"Liberal" support of the Civil War?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

No because a large part of the cultural changes involved are due to the emergence of the American economy as the world superpower after the civil war. And welfare spending would have been non-existent in a second-rate power threatened by a more powerful neighbour to the south.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

No because a large part of the cultural changes involved are due to the emergence of the American economy as the world superpower after the civil war. And welfare spending would have been non-existent in a second-rate power threatened by a more powerful neighbour to the south.

The South was never more powerful than the North.  The North has always had more people and more factories and more transportation options.  What would have made the south more powerful?

The sheer fact of its existence and the fact that it won the war (and that would almost certainly lead to massive political instability in the North - would they have to pay reprerations?  Does anyone who knows more about the Civil War than I do know?). Also the loss of the southern market would also be a factor. And that the US would have to spend alot more than did on military spending as it would have to defend itself from the south.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

...which, of course, had plenty of deranged expansionist ideas.

Yes; of course this as well.

What would happen to the "Monroe Doctrine" in this? Remember that France's incursion into Mexico was in part due to the inability of the US to enforce its traditional foreign policy during the civil war. Would we be looking at a very different American continent as a whole? I don't know whether the confedracy could realistically hold Mexico - or at least the South and densely inhabited parts of it but given how easy it was for William Walker in Nicaragua intervention in Central America would be a certainty.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Meh... Even if we lost the civil war (Fcuk the south, Union foerver!!), the United States still could've emerged as a great power.

How?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Meh... Even if we lost the civil war (Fcuk the south, Union foerver!!), the United States still could've emerged as a great power.

How?

I meant to say "Middle Power". I think we would have, if the South won, ended up much like Canada in terms of power globally.

Huh? Canada would not have ended up being the nation it is today without the United States.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. As long as Cotton Profits kept rolling in then the CSA was a power and would probably be a 'modern' power too --> our definition of 'modern' is in part due to the victory of the Union, among other things, anyway trade with the Southern States was powering the industrial revolution in Britain after all. Already long before the war the southern states were far ahead of most (all?) non-Southern Cone Latin American States and even with slavery had nothing like the social problems the others had - hell a southern backed pirate conquered Nicaragua and held it for about a year. On other hand when the profits stopped... well there is always imperial expansion or industrialization using the capital already gained, take your pick.

Another factor would be the extent to which the USA would be weakened after the war, as that directly impigned on the nature of the CSA's military spending and international relations (obviously).