Parties in a CSA

[k-onmmunist]

What would the parties be in a Confederate States of America that survived the War of Northern Aggression?

[dead0man]

A party for big govt racists and a party for small govt racists and then a small party (or three) for the non racists.  One of the main parties will be religious based and of course will try and bring in prohibition...my guess is the big govt party, but that could be my biases talking.  Until slavery went away at least at which point one of the racists parties will stop being that way or one of them dies and a small party rises up to take the black vote.

On the other hand there are a lot of quite likely scenarios that would make the above impossible.  Banning political parties, banning certain kinds of political parties, blacks never gaining suffrage, etc

[12th Doctor]

I'm not a "Lost Causer" by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think that actual racial parity probably would have come sooner in the South had it not been for the outcome of the Civil War, for any number of reasons.

[12th Doctor]

And note, I said "parity" for a reason, because in various ways we lack "equality" even to this day, in real life.

[President Mitt]

There probably wouldn't have been time for a party system to develop, as the CSA would have likely crumbled in 10 or so years.

[useful idiot]

A Whig-ish party in the Clay mold, probably led by Alexander Stephens at first, and a Jacksonian/Jeffersonian party.

There probably wouldn't have been time for a party system to develop, as the CSA would have likely crumbled in 10 or so years.

What would lead you to believe this? Of the five richest states in 1860, New York was fifth, and the other four were Southern states. It obviously depends under what scenario the war ended and in what year, but I can't see a CSA having won in 1862/63 with recognition from the United States, not lasting for a while. Given the immediate support they would have gained from Britain and France, who were undergoing a cotton shortage at the time, I think the South could have easily rebuilt itself from the first two years of war.

[Хahar 🤔]

I've always had the feeling that there would be a lot of censorship on the part of individual states in a Confederacy. New Orleans would have been the freest part of the country and a major city in its own right.

War of Northern Aggression

Wrong.

[WillK]

What would the parties be in a Confederate States of America that survived the War of Northern Aggression?

Is this alleged war part of some alternative history scenario I missed?

[WillK]

I'm not a "Lost Causer" by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think that actual racial parity probably would have come sooner in the South had it not been for the outcome of the Civil War, for any number of reasons.

Can you give any of those reasons?

[k-onmmunist]

What would the parties be in a Confederate States of America that survived the War of Northern Aggression?

Is this alleged war part of some alternative history scenario I missed?

Umm... no...

[President Mitt]

A Whig-ish party in the Clay mold, probably led by Alexander Stephens at first, and a Jacksonian/Jeffersonian party.

There probably wouldn't have been time for a party system to develop, as the CSA would have likely crumbled in 10 or so years.

What would lead you to believe this? Of the five richest states in 1860, New York was fifth, and the other four were Southern states. It obviously depends under what scenario the war ended and in what year, but I can't see a CSA having won in 1862/63 with recognition from the United States, not lasting for a while. Given the immediate support they would have gained from Britain and France, who were undergoing a cotton shortage at the time, I think the South could have easily rebuilt itself from the first two years of war.

The Confederacy was bound to fail, there was little to no central authority in the Confederate States, I mean, there were talks of secession from the Confederacy BEFORE the war even started. The States merely couldn't get along with themselves, for example, my great and happy state of South Carolina believed since they seceded first, they should have a larger say in the new nation. Do you think the other states would have liked that? Jefferson Davis had no control over any of the states.

Simply put, the Confederacy died of "state's rights."

[Bo]

The Bourbons--Pro-business, pro-slavery, libertarians. Tough on defense.
The Reformers--Pro-liberty for all, pro-redistribution fo wealth, soft on defense.

[Lief 🗽]

Some pro-business, pro-tariff party and another pro-rural (really more pro-plantation), pro-free trade party.

[rebeltarian]

1) A hawkish, fabian socialist, pro-business, lasseiz-faire, pro-slavery party for rich plantation owners and industrialists.


2) A super-hawkish, highly nationalistic, ultra-bible-thumping, populist/labor, pro-segregationalist, anti-corporate party for poor whites and KKK leaders.


3) A small, radical anti-slavery libertarian party for blacks and anti-slavery whites.

[Hash]

I've seen countless althits which use a Democratic Party, usually Southern pro-slavery conservative-populist and Whigs, historically anti-slavery and more economically 'conservative' (to use your ugh terms).

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

They probably would be more likely to develop a 3-party system than the US now actually (assuming they keep FPTP). We'd probably end up with some very pro-business party (Remember Atlanta suburbs and the like), some crazy religious agrian party similar to European Christian Democrats but more extreme (Christian Union in the Netherlands might qualify, SGP might be too extreme even for here), and a party consisting of the few liberals and maybe some modern day Clinton-style Democrats. Blacks though are the big wild card, since the religious populist party is likely heavily linked to slavery and segregation they probably wouldn't vote for them despite having the most in common...on the other hand blacks vote for southern Democrats today.

[President Mitt]

Does anybody here actually believed the Confederacy could have lasted?

[ARescan]

Pro-Northern style progression in big cities

Pro-total agrarian

[Jensen]

White Party
Non-white Party
Cuban Party

[The Mikado]

Did anyone else start hearing "Party in the USA" when reading this post's title?

Damn you all for making me think of horrible, catchy Miley Cyrus music!  I'm going to go through hours of good music before I stop hearing this in my head!

[12th Doctor]

I'm not a "Lost Causer" by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think that actual racial parity probably would have come sooner in the South had it not been for the outcome of the Civil War, for any number of reasons.

Can you give any of those reasons?

There would have been no incentive for preserving slavery, past a couple decades after independence.  That might not sound like much, but prior to the Civil War, the abolitionist-don't care-pro slavery ratio was probably 30-50-20 in the North and 30-40-30 in the South.  There really was not that much of a difference.  Most of the major Southern generals were anti-slavery, while most of the politicians were the most adamantly in favor of it.  The opposite was the case in the North.  Many of the leaders in a post war South would have been military men, Lee, Longstreet, Stuart.  The extreme animosity that the average Southerner felt toward blacks after the war was by and large do to their focusing their anger for the way the war ended on blacks.  If the war ends well, that doesn't happen.

Slavery was an extremely inefficient system, from an economic standpoint, and would never have survived the inevitable industrialization of the South.  The idea that the South would have turned to back to pre-war status quo anti-industrialism is ridiculous.  Once the war created Southern industry, they wouldn't have dove back under the bed... there was too much money in it.  The Southern Constitution prohibited tariffs, which many have used as a means to show that the South wouldn't be able to have industry due to lack of protections.  That's a 1920's-1950's economic argument, and its crap (I mention it because it has been used in academic works evaluating this question in the past).  To believe that, you have to believe that tariffs work, and they don't.  American industry was not created by high tariffs.  It occurred because of close proximity to a wealth of natural resources.  Tariffs were only there to line the pockets of the government.  So, living in a post-tariff age, we can see that that argument makes no sense, in hindsight.  The South had many of the resources needed to spur industrialization, and given the opportunity, it would have developed.  With that, slavery simply becomes obsolete.  And having white workers laboring alongside black workers in the factories, just like having them side-by-side in the fields, would have facilitated the break down of racial barriers.

[k-onmmunist]

Did anyone else start hearing "Party in the USA" when reading this post's title?

Damn you all for making me think of horrible, catchy Miley Cyrus music!  I'm going to go through hours of good music before I stop hearing this in my head!

Not until now, but if you've gotten that in my head now, there will be hell to pay.

[jokerman]

The Southern Constitution prohibited tariffs, which many have used as a means to show that the South wouldn't be able to have industry due to lack of protections.  That's a 1920's-1950's economic argument, and its crap (I mention it because it has been used in academic works evaluating this question in the past).  To believe that, you have to believe that tariffs work, and they don't.  American industry was not created by high tariffs.  It occurred because of close proximity to a wealth of natural resources.  Tariffs were only there to line the pockets of the government.  So, living in a post-tariff age, we can see that that argument makes no sense, in hindsight.

Oh I beg to differ, but that's an argument for another thread.  If you have the time feel free to start it and I will rebut this above quote.

[Хahar 🤔]

Did anyone else start hearing "Party in the USA" when reading this post's title?

Damn you all for making me think of horrible, catchy Miley Cyrus music!  I'm going to go through hours of good music before I stop hearing this in my head!

I have the Hymn of the Soviet Union in my head, so I'm fine.

[12th Doctor]

The Southern Constitution prohibited tariffs, which many have used as a means to show that the South wouldn't be able to have industry due to lack of protections.  That's a 1920's-1950's economic argument, and its crap (I mention it because it has been used in academic works evaluating this question in the past).  To believe that, you have to believe that tariffs work, and they don't.  American industry was not created by high tariffs.  It occurred because of close proximity to a wealth of natural resources.  Tariffs were only there to line the pockets of the government.  So, living in a post-tariff age, we can see that that argument makes no sense, in hindsight.

Oh I beg to differ, but that's an argument for another thread.  If you have the time feel free to start it and I will rebut this above quote.

Which points, exactly, are you debating?

Did anyone else start hearing "Party in the USA" when reading this post's title?

Damn you all for making me think of horrible, catchy Miley Cyrus music!  I'm going to go through hours of good music before I stop hearing this in my head!

I have the Hymn of the Soviet Union in my head, so I'm fine.

Damn... now so do I, thank you very much.