Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Owlswing on August 06, 2015, 10:40:05 AM
-
One of those thoughts that creep unbidden into your, or at least, my, mind in that half-state between sleep and waking . . .
In what ways different do you think the World would be in 2015 if, 150 years ago, the Confedaracy had won the American Civil war?
-
One of those thoughts that creep unbidden into your, or at least, my, mind in that half-state between sleep and waking . . .
In what ways different do you think the World would be in 2015 if, 150 years ago, the Confedaracy had won the American Civil war?
The most obvious is that the conditions in which black Americans live would be even worse than they are now. I suspect that gay rights campaigning would never got into the remotest of gears, but perhaps even more importantly, the USA may well never have got involved in the 1st World War meaning that there probably wouldn't have been a 2nd World War, any tragedy at Hiroshima and Nagasaki (70th anniversary of the former today), and perhaps not even computers.
-
Even if the Confederacy had won the changes were inevitable. They would have happened, maybe more slowly, maybe without guns, and maybe the USA would be lagging behind the rest of the world still, but the black rights movement would have happened sooner or later, as would the gay rights movement. Apart from the questionable idea that the States wouldn't have been involved in WW1 I don't think things would look a great deal different.
-
Even if the Confederacy had won the changes were inevitable. They would have happened, maybe more slowly, maybe without guns, and maybe the USA would be lagging behind the rest of the world still, but the black rights movement would have happened sooner or later, as would the gay rights movement. Apart from the questionable idea that the States wouldn't have been involved in WW1 I don't think things would look a great deal different.
I referred to the Americans not being involved in WW1 because everything I've read about the two halves of the country suggests that any oif the isolationist tendencies tend to be rooterd in the South, even today. At the same time, I'm not convinced about the black rights movement, simply because slavery might still have been legal.
By the way, where would the federal capital have been? Would it still have been in Washington?
-
By the way, where would the federal capital have been? Would it still have been in Washington?
Which federal capital? During the war the federal capital of the CSA was Richmond, and the federal capital of the USA was Washington DC. Had the CSA won the war, they would have retained their independence from the USA, the USA would have continued without them, and I imagine both capitals would have remained where they were.
-
Which federal capital? During the war the federal capital of the CSA was Richmond, and the federal capital of the USA was Washington DC. Had the CSA won the war, they would have retained their independence from the USA, the USA would have continued without them, and I imagine both capitals would have remained where they were.
Would that have happened? Wouldn't the north have fallen apart and the Confederacy taken them over.
-
Which federal capital? During the war the federal capital of the CSA was Richmond, and the federal capital of the USA was Washington DC. Had the CSA won the war, they would have retained their independence from the USA, the USA would have continued without them, and I imagine both capitals would have remained where they were.
Would that have happened? Wouldn't the north have fallen apart and the Confederacy taken them over.
Why on Earth would that have happened? It was simply a bid for independence. That's like saying if Scotland got independence the rUK would fall apart and Scotland would take over!
-
Why on Earth would that have happened? It was simply a bid for independence. That's like saying if Scotland got independence the rUK would fall apart and Scotland would take over!
The difference with the American Civil War was that it was largely fought over the idea of slavery - not something that has any comparative issue in the Scotland/UK debate.
-
Why on Earth would that have happened? It was simply a bid for independence. That's like saying if Scotland got independence the rUK would fall apart and Scotland would take over!
The difference with the American Civil War was that it was largely fought over the idea of slavery - not something that has any comparative issue in the Scotland/UK debate.
that makes no difference at all to what we're discussing though. where do you get the idea that if 'a' successfully achieves independence from 'b', then what is left of 'b' falls apart and 'a' takes over?
-
.... where do you get the idea that if 'a' successfully achieves independence from 'b', then what is left of 'b' falls apart and 'a' takes over?
I get it from a lot of the reading I've done over the years: that the Civil War was a fight over which economic system would hold sway across what we now call the USA.
-
Of course the Civil War is reduced to the question of slavery and it as one of the issues but not the only. In some ways when reading the history I have sympathy with the Confederacy in its fight against a bigger power demanding homogeny.
-
Why on Earth would that have happened? It was simply a bid for independence. That's like saying if Scotland got independence the rUK would fall apart and Scotland would take over!
The difference with the American Civil War was that it was largely fought over the idea of slavery - not something that has any comparative issue in the Scotland/UK debate.
That's not so. The overriding issue was the maintenance of the Union, and slavery was second to that.
-
It was British arms that sustained the confederacy. If Britain had not supplied arms and materials the war would probably been over in a year. But Rhi is correct. Slavery would have gone the way of the Dodo. Interesting that it was democrats that stood against change and the Republicans that were calling for the end to slavery.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-rights-act-interesting-facts/
-
the Civil War was a fight over which economic system would hold sway across what we now call the USA.
Not at all. the CSA didn't give two hoots what policies held sway over Chicago or Boston - they just didn't want Northern policies determined Southern economics. it was an independence movement.
-
That's not so. The overriding issue was the maintenance of the Union, and slavery was second to that.
Nope. Several Confederate leaders explicitly made reference to slavery as being the reason for the war.
-
One of those thoughts that creep unbidden into your, or at least, my, mind in that half-state between sleep and waking . . .
In what ways different do you think the World would be in 2015 if, 150 years ago, the Confedaracy had won the American Civil war?
A staple subject for alternative histories or Uchronia as I believe it's sometimes referred to.
There are a pair of books edited by war historian john Keegan which deal with this and other what if's called ''What If?''
New Scientist devoted a whole edition to the ''what if's?'' of science a few years ago.
There is an Alternative history site with an amusing feature on How celebrities and the famous became Catholic priests in an alternative history......so you have Father Billy Graham, Father Bill Clinton, Father Richard Dawkins, Father Eminem etc.
If the confederates had won the war? I think it would have led to a real American aristocratic class, the confederate president declaring himself as an Emperor, poor whites becoming a serf class and slavery extended to Native Americans.
-
That's not so. The overriding issue was the maintenance of the Union, and slavery was second to that.
Nope. Several Confederate leaders explicitly made reference to slavery as being the reason for the war.
It was the absolute, vital, consideration with Lincoln, and he was the one who called the tune.