I’m sure at one point everyone has asked him or herself the same question: What would have happened if the South had won the Civil War? Understandably this is an extremely large question and on some levels should not even be addressed, but oh well; here I go.
Maybe the most obvious difference would be the issue of equal rights. Today, it is hard to imagine a world where certain people are intentionally discriminated against based off of some sort of physical difference. I believe that even if the South had won the Civil War, slavery would not exist even today. I do believe, however, that America would not be nearly as deep into eliminating racism as we are today. There would not be a black President, and the Civil Rights Movement might not have even happened yet.
Now to the next and even more mysterious issue: Would the United States still even be the United States? While some may think that if the South won the United States would split into two different countries, I do not believe so. The North and the South had too many interconnecting parts to suddenly be split into to nations. If the South had won changes would be made to affect America as a whole, but I do not believe that the country would just split into two.
I’m sure that there are a million other changes that would come with a Southern victory, but these two seem to be the most important.
11 comments:
Sam, this post is pretty interesting. Your two points regarding the civil rights movements and the US either being one or two countries is another interesting point.
I would disagree with your views on civil rights. I think the more oppressed a people are, the faster they act to help themselves. Had the south won, I think the black community would be quicker to unite against the racist, unfair government. That's why so much of the civil rights movement took place in the south (Alabama, Georgia, etc.) This happened because the conditions were so bad there. For the most part, the north was less active in the civil rights movement because blacks had more rights there than in the south. I know this seems strange, but I hope it makes sense.
i completely agree with you about slavery; though it still exists in some areas of the world (unfortunately), Americans have too many tightly upheld ideals stated directly within the Constitution to have continued slavery beyond the beginning of the 20th century (or roughly around then).
About the two different nations, though, i am more skeptical. America may not have broken into two countries indefinitely, but i'm pretty sure there would have been a brief split at least. Too many people were too angry to NOT do something if they had won.
I agree in that I don't think slavery would exist today even if the South had won the civil war. Yes, someone would have done something about slavery, just maybe at a later time. However, slavery still existed after the civil war and the Southern loss. So of course, we know people did something-- the Civil Rights Movement. Maybe it would have come at a later time if the South won, but it still would have happened, rightfully so.
On Sam's second mysterious issue, I think Tess and Sam are both right. I think there may have been a brief split, but they were interconnected through industry and agriculture. The seemingly independent territories of the North and South were somewhat dependent on each other economically. Thus, due to their proximity and similar fundamental bases, I think they needed each other.
I think we can all agree that even if we currently lived in the Confederate States of America, slavery would have been abolished at some time. Also, concerning the idea of two different Americas, I agree with Scott and Tess when they say there would be a brief split but not a permanent one. However, even if the CSA had one their independence from the USA, I don't think they could have remained an independent nation. For a brief period after the war they would have functioned as their own country but without the industrial power that resided in the north, they could not have survived. Also, the southern economy was in complete shambles because of the war and even with a victory, could not have remained afloat for very long. Because of this I believe that two separate Americas could not have existed but instead of the CSA, the USA would have been reformed. The south simply could not survive on their own and the only logical solution would have been for the north to annex the south back into the United States. A completely hypothetical situation but nonetheless, fun to talk about.
Like Nick said, the Southern economy was too broken to sustain itself after a victory. Although I could see the South exploiting the North for its resources as part of reparations. In terms of all the other issues, like slavery and the civil rights movements, they would probably end in due time. Very interesting blog post, even if it was about a hypothetical event.
I don’t think we can disregard slavery as a small and meager issue that someone would have eventually fixed. We cannot forget that the confederates truly believed slavery to be morally acceptable and that it was god’s will for the white race to rule over all others. A confederate victory would have ignited passion and enthusiasm for southern ideals and beliefs in slavery. The South would have eventually gone through an industrial revolution, but they would not have given up their superior status over slaves. Even though slavery was used in most part for labor, the South would have oppressed the black race and kept them as slaves or at the minimum inferior beings. A confederate victory would have only portrayed gods will to keep things the way they were.
I like the idea of your post, but I disagree with both of your points. The first one, I think Michael pretty much covered what I was thinking. As for whether or not the U.S. would be split, I think it would. Before the Civil War, the South suceeded in order to create a country that they believed in. That's what caused the war. If the South has already demonstrated that they are willing to leave the United States, what would stop them after they beat the North in the Civil War? They obviously felt strongly enough about not wanting to be apart of the United States that they were willing to suceed and ignore the "interconnecting parts."
Going off of what Tess said, while slavery is gone in many parts of the world today (however it is still not entirely eliminated) child labor (in my opinion) is the new slavery. While it is not as big of a problem here in the US children all over the world are being exploited into working for little or no money at all.
You know what is interesting, if the South had won the war Greenhill School (if it happened to still be created) would have had to develop a different motto of diversity (which it claims to have today).
I agree with Tess. Perhaps a split would have occurred for a short period of time but not a permanent one. The two countries were just too dependent on each other to stay seperated.
I do agree with you Sam about slavery. I believe that the South would have come to their senses and understood that slavery is an awful thing. I also have to agree with Mikey in the fact that African American community would have risen and rebelled against those who discriminated them throughout the years. Also I want you to think of this, if the South did win, in later years could we have had another civil war?
Sam, while i like your post and where you headed, it brings me to a point that i think is often overmade. For example, people often say things like what ___ hadnt done ____? I think that while this kind of discussion is interesting in terms of scholarly activity, the fact remains that it happened, and whether or not the situation occured, i think the end result could still very well be the same. So the discussion about how the USA would be had the South won the war is irrelevant to me because they didnt win the war. And they didnt not win the war because one thing happened.
Post a Comment