What would happen if the South won the Civil War?

[Kurt_Angle_Pwns]

the south WILL rise again folks. i guarantee it. what happened at the end of the civil war in the robert e lee surrendering is what we down south call a a fluke. now, if youll review most of the major battle, the confederacy(which didnt have near the money nor resources of those damn yanks) managed to kick some northern *** on sveral occasions(fredericksburg, cold harbor, wilderness campaign, BOTH bull runs, etc, etc). Simply put, the south has stronger people, and it comes down to this-if stonewall jackson, my personal hero(aside from kurt angle) had not died, there would be a csa today.

but as i like to say, NEVER FORGET. the burnings of atlanta and Sherman's march to the sea still scars the bauty of the south. for his introduction of total warfare onto poor southern families, there can be no revenge too great. there's always talk of another seccesion, and if that barrack hussein obama gets elected, we will seceed again.

just remember, every great leader in this country was southern. you fools owe us.

 

[Ethan]

I'm not sure whether to respond to you because I think I smell a troll, but nonetheless you will be beaten down with the facts and put in your place.

the south WILL rise again folks. i guarantee it. what happened at the end of the civil war in the robert e lee surrendering is what we down south call a a fluke.

This is just plain wrong. The union had cut the confederacy in two halves by siezing control of the Mississippi river. The confederate army couldn't transport supplies as efficiently. Robert E. Lee was getting his tail beat in Virginia by Ulysses S. Grant and the capitol Richmond was captured FORCING the confederacy to surrender. By no means was that a fluke.

now, if youll review most of the major battle, the confederacy(which didnt have near the money nor resources of those damn yanks) managed to kick some northern *** on sveral occasions(fredericksburg, cold harbor, wilderness campaign, BOTH bull runs, etc, etc). Simply put, the south has stronger people, and it comes down to this-if stonewall jackson, my personal hero(aside from kurt angle) had not died, there would be a csa today.

Oh please. The reason we didn't do get at first is because the union's troops weren't prepared for the kind of war they would be fighting. Everyone had the idea that the war would be over in a few weeks. The South fought with veracity that no one expected therefore the North was caught off gaurd. Secondly Lincoln had appointed a poor general McClellan that had lost major battles. When Sherman and Ulysses S. Grant joined in, the tides immediatley started to turn. Lastly it says something about the Southern army, that they were so blind they shot their own general.

but as i like to say, NEVER FORGET. the burnings of atlanta and Sherman's march to the sea still scars the bauty of the south. for his introduction of total warfare onto poor southern families, there can be no revenge too great. there's always talk of another seccesion, and if that barrack hussein obama gets elected, we will seceed again.

LOL.

just remember, every great leader in this country was southern. you fools owe us.

Yet about five came from Ohio.

 

[ImJessieTR]

but as i like to say, NEVER FORGET. the burnings of atlanta and Sherman's march to the sea still scars the bauty of the south. for his introduction of total warfare onto poor southern families, there can be no revenge too great. there's always talk of another seccesion, and if that barrack hussein obama gets elected, we will seceed again.

I think I like this one the best. I mean, the fact the South started the shooting means nothing, I suppose. They lived up to the stereotype of the arrogant redneck moron whose primary solution to anything is to shoot it. The South split because a group of Elmer Fudd's liked screwing their employees (in more ways than one) over doing the right thing.

 

[Irith_Locke]

Well, what the world would be like would depend entirely on how the Confederacy won, and when they did. I mean, there's no way they could really have won with the real situation: they had incredibly inferior manpower, resources, and industrial output. They had lost access to anything past the Mississippi.
So, say the British had decided to recognize Southern independence and joined them in the war to have some premium deal on cotton. Well, after winning, Britain probably would have retaken the Union as a colonial possession and the South would also have eventually be absorbed. It would need British military protection and investment to remain alive. The slaves would also likely have rebelled to speed up British takeover, seeing as the British had outlawed slavery.
If John Wilkes Booth had kidnapped Lincoln and brought him to the south as a hostage, (incidentally, this was his original plan) then there would likely have been some treaty allowing Southern sovereignty. The two nations would have warred from time to time, until eventually one of them (probably the North) triumphed. The divisions in American society would have been MUCH deeper than they have been. Racism would be an incredibly powerful force in the South, and many former Confederates would rebel against the Union victory after a long time as part of another country. All in all, America would be unstable and not the superpower it is today.
So, yeah...hard question to answer.

 

[Suwaterse]

What would the economy be like?
No gangsters
What would the government be like?
The same XD
Would America be more about agriculture than industry today?
what?
Would there still be slaves today?
Yes because thats what the war was about!

 

[qwerqwer]

What would the economy be like?
No gangsters
What would the government be like?
The same XD
Would America be more about agriculture than industry today?
what?
Would there still be slaves today?
Yes because thats what the war was about!

you ignorant american.

there are white gangsters.
same government but much more conservative
yeah, more agriculture
the war wasn't fully about slaves.

 

[Cutiebunny]

So we're assuming that nobody in a "confederacy" style government would eventually become more progressive?

We're operating under the assumption that the same type of idealogy that existed in 1860 would remain unchanged? That's BS.

If that were the case, then, I'd have to assume that since the North won the war, that women would still be unable to vote and abortions would be illlegal because, that's what was going on in the 1860s in the North.

I think that, if the South would have won, that there would be some noticeable differences. I believe that slavery would eventually be abolished, merely because, in societies such as South Africa, it happened. It may have taken several generations more for that change to occur, but it would have occurred anyways.

However, I think that life in a confederacy would be one where the government would be more focused on domestic issues instead of international ones, especially those that did not affect trade. Human rights, governments, etc. would not be problematic as long as trade was uneffected. So, I think it's quite possible to say that the US would likely have never gotten involved with WWI, WWII, Korean, Vietnam, Iraq, etc. because they did not directly involve or affect us.

I doubt society would be so openly liberal as well. Which, really, could be a good thing. We are the only country in the world that has to put messages on coffee cups alerting the consumer that the "beverage they are about to enjoy is hot". Foriegners actually enjoy coming to the US to see how stupid us Americans are because we put warnings like that on our foodstuffs. Personally, I would welcome this change because political correctness merely robs a citizen of their right to free speech.

So, it's hard to say that life would be better or not had the South won the war. I think some things would be different, and some would not.

 

[PokemonHero]

That's a interesting question to ponder. Here's what I think about the original questions asked:

What would the economy be like?

The economy would be feature a lot less government control and probably be even more unstable than our current economy.

What would the government be like?

It would be a confederacy. Basically worried more about problems within individual states rather than the country as a whole.

Would America be more about agriculture than industry today?

It would most likely have more agriculture, although they would have recognized that some industry was neccessary.

Would there still be slaves today?

No there wouldn't. If they were to become a separate country, they would need powerful allies. No one in the world wants to be allied with a country that allows for slavery legally. Even back during the Civil War, the South considered abolishing slavery in order to form alliances with Great Britain and France.

However, I do not think that it would have survived for long on its own, as the Articles of Confederation prove early on that a confederacy is a very weak government overall.

 

[The Big Al]

I doubt the CSA would have left Brittan and France to the German and Austrian Empires. Considering any Confederate victory would come with substantial aide from those two countries they would be expected to do the same. So the CSA would be involved in World War I.

And there's stupid labels on things because companies fear the courtroom. What that and political correctness has to do with liberalism is beyond me. Just dumb stereotypes I guess.

But liberalism would sadly be less of a factor in the CSA.

 

[qwerqwer]

I doubt the CSA would have left Brittan and France to the German and Austrian Empires. Considering any Confederate victory would come with substantial aide from those two countries they would be expected to do the same. So the CSA would be involved in World War I.

And there's stupid labels on things because companies fear the courtroom. What that and political correctness has to do with liberalism is beyond me. Just dumb stereotypes I guess.

But liberalism would sadly be less of a factor in the CSA.

i see your point. the CSA would very likely give aid to europe but i think we all agree that slavery would be abolished sooner or later. yet, there would still be much tension.

the CSA would probably be much tougher with the law and these *stupid* suits would have most likely been thrown out.

actually, this brings up a new question. could the south have won the war w/o help from britain/france

facts:
the south needed their weapons because they were mostly incapable of manufacturing their own and domestic rifles often varied and lacked power.

the south had 7/8 military academies and a single soldier was most likely better disciplined than the north.

the north were attacking and the south had an advantage. the south didn't have the power to conquer the north and they knew that. a victory is their books probably counted as repelling the invaders and living as two separate countries.

theres a new point too. if the old conservative values of the south and the CSA itself survived until WWII, would they have joined hitler and attacked the USA?

discuss (this is a debate topic so debate, i feel like arguing a point)

 

[Triforce007]

Racisim would be more common then it would be today. America may still have slaves. The Confederate States of America would now be controlling all of america besides Canada and Nazi Germany would control all of Europe and Africa. Imperial Japan would control most of Asia and the Pacific. Obama would not be running for President.
Check out "Bring on the Jubliee" and the film "Confederate States of america" by Indepenent Film Channel. Both these works discuss various scenarios to this outcome.

 

[Straha]

The South would be a nation of christian culture and civilization without you yankees ruining it. In an independant Confederacy we'd lack the trendy european social ideas you yankees keep pushing down our throats like feminism, political correctness, gun control and tolerating homosexual relationships. Heck, we'd probably have real anti-drug laws and god willing still have prohibition to this day. We don't need your godless empty consumerism, multiculturalism or educated pointy headed intellectuals telling us how to run our own affairs.

 

[Irith_Locke]

In an independant Confederacy we'd lack the trendy european social ideas you yankees keep pushing down our throats like feminism, political correctness, gun control and tolerating homosexual relationships. Heck, we'd probably have real anti-drug laws and god willing still have prohibition to this day. We don't need your godless empty consumerism, multiculturalism or educated pointy headed intellectuals telling us how to run our own affairs.

God I hope this is sarcasm/satire/trolling.

 

[qwerqwer]

obama would not be running for prez? YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. CSA! CSA! CSA! CSA! CSA!

im not racist, you know.racism is a crime and crime is for blaks people

 

[Eerie Fuwante]

"What if" makes it obvious that this discussion will go nowhere.

 

[Kazekage]

my guess is that it would be alot like india and pakistan

 

[qwerqwer]

my guess is that it would be alot like india and pakistan

i see your point. they do match, in a way, with pakistan being rather weaker than india yet having a very strong national pride.
if the CSA had survived to post WWII and is they had abolished slavery, then it's quite probably this would be the situation, where the UN would go for peace and keep them seperate.

However, you have to realize, this is not a religious seperation between the CSA and the USA, unlike paki and india. so there would be pressure to reunite.