What if the civil war had not happened

[Basil the Great]

A friend of mine got the wrong impression of me months ago, when I told him that the North should have left the South leave the Union. Now don't misunderstand, I am against slavery as much as anyone. However, I firmly believe that Christians go to war far too easily and that they usually do not even think about Augustine's Just War doctrine. I do not know how long slavery would have lasted if the South had gone off on it's own, but I suspect it could not have lasted very long into the 1900's. The North might have been able to force the South to give up slavery through some form of economic pressure? Regardless, it just seems to me that the Civil War could have been avoided. It was not really a last resort and necessary action, as referred to by the Just War doctrine. However, I will admit that a decent case can be made for the necessity of the Civil War, as compared to what I believe was the absolute least justifiable war in U.S. history, the Revolutionary War.

p.s. - I am no huge fan of Augustine's Just War doctrine, as he failed to give the individual Christian the right to refuse military service in a given war, if said Christian's conscience told him that such war wrong. However, I give Augustine credit for at least trying to address the complex issue of Christians fighting wars. Personally, I think St. Basil probably had the best view of the matter.

 

[Percivale]

A friend of mine got the wrong impression of me months ago, when I told him that the North should have left the South leave the Union. Now don't misunderstand, I am against slavery as much as anyone. However, I firmly believe that Christians go to war far too easily and that they usually do not even think about Augustine's Just War doctrine. I do not know how long slavery would have lasted if the South had gone off on it's own, but I suspect it could not have lasted very long into the 1900's. The North might have been able to force the South to give up slavery through some form of economic pressure? Regardless, it just seems to me that the Civil War could have been avoided. It was not really a last resort and necessary action, as referred to by the Just War doctrine. However, I will admit that a decent case can be made for the necessity of the Civil War, as compared to what I believe was the absolute least justifiable war in U.S. history, the Revolutionary War.

p.s. - I am no huge fan of Augustine's Just War doctrine, as he failed to give the individual Christian the right to refuse military service in a given war, if said Christian's conscience told him that such war wrong. However, I give Augustine credit for at least trying to address the complex issue of Christians fighting wars. Personally, I think St. Basil probably had the best view of the matter.

I agree with just about all you say here; neither party should have fought the civil war, nor the revolutionary probably, though I'd say the Vietnam and Iraq wars were less justifiable than the revolution. I believe a war is only just if the other side started it, the cause is important, and it can be won without too much death and destruction. WW2 is just about the only war I am pretty sure was just; maybe the Korean war takes second place.

 

[mindlight]

Hitler would have won WW2.

No Stalin would have , but Europe would have been a ruin under Communist rule and would have probably never recovered as it did with American help and with the freedoms and capitalism that American protection brought. Britain also would have even more devastated and even more bankrupted by the war even though victorious. American pressure for decolonisation might not have been as obvious though and we would probably have lost our empire to communist revolutionaries instead.

 

[mindlight]

Hitler was made by the First World War. Something as drastic as the South successfully seceding for example would have had profound outcomes on the circumstances of the First World War. For example a German victory in World War One would have seen Adolf vanish into obscurity supplying tourists with tacky paintings.

Actually yes that is more likely. Germany had already won on the Eastern front in WW1 and was advancing in France. Americas intervention tipped the balance on the Western front and Allenbys victories overpowered Turkey. But a split America might not have had the same clout or might not have intervened at all. So Germany and the old AustroHungarian Empire and its Turkish ally would have won WW1 and the world would look very different. The ottomans might control the oil economy for instance.

 

[mindlight]

What do you think America would be like today if the Civil War had never been fought? What if the North had allowed the south to secede and done nothing about it other than maybe putting up some tariffs on imports from the south to the north? Would their have been later wars or conflict between the two countries? How long would slavery have lasted?

I guess the two models are power to the states or power to the central Federal government and its institutions of Supreme Court, Congress and President.

The Northern centralised state had much of the industry and given its non agrarian - slave owning focus would have been richer. I wonder if over time the poorer Southern states would have applied to join the Union and especially when slavery became redundant. I am sure there would have been disputes over Westward expansion and I wonder if the South would have been kicked around by Mexico more easily. I think the South would not have been that attractive except for the richest people. You would have 3 North American countries the USA , then Canada and then poorest and most unequal of all the Confederate South.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

No Stalin would have , but Europe would have been a ruin under Communist rule and would have probably never recovered as it did with American help and with the freedoms and capitalism that American protection brought. Britain also would have even more devastated and even more bankrupted by the war even though victorious. American pressure for decolonisation might not have been as obvious though and we would probably have lost our empire to communist revolutionaries instead.

An independent Confederacy would have been more keen to aid Britain. On matters of foreign policy, the public opinion South was very pro-British. It was in the Midwest that isolationist sentiment was strongest.

 

[Sketcher]

Actually yes that is more likely. Germany had already won on the Eastern front in WW1 and was advancing in France. Americas intervention tipped the balance on the Western front and Allenbys victories overpowered Turkey. But a split America might not have had the same clout or might not have intervened at all. So Germany and the old AustroHungarian Empire and its Turkish ally would have won WW1 and the world would look very different. The ottomans might control the oil economy for instance.

However, a split America would likely see Teddy Roosevelt get re-elected as the President of the United States, and Woodrow Wilson would have been elected as President of the Confederate States. Roosevelt would have gone to war in 1914 if he had the Congressional support. So while the US wouldn't have had as much clout at once as it did in 1917, it would have been sending support for 3 more years had that happened.

 

[Goonie]

However, a split America would likely see Teddy Roosevelt get re-elected as the President of the United States, and Woodrow Wilson would have been elected as President of the Confederate States. Roosevelt would have gone to war in 1914 if he had the Congressional support. So while the US wouldn't have had as much clout at once as it did in 1917, it would have been sending support for 3 more years had that happened.

Except that rhe break up of the United States would have profound implications for the politics of the remaining Northern States. You are assuming Teddy would have won, or even running for his first election in this alternate timeline.

 

[Radagast]

Hitler would have won WW2.

Germany would have won WW1. There would have been no Hitler.

 

[mindlight]

An independent Confederacy would have been more keen to aid Britain. On matters of foreign policy, the public opinion South was very pro-British. It was in the Midwest that isolationist sentiment was strongest.

It may have been more keen but less organised and less able to deliver. Britain was deeply anti slavery and the prime mover against the slave trade in the world. There would have been tensions in peacetime that might have destroyed the relationship. The Confederate army were fighting for their homes, loved ones and way of life in the Civil War. But how motivated would have state governments to organise and act together to defeat an enemy that had not threatened them have been.

 

[mindlight]

However, a split America would likely see Teddy Roosevelt get re-elected as the President of the United States, and Woodrow Wilson would have been elected as President of the Confederate States. Roosevelt would have gone to war in 1914 if he had the Congressional support. So while the US wouldn't have had as much clout at once as it did in 1917, it would have been sending support for 3 more years had that happened.

How big would the confederacy have been? If black guys were not in its military how many men would it have had to send abroad. I very much doubt they would have secured many of the Western American territories from the North in the run up to 1914. Slave owning culture was not relevant at all West of the rockies. So a country probably slightly weaker than the Empire Dominium of Canada may have not made much difference and particularly if their contribution was submitted to the oversight of some rather incompetent British and French generals. America was big enough and its contribution large enough and fresh enough in 1918 to change the balance of the war.

 

[Basil the Great]

I agree with just about all you say here; neither party should have fought the civil war, nor the revolutionary probably, though I'd say the Vietnam and Iraq wars were less justifiable than the revolution. I believe a war is only just if the other side started it, the cause is important, and it can be won without too much death and destruction. WW2 is just about the only war I am pretty sure was just; maybe the Korean war takes second place.

You are correct. I will have to amend my claim. The Iraq War was the least justifiable in US. History, then maybe the Revolutionary War, closely followed by Vietnam.

 

[Basil the Great]

An independent Confederacy would have been more keen to aid Britain. On matters of foreign policy, the public opinion South was very pro-British. It was in the Midwest that isolationist sentiment was strongest.

The Midwest isolationist sentiment was probably due to the huge German-American population in WI, ND and NE, but also IA, MN and KS.

 

[Dave RP]

Actually yes that is more likely. Germany had already won on the Eastern front in WW1 and was advancing in France. Americas intervention tipped the balance on the Western front and Allenbys victories overpowered Turkey. But a split America might not have had the same clout or might not have intervened at all. So Germany and the old AustroHungarian Empire and its Turkish ally would have won WW1 and the world would look very different. The ottomans might control the oil economy for instance.

It's impossible to know what might have happened on the western front in 1918/19 if the US hadn't joined the war. The allied blockade of Germany was beginning to really bite, Germany like all the warring nations was exhausted. I think it is likely that the western allies would not have been defeated, and I wonder if by 1919 there would have been such a backlash against the non stop slaughter that some sort of conclusion to the war might have been agreed. Maybe there might have been enough of an allied push to enable them to claim some sort of victory and force Germany back behind its borders? Remember even without the american troops, the UK and France we importing vast amounts of arms and equipment from the US whereas Germany was being strangled by the blockade.

 

[Radagast]

Germany would have won WW1. There would have been no Hitler.

1863 -- Pickett's charge wins the Battle of Gettysburg for Lee
1864 -- The Union agrees to a ceasefire and to Confederate secession
1871 -- Texas declares independence from the Confederacy
1914 -- World War I begins
1917 -- Russian Revolution
1919 -- World War I ends with German victory in Europe
1922 -- Germany recaptures German New Guinea from Australia, and expands its territory to include Singapore and much of northern Australia
1926 -- German East Africa expands to cover much of Africa south of the Sahara
1927 -- African refugees begin to flood to America
1930 -- German conquest of Australia and Africa completed
1933 -- Dust Bowl begins in America; widespread starvation increases racial tension
1934 -- Mao begins long March
1937 -- Japan invades first China, then Korea and Siberia
1941 -- Mao signs mutual defence pact with Soviet Union
1943 -- Battle of Novosibirsk, though bloody, repels the Japanese advance
1945 -- Soviet-Japanese war ends when the Russians use atomic weapons

 

[Goonie]

1863 -- Pickett's charge wins the Battle of Gettysburg for Lee
1864 -- The Union agrees to a ceasefire and to Confederate secession
1871 -- Texas declares independence from the Confederacy
1914 -- World War I begins
1917 -- Russian Revolution
1919 -- World War I ends with German victory in Europe
1922 -- Germany recaptures German New Guinea from Australia, and expands its territory to include Singapore and much of northern Australia
1926 -- German East Africa expands to cover much of Africa south of the Sahara
1927 -- African refugees begin to flood to America
1930 -- German conquest of Australia and Africa completed
1933 -- Dust Bowl begins in America; widespread starvation increases racial tension
1934 -- Mao begins long March
1937 -- Japan invades first China, then Korea and Siberia
1941 -- Mao signs mutual defence pact with Soviet Union
1943 -- Battle of Novosibirsk, though bloody, repels the Japanese advance
1945 -- Soviet-Japanese war ends when the Russians use atomic weapons

At which point do the aliens invade?(thinking of the harry turtledove alternative history series)

 

[Radagast]

At which point do the aliens invade?(thinking of the harry turtledove alternative history series)

There's no causal relationship between the Civil War and aliens (unless y'all are hiding something).

 

[mindlight]

1863 -- Pickett's charge wins the Battle of Gettysburg for Lee
1864 -- The Union agrees to a ceasefire and to Confederate secession
1871 -- Texas declares independence from the Confederacy
1914 -- World War I begins
1917 -- Russian Revolution
1919 -- World War I ends with German victory in Europe
1922 -- Germany recaptures German New Guinea from Australia, and expands its territory to include Singapore and much of northern Australia
1926 -- German East Africa expands to cover much of Africa south of the Sahara
1927 -- African refugees begin to flood to America
1930 -- German conquest of Australia and Africa completed
1933 -- Dust Bowl begins in America; widespread starvation increases racial tension
1934 -- Mao begins long March
1937 -- Japan invades first China, then Korea and Siberia
1941 -- Mao signs mutual defence pact with Soviet Union
1943 -- Battle of Novosibirsk, though bloody, repels the Japanese advance
1945 -- Soviet-Japanese war ends when the Russians use atomic weapons

Could be. Minor correction , Japanese already owned Korea in 1910.

 

[Radagast]

Could be. Minor correction , Japanese already owned Korea in 1910.

I stand corrected. Totally inadequate research (and too much beer) on my part.

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

Hitler would have won WW2.

No America in WW1, they fight it out longer and come to a more agreeable end, means no lopsided treaty means no WW2