Alternative confederate leaders and decisions how could the south have done better based upon differ
May 14, 2024 15:45:19 GMT
Post by American hist on May 14, 2024 15:45:19 GMT
Authors purpose of revival
I will revive this thread while expanding and clarifying its purpose. I hope to contribute new information that will be worthy of discussion,in this post rathern then go over the same subject.
This thread discusses the leadership of the CSA and the alternatives it may have produced, mainly its political aspects. This thread wishes to include leaders who were not directly affiliated with the Confederacy, such as the copperhead leader such as Clement Vallandigham.
This thread permits military leaders to be discussed, but this discussion gives strong preference to the political aspects of the Southern war leaders, which are not limited to its governors.
However, I wish to clarify that I didn't mean that immigration ships came to the Confederacy in real life . If there was a longer period of peace, this possibility would be reasonable, just as there were immigrants to the South during this time. A beneficial incentive would be that the CSA government pays for the ferry services to the CSA with previous employment agreements from fledging factories making war supples
1861
One crucial mistake historians overlook is that many diplomats abroad would resign from their posts to join the Confederacy. Had the Confederate administration asked them to accept appointments by the CSA to be the official diplomats to the CSA This would strengthen the narrative that Lincoln’s government was illegitimate, and not the union of the founding fathers
What the confederacy should have done was try to bring the the union government to court through a lawsuit this would buy up time and chief justice robert tany favored the south.
While I have belabored the South's foolish mistakes early on in the first year of the fight, such as declaring war on Fort Sumter, violating Kentucky's neutrality, and the South's suicidal cotton embargo, let's also analyze Southern commerce.
www.historynet.com/blockade-in-name-only/
I will revive this thread while expanding and clarifying its purpose. I hope to contribute new information that will be worthy of discussion,in this post rathern then go over the same subject.
This thread discusses the leadership of the CSA and the alternatives it may have produced, mainly its political aspects. This thread wishes to include leaders who were not directly affiliated with the Confederacy, such as the copperhead leader such as Clement Vallandigham.
This thread permits military leaders to be discussed, but this discussion gives strong preference to the political aspects of the Southern war leaders, which are not limited to its governors.
However, I wish to clarify that I didn't mean that immigration ships came to the Confederacy in real life . If there was a longer period of peace, this possibility would be reasonable, just as there were immigrants to the South during this time. A beneficial incentive would be that the CSA government pays for the ferry services to the CSA with previous employment agreements from fledging factories making war supples
1861
One crucial mistake historians overlook is that many diplomats abroad would resign from their posts to join the Confederacy. Had the Confederate administration asked them to accept appointments by the CSA to be the official diplomats to the CSA This would strengthen the narrative that Lincoln’s government was illegitimate, and not the union of the founding fathers
What the confederacy should have done was try to bring the the union government to court through a lawsuit this would buy up time and chief justice robert tany favored the south.
While I have belabored the South's foolish mistakes early on in the first year of the fight, such as declaring war on Fort Sumter, violating Kentucky's neutrality, and the South's suicidal cotton embargo, let's also analyze Southern commerce.
www.historynet.com/blockade-in-name-only/
This bill galvanized NYC, and its effects would wedge the city further until the city's economy was taken over by the city's appetite for war profits. Had the South been patient, it could have found the city's wealth to be used for preparations of Southern defense. While it may be true Britain had warehouses full of cotton in 1860, the Union states largely went to wool and the southern portions of the midwest, such as little Egypt and its border states, temporarily produced cotton. As these areas are not known for their cotton, the union relied on conquest for its need for cotton when not engaging in illegal trade with trading with the enemy
repository.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2333&context=cwbr
www.researchgate.net/publication/256021052_The_'Confederate'_Blockade_of_the_South
This article displays that relatively few blockade runners were actually captured during the conflict and that the real menace was the South itself.
www.cnrs-scrn.org/northern_mariner/vol09/nm_9_4_35-46.pdf
(from Wikipedia)
The Civil War period saw booming economic growth for the BNA colonies. The war in the United States created a huge market for Canada's agricultural and manufactured goods, most of which went to the Union. Maritime shipbuilders and owners prospered in the wartime trade boom.
If NYC had gone south, this would have allowed NYC officials to use British Canada as their food source.
The Confederates should have purchased more rifled artillery and made a separate list of forts they should be placed in, such as New Orleans, Savana, and Charleston. This could have prevented the Union capture of Fort Pulaski and allowed a possible csa victory at the Battle of Santa Rosa Island.
The confederates in fact use these cannons, battles such as the battle of Fredericksburg. It would’ve been more useful have they put them on the forts Another possibility suggested if the confederates had a better navy.which could be a possibility under a different confederate admenstration.
www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2020/june/blockade-busters-confederate-navy
www.military-history.org/feature/american-civil-war/it-was-british-arms-that-sustained-the-confederacy-during-the-american-civil-war-peter-tsouras.htm
Confederate finances
The CSA secretary of the treasure believed the south would receive 25 million in tariff revenue in the year 1861. Unfortunately for the CSA, the blockade avoided collecting those duties. (Perhaps more revenue as the economy may spur further as the slaveholder republic prepares for war. Initially, the csa of only 7 states convinced the people domestically and internationally to purchase bonds which the South enjoyed great success, particularly in the first months before Fort Sumter.
If the south can refrain from starting the war it can purchase precious metals abroad the geographical closet would be Mexico perhaps purchasing silver and other precious metals to help pay of Mexico debts. Had the csa bought precious metals this would have avoided the currency drying up which eventually lead to hyper inflation however as previously not the main episodes of hyper inflation occurred when the south least key battles such as the sumer of 1863.
In fac the Davis administration understood the 2 surprisingly important nations they must be under good terms with were mexico and russia which I will talk about.
www.eiu.edu/historia/8Historia2018JCunningham.pdf
It is wrong that diplomats didn't have as much power because while there were flaws in diplomatic policies under Davis, diplomats could weld extraordinary influence as periods of isolation were met without instructions from Richmond.
Picket was a terrible pick, and whats worse its leaders stupidly encouraged seccionsit in northern Mexico
The Confederate plans on Mexico
What the Confederates should have done instead, especially before Fort Sumter, was focus on the international trade by sea and land for weapons in exchange for CSA exports, which would have hurt the Union that went to war with America. This would have improved CSA-Mexican relations if Southern California had had enough time to separate.
southern Mexican trade
This alone could have allowed the CSA ton win key battles out west.
James Chestnut seems to be a fine pick for ambassador to Mexico one of the sons of .Manuel Armijo who historically sided with the confederates, might be a good pick a southern diplomat to Mexico.
Russia is interesting in Mexico had the czar not liberated the serfs the CSA would have had better diplomatic grounds, such as the conservative government winning the reform war.
repository.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2333&context=cwbr
www.researchgate.net/publication/256021052_The_'Confederate'_Blockade_of_the_South
This article displays that relatively few blockade runners were actually captured during the conflict and that the real menace was the South itself.
www.cnrs-scrn.org/northern_mariner/vol09/nm_9_4_35-46.pdf
(from Wikipedia)
The Civil War period saw booming economic growth for the BNA colonies. The war in the United States created a huge market for Canada's agricultural and manufactured goods, most of which went to the Union. Maritime shipbuilders and owners prospered in the wartime trade boom.
If NYC had gone south, this would have allowed NYC officials to use British Canada as their food source.
The Confederates should have purchased more rifled artillery and made a separate list of forts they should be placed in, such as New Orleans, Savana, and Charleston. This could have prevented the Union capture of Fort Pulaski and allowed a possible csa victory at the Battle of Santa Rosa Island.
The confederates in fact use these cannons, battles such as the battle of Fredericksburg. It would’ve been more useful have they put them on the forts Another possibility suggested if the confederates had a better navy.which could be a possibility under a different confederate admenstration.
www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2020/june/blockade-busters-confederate-navy
www.military-history.org/feature/american-civil-war/it-was-british-arms-that-sustained-the-confederacy-during-the-american-civil-war-peter-tsouras.htm
Confederate finances
The CSA secretary of the treasure believed the south would receive 25 million in tariff revenue in the year 1861. Unfortunately for the CSA, the blockade avoided collecting those duties. (Perhaps more revenue as the economy may spur further as the slaveholder republic prepares for war. Initially, the csa of only 7 states convinced the people domestically and internationally to purchase bonds which the South enjoyed great success, particularly in the first months before Fort Sumter.
If the south can refrain from starting the war it can purchase precious metals abroad the geographical closet would be Mexico perhaps purchasing silver and other precious metals to help pay of Mexico debts. Had the csa bought precious metals this would have avoided the currency drying up which eventually lead to hyper inflation however as previously not the main episodes of hyper inflation occurred when the south least key battles such as the sumer of 1863.
In fac the Davis administration understood the 2 surprisingly important nations they must be under good terms with were mexico and russia which I will talk about.
www.eiu.edu/historia/8Historia2018JCunningham.pdf
It is wrong that diplomats didn't have as much power because while there were flaws in diplomatic policies under Davis, diplomats could weld extraordinary influence as periods of isolation were met without instructions from Richmond.
Picket was a terrible pick, and whats worse its leaders stupidly encouraged seccionsit in northern Mexico
The Confederate plans on Mexico
What the Confederates should have done instead, especially before Fort Sumter, was focus on the international trade by sea and land for weapons in exchange for CSA exports, which would have hurt the Union that went to war with America. This would have improved CSA-Mexican relations if Southern California had had enough time to separate.
southern Mexican trade
This alone could have allowed the CSA ton win key battles out west.
James Chestnut seems to be a fine pick for ambassador to Mexico one of the sons of .Manuel Armijo who historically sided with the confederates, might be a good pick a southern diplomat to Mexico.
Russia is interesting in Mexico had the czar not liberated the serfs the CSA would have had better diplomatic grounds, such as the conservative government winning the reform war.
www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/13q1qa9/i_asked_chatgpt_about_russian_support_for/?rdt=39891
Russia is far away from the CSA, but the CSA diplomat can sell bonds to the Russian court, especially if he arrived before the act took place. Francis Wilkinson Pickens, having befriended the Russian king, could convince the king to treat the separatists like the USA, except for a lower tariff.
Which the Union ambassador before Casscuis Clay John Appleton warned while there was no fear in Russia recognising the csa,but they could trade with the csa.
In a country where the CSA that had few resources other than cash crops russia could supply what the south lacked such as tallow pig iron, leather,boots,baynots other metals,furs, wool (winter clothing which the south lacked as man. y died of exposure)
Russian global exports
Russia is a long distance from the csa thats why the csa would most probable send trading agents aboard British ships as they would make sure the Russian goods go to warehouses before they are unloaded two shifts going to the confederacy
Prussia, who had good relationships with Russia, could’ve traded with a confederacy such as the needle rifle and as warfare begun, Bismarck didn’t care about the conflict. It would be feasible as long as these confederate merchants had money they’d be willing to sell Prussia manufactured goods, most famous leather, and the needle gun
Egypt had only produce 600,000 cotton bales in 1861. In 1861 only 33% of Britain’s cotton came from India by the end of 1862 it was almost 90%. It however, was not enough to feed Europe’s powerhouse as already in the beginning of 1862 Mills were laying off workers and closing . Antietam was such a crucial battle to the outcome of the American Civil War as it would determine international recognition of the confederacy as Britain was already feeling the effects of the cotton glout. The effects of France on the counting glow was more severe as France did not have a colony to produce cotton, as this was true with Europe.
If the 1862 offensives all managed to be successful Lincoln would’ve lost his congressional And British in French recognition would occur.
Despite confederate diplomats sometimes mentioning that their country was founded upon slavery.
Edwin De Leon argues that confederate diplomats should have been the confederate leaders of the CSA as they learned the topics of slavery. a big failure on the government part of the CSA was the lack of audiology other than fighting for slavery and racism
One of Jefferson Davis‘s major failures was his belief that the CSA could convince great Britain that the Union blockade was illegal Which would allow great Britain to intervene to dismantle the union blockade.
You know they’re great failure on Davis besides the self Contin embargo the historian points out that the south should have broaden its appeal and talked less about slavery
