Union. So as to the argument that the CSA would've been a haven of racism/bigotry, that is no more applicable to the CSA than to the Union. Just look at how bad the North treated blacks during that time. It was really atrocious.

However, nearing the end of the war the CSA was becoming more and more centralized as President Davis pulled things in closer and closer to him. In today's world, I don't think a country made of individual soverign states would work. There has to be a centralized cohesive effort in today's growing globalization in economy and militarily. However, John Ashcroft and George W. Bush is pushing centralization just a wee bit too far.

Oh, btw. GO SEE GODS AND GENERALS =)

Trytostaydead wrote:Well, slavery was going to be phased out anyways. Most people already saw its death. The big question over slavery was, whose right was it to decide its legality? The Union as a whole? Or individual states?

Most of the great commanders of the Southern armies had no problem with blacks. Robert E. Lee viewed it as abominal on the issue of slavery. General Jackson believed God had a plan over slavery and it would be dealt with in time. There were actually a lot of black men that marched with the Southern armies, there is some debate whether or not if some of them fought. Nearing the end of the war, the CSA was considering arming black troops to fight the Union. So as to the argument that the CSA would've been a haven of racism/bigotry, that is no more applicable to the CSA than to the Union. Just look at how bad the North treated blacks during that time. It was really atrocious.

However, nearing the end of the war the CSA was becoming more and more centralized as President Davis pulled things in closer and closer to him. In today's world, I don't think a country made of individual soverign states would work. There has to be a centralized cohesive effort in today's growing globalization in economy and militarily. However, John Ashcroft and George W. Bush is pushing centralization just a wee bit too far.

By the end of the war, the CSA was more centralized, nationalized, and socialistic than the Union gov't had ever been. Even more in some respects; IIRC, the American government has never nationalized the railroads, which the CSA did do as the war went on.

The irony of the CSA is that to survive as an independent state, it would have had to abandon the way of life it was trying to protect. I'm not just talking about slavery, though that would have died out by 1900. The CSA would have had to industrialize and abandon the cotton economy, or else it would have been completely dependent on European and American imports and would be reduced to a third-world shithole when England started developing Egyptian cotton plantations and synthetic fibers were invented.

Trytostaydead wrote:
Most of the great commanders of the Southern armies had no problem with blacks. Robert E. Lee viewed it as abominal on the issue of slavery. General Jackson believed God had a plan over slavery and it would be dealt with in time. There were actually a lot of black men that marched with the Southern armies, there is some debate whether or not if some of them fought. Nearing the end of the war, the CSA was considering arming black troops to fight the Union. So as to the argument that the CSA would've been a haven of racism/bigotry, that is no more applicable to the CSA than to the Union. Just look at how bad the North treated blacks during that time. It was really atrocious.

.

The problem here is that the original question was if they were allowed to leave peacefully. Which means all those wartime changes would not take effect.

The Economic viability of the CSA is best expressed as the number Zero. They had virtually no industry or railroads, an almost totally agrarian economy in which 90% of power and wealth was concentrated in the top 20% of landowners, a vast slave underclass, and a socio-political ethos entirely opposed to change.

Add to this the extremely high probability of a Union trade embargo, which would force them into total dependence on European trade and make industrialization almost impossible. The whole reason for the CSA existence was that it's society was becoming an anachronism. I'd bet that by 1880 they'd be in economic doldrums, and the rapidly ascendent North would swallow them with minimal effort and little comment from Europe. (The Union would certainly have turned the struggle into a slavery issue before it lost the Civil War, which would make European intervention so politically untenable as to be an impossibility).

EDIT:

Sorry, didn't read the bit about leaving it peacefully. To that I respond:

Hahahahah! There is no way that could possibly happen, so the scenario itself is a lark. Why not postulate that Hitler implement nuclear weapons in 1930, or that China industrializes in 1600?

Hahahahah! There is no way that could possibly happen, so the scenario itself is a lark. Why not postulate that Hitler implement nuclear weapons in 1930, or that China industrializes in 1600?

I'm grateful that it didn't happen, but at the time of Lincoln's election and inauguration (in fact, until after Ft. Sumter was fired on), there remained a sizable group in the north (including many influential businessmen and politicians) who were opposed to coercing the southern states to remain in the Union. If Lincoln had less courage than he did, and if Gen. Beauregard hadn't opened fire in Charleston, there was the distinct possibility that the CSA may have left without the violence of war.

BTW guys and gals..

GO SEE GODS AND GENERALS! It was an awesome movie!

RedImperator wrote:The irony of the CSA is that to survive as an independent state, it would have had to abandon the way of life it was trying to protect. I'm not just talking about slavery, though that would have died out by 1900. The CSA would have had to industrialize and abandon the cotton economy, or else it would have been completely dependent on European and American imports and would be reduced to a third-world shithole when England started developing Egyptian cotton plantations and synthetic fibers were invented.

What makes you think the CSA wouldn't have industrialized eventually? Unless the confederate government actually took action to discourage industrialization, which it likely would not have, I don't see why it wouldn't.

Durran Korr wrote:What makes you think the CSA wouldn't have industrialized eventually? Unless the confederate government actually took action to discourage industrialization, which it likely would not have, I don't see why it wouldn't.

Because with out the North it would have neither the capital to to so on it's own and it's exports would not be enough to allow them to purchase stuff from Europe.

The slavery would not have lasted more than a couple years after the war. Most countries would most likely not trade with them heavily, since there was a heavy anti-slavery issue, and, slavery was quickly becoming economically obsolete, with the emergence of mechanization. You could do the work of ten men with one machine, and you didn't have to feed, clothe, and house the machine. Slavery would have ended, and, most likely, the USA and CSA would live in peace and open back up trade within a few years. I could imagine that the CSA would be very similar to the current southern US if it still existed.

Trytostaydead wrote:BTW guys and gals..

GO SEE GODS AND GENERALS! It was an awesome movie!

It looks great. Hopefully, it wasn't ruined by some undercurrent love story sh*t that ends up taking over the movie.

NF_Utvol wrote:

Trytostaydead wrote:BTW guys and gals..

GO SEE GODS AND GENERALS! It was an awesome movie!

It looks great. Hopefully, it wasn't ruined by some undercurrent love story sh*t that ends up taking over the movie.

*slaps NF_Utvol for suggesting such a thing*

There IS a love story, yes. The love for either the Union, their home, family and God. Those love stories are very strong and evident in the movie.

Stormbringer wrote:

Durran Korr wrote:What makes you think the CSA wouldn't have industrialized eventually? Unless the confederate government actually took action to discourage industrialization, which it likely would not have, I don't see why it wouldn't.

Because with out the North it would have neither the capital to to so on it's own and it's exports would not be enough to allow them to purchase stuff from Europe.

Well, assuming that the CSA left peacefully, without war, I don't imagine there would have been a discontinuation of trade with the Northern states, and the South certaintly would not have limited trade with the North. The United States did not cut off trade from Britain when it seceded from the British Empire.

Trytostaydead wrote:

NF_Utvol wrote:

Trytostaydead wrote:BTW guys and gals..

GO SEE GODS AND GENERALS! It was an awesome movie!

It looks great. Hopefully, it wasn't ruined by some undercurrent love story sh*t that ends up taking over the movie.

*slaps NF_Utvol for suggesting such a thing*

There IS a love story, yes. The love for either the Union, their home, family and God. Those love stories are very strong and evident in the movie.

When I was referring to love story, I meant crap like the 'Titanic' love story. A movie with great potential such as Titanic was ruined because of its reliance on the love story.

Nope. No love story. Like Gettysburg, it's a dramatized version of painstakingly researched historical events.

The only fictional characters are the nameless soldiers and probably some of the civilians.

My AP US History class is thinking about taking a field trip to see G&G, but I'll have to do some research to see which theaters near us have closed captioning, subtitling, or rear-view.

Durran Korr wrote:

RedImperator wrote:The irony of the CSA is that to survive as an independent state, it would have had to abandon the way of life it was trying to protect. I'm not just talking about slavery, though that would have died out by 1900. The CSA would have had to industrialize and abandon the cotton economy, or else it would have been completely dependent on European and American imports and would be reduced to a third-world shithole when England started developing Egyptian cotton plantations and synthetic fibers were invented.

What makes you think the CSA wouldn't have industrialized eventually? Unless the confederate government actually took action to discourage industrialization, which it likely would not have, I don't see why it wouldn't.

Where did I say they wouldn't? I just said it was ironic that in order to survive, they would have had to do exactly what they were trying to avoid by seceding from the union: modernize, abandon slavery, and industrialize.