Replies

interestingly enough, several scholars have considered those questions.

absent a WBTS or with a CSA winning her FREEDOM from the north, i think the following is likely,

1. there would have eventually been a similar situation between the USA & CSA as there is between Canada/USA now, i.e, peace & a long but peaceful border. for that reason, there would be little difference for many citizens of the CSA than there is now BUT the citizens of the CSA would have FAR LESS a distant & "controlling central government" than we have now.

SOME of the differences you MIGHT notice in touring a FREE dixie would be:

1. prayers in public schools & perhaps nuns/priests in LA schools (there would be MANY differences between the various states, which would be allowed) teaching. some states would ABSOLUTELY forbid abortion;some would allow it.

2.much lower taxes & few "Richmond bureaucrats" making rules for the CSA

3. a very large & well-armed National Guard, with a SMALL "professional" military. there might well be a large navy. the CSA would have learned that lesson during the "War for Freedom".

as for WW1/WW2, i think the south would have fought with GB as an ally, while the Union would have fought with Germany in WW1/WW2 or stayed neutral.

i think, had our forefathers WON their freedom from the union, the CSA would see herself as a VERY GOOD FRIEND of the British Empire & that GB & Europe would be the CSA's main marketplace.

free dixie,sw

Rebland wouldn't have lasted fifty years even had they won the Civil War. For one thing, there soon would have been a real war to the finish with the Americans. If the Confederate hotheads first went to war because they were afraid slavery would not be allowed to spread to the territories, they certainly would not stand by while a prosperous USA filled in the continental empty space with free states. Secondly a backward, feudal society would never survive the modern world. The Confederates did bad enough in the mid-1800s, but 20th century war would have been far beyond the CSA's capabilities. You can't build a modern nation while holding half of your inhabitants in bondage.

several scholars have considered those questions.

Yeah and when I want their opinions I'll ask them for them, I asked for yours, so rather then parrot what you have read give me your own honest opinion and why you have formed those opinions.

True or false you have never had anyone give you the type of opinion I have given you I.E. The Democrats are to blame for all the problems leading to the civil war during the civil war and after the civil war and for most of the racism in this country because they use racism to collect votes.

That is my own personal opinion of which I have based upon historical fact not the historical opinions of others. I want to hear your opinions, not the opinions of others.

Why do you believe that let's call the fractured nation the Federal States of America (FSA) would fight against the CSA during WWI and WWII instead of along side of say The CSA, Britain and France against the Kaiser and Hitler?

Teddy Roosevelt was no friend of the Kaiser and FDR was more a friend of England then say Huey Long or other southerners were. and yet you believe that The FSA would fight beside Imperial Germany and the Nazis, Why?

It makes a better storyline? How about the actions of the leaders of the day, should that have so sort of effect on your alternative history?

"as for WW1/WW2, i think the south would have fought with GB as an ally, while the Union would have fought with Germany in WW1/WW2 or stayed neutral."

You saying that Americans residing in Northeastern states, including urban Jewish Americans, would have sided with Nazi Germany, once again clearly exemplifies how twisted and demented you really are.