If the Confederacy Won

[Republic of Coldwater]

The Confederate States of America, Dixie, the Traitors, the names for the 11 seceding southern states go on and on. By early 1861, 11 Southern States, which constitutes most of the American South left the Union, and on April 12th of 1861, Confederate Cannons fired upon Fort Sumter, beginning the Civil War, War of Northern Aggression, War of Southern Aggression, War Between the States and many other names.

Of course, we know that the rebellious southerners, who first won major engagements eventually succumbed to the industrially stronger North and disappeared following the surrender of Robert E. Lee and Joseph E. Johnston.

What if the South Won? How would've things be different? Would blacks still be slaves today?

The War really shifted towards the Union when Vicksburg was captured and when the Army of Northern Virginia got heavily damaged following Gettysburg. If the Confederacy decided to arm New Orleans with cannons and have a stronger naval defense, we wouldn't even have a point of entry. But given that the Union did seize New Orleans, the Confederacy cannot stop communication with the Western Division, or else the flow of men and logistics will be harmed, as what happened following the Siege of Vicksburg

For Gettysburg, the Confederacy should've held a defensive, instead of attacking the Union, or should've simply retreated following the raiding of Gettysburg, which would've made the task much harder for the Union, and it would've spared the Army of Northern Virginia.

If the Confederacy won these engagements, they would be on a fast track to victory, and that would come with Lincoln being forced to recognize the Confederacy and thus independence. Following the war, slaves would be freed nonetheless, as even highly agrarian places (even more agrarian than the progressively industrializing south) like Brazil freed their slaves by the late 1800s, and with the advent of new mechanization and the higher price of slaves, slavery would simply be inefficient and unprofitable, while international pressure would only add to the reason for why the CSA would've freed the slaves not long following the war.

Segregation- Now this is a more difficult issue, as the people of the south would be less inclined to hate blacks, because they didn't have the rage of defeat, and also because they didn't have thousands of men raping their women and pillaging their towns and using emancipation as a military strategy, which would naturally result in the scapegoating of blacks. It may have happened in the lower south, but it wouldn't be very likely in the upper south. More states rights would've probably resulted in this situation. Segregation would eventually end with a more progressive society, as it had been in basically every nation.

Industrialization-The south was progressively industrializing before the war. Factories were being built in Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and other upper southern states. The Agrarian Part of the south would likely adapt to co-exist with the industrial part of it, which may result in even more wealth.

Reunion- Unlikely, but both sides might want to form some sort of alliance due to a common history

[Jinos]

Within a decade the Southern economy would've imploded due to plummeting cotton prices as Egypt floods the market in the wake of the Union blockade.

Without reliable exports, the South becomes an economic ramshackle - the plantation elite collapses, the South (having been utterly exhausted by the war with the north) is suddenly overrun in slave revolts (especially in areas where blacks outnumber whites, like Virginia).

The confederacy collapses with only the largest and most economically self sufficient states (like Texas) able to keep themselves afloat. The border states either beg the Union for readmission in order to restore order, the blacks take over the state entirely, or the Union moves in on its own to reannex the breakaways.

After the Union consolidates its reclaimed territory, it's only a matter of time until they come for any confederate survivors like Texas. And that's not counting if Mexico launches a war to take Texas first.

[Republic of Coldwater]

Within a decade the Southern economy would've imploded due to plummeting cotton prices as Egypt floods the market in the wake of the Union blockade.

Without reliable exports, the South becomes an economic ramshackle - the plantation elite collapses, the South (having been utterly exhausted by the war with the north) is suddenly overrun in slave revolts (especially in areas where blacks outnumber whites, like Virginia).

The confederacy collapses with only the largest and most economically self sufficient states (like Texas) able to keep themselves afloat. The border states either beg the Union for readmission in order to restore order, the blacks take over the state entirely, or the Union moves in on its own to reannex the breakaways.

After the Union consolidates its reclaimed territory, it's only a matter of time until they come for any confederate survivors like Texas. And that's not counting if Mexico launches a war to take Texas first.

I don't think the Union would want to blockade the south, especially after being militarily defeated. It wouldn't be politically feasible, especially after a loss of a war. They would be able to export Cotton Again, and as such, their economy would come back on track.

[Crimiea]

Within a decade the Southern economy would've imploded due to plummeting cotton prices as Egypt floods the market in the wake of the Union blockade.

Without reliable exports, the South becomes an economic ramshackle - the plantation elite collapses, the South (having been utterly exhausted by the war with the north) is suddenly overrun in slave revolts (especially in areas where blacks outnumber whites, like Virginia).

The confederacy collapses with only the largest and most economically self sufficient states (like Texas) able to keep themselves afloat. The border states either beg the Union for readmission in order to restore order, the blacks take over the state entirely, or the Union moves in on its own to reannex the breakaways.

After the Union consolidates its reclaimed territory, it's only a matter of time until they come for any confederate survivors like Texas. And that's not counting if Mexico launches a war to take Texas first.

It would also be bad for the Union's exports given the Confederacy's large agricultural lands, especially cotton (which will still be profitable but not as much as the Southerners thought it would be given that India, Egypt, and Central Asia are large cultivators of cotton as well).

Given the Confederacy's nature, it would be a decentralized, weak, union of states similar to the Holy Roman Empire, except there's no religious authority like the Pope to protect the Confederate State's legitimacy and prestige in the world courts and would break apart as you've said.

[Laerod]

Within a decade the Southern economy would've imploded due to plummeting cotton prices as Egypt floods the market in the wake of the Union blockade.

Without reliable exports, the South becomes an economic ramshackle - the plantation elite collapses, the South (having been utterly exhausted by the war with the north) is suddenly overrun in slave revolts (especially in areas where blacks outnumber whites, like Virginia).

The confederacy collapses with only the largest and most economically self sufficient states (like Texas) able to keep themselves afloat. The border states either beg the Union for readmission in order to restore order, the blacks take over the state entirely, or the Union moves in on its own to reannex the breakaways.

After the Union consolidates its reclaimed territory, it's only a matter of time until they come for any confederate survivors like Texas. And that's not counting if Mexico launches a war to take Texas first.

I don't think the Union would want to blockade the south, especially after being militarily defeated. It wouldn't be politically feasible, especially after a loss of a war. They would be able to export Cotton Again, and as such, their economy would come back on track.

Yeah, but you also think that the South wouldn't have been racist, so it seems that your approach to this topic relies primarily on wishful thinking. It's virtually impossible that the South would have militarily defeated the North. The best that could have been hoped for (from perspective of the South; no realistic scenario where the South won is good) is the North cutting its losses after a war of attrition. As such, the North deciding to continue the blockade is a matter of political will and resources. If both can be mustered it's entirely plausible that the blockade would have continued and the South would be in worse shape economically than it is today.

[Jinos]

Within a decade the Southern economy would've imploded due to plummeting cotton prices as Egypt floods the market in the wake of the Union blockade.

Without reliable exports, the South becomes an economic ramshackle - the plantation elite collapses, the South (having been utterly exhausted by the war with the north) is suddenly overrun in slave revolts (especially in areas where blacks outnumber whites, like Virginia).

The confederacy collapses with only the largest and most economically self sufficient states (like Texas) able to keep themselves afloat. The border states either beg the Union for readmission in order to restore order, the blacks take over the state entirely, or the Union moves in on its own to reannex the breakaways.

After the Union consolidates its reclaimed territory, it's only a matter of time until they come for any confederate survivors like Texas. And that's not counting if Mexico launches a war to take Texas first.

I don't think the Union would want to blockade the south, especially after being militarily defeated. It wouldn't be politically feasible, especially after a loss of a war. They would be able to export Cotton Again, and as such, their economy would come back on track.

I don't think you understand. The blockade already did its damage, whether it remains is irrelevant. By the time the war ends, Egypt and India would be out exporting the CSA in cotton. A sudden influx would mean a collapse in cotton prices, the only way for that to be avoided is to sell to the North...which has huge tariffs since a domestic market the south relied on for decades suddenly becomes a foreign one. And that is if the North doesn't want to wage an economic war on the south by importing egyptian cotton instead of southern (and it's not like the north couldn't afford the switch, since the Egyptians were desperate to sell in the aftermath of the ACW since they banked everything on becoming a cotton producing nation and were economically devastated in the coming decades).

[Theistic Satanism]

I'd maybe live there.
I was born in Texas but am not your stereotypical redneck.

[Caltarania]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Victory_Series

[New Connorstantinople]

I have an interesting idea, if anyone is willing to listen.

A referendum was held after the Republic of Texas was annexed into the United States, and it revealed that while the LoNe Star Republic's government (with notable exceptions, like Sam Houston) wanted annexation, the Texans did not. While Texas did allow slavery, it was clear the cotton-driven slave system wouldn't work quite as well and was not as common. After all, Texas is much better suited for ranching and port trading.
Wo when Texas joined the Confederate States of America it did it not out of love of slavery or the like, but because the CSA allowed more freedom for member states, and maybe once the war was over, would have separated yet again to reestablish its own republic.
How likely does this seem?

[Southern Arkansas]

I'd be living in Illinois then. Sounds awful.

[Nazis in Space]

I have an interesting idea, if anyone is willing to listen.

A referendum was held after the Republic of Texas was annexed into the United States, and it revealed that while the LoNe Star Republic's government (with notable exceptions, like Sam Houston) wanted annexation, the Texans did not. While Texas did allow slavery, it was clear the cotton-driven slave system wouldn't work quite as well and was not as common. After all, Texas is much better suited for ranching and port trading.
Wo when Texas joined the Confederate States of America it did it not out of love of slavery or the like, but because the CSA allowed more freedom for member states, and maybe once the war was over, would have separated yet again to reestablish its own republic.
How likely does this seem?

The South invaded seceding states (West Virginia). The South also invaded the -initially neutral - Kentucky for no particular reason, other than wanting to set things on fire.

And while we're at it, Texas also just so happened to on the way to westward expansion or the - seriously considered - invasion and colonisation of Mexico by the South. Neither would be possible with a seceding Texas.

The idea that the South would let any of its memberstates secede - yet alone that it'd let a state of such strategic importance as Texas secede - is ludicrous in the extreme.

[Laerod]

I have an interesting idea, if anyone is willing to listen.

A referendum was held after the Republic of Texas was annexed into the United States, and it revealed that while the LoNe Star Republic's government (with notable exceptions, like Sam Houston) wanted annexation, the Texans did not. While Texas did allow slavery, it was clear the cotton-driven slave system wouldn't work quite as well and was not as common. After all, Texas is much better suited for ranching and port trading.
Wo when Texas joined the Confederate States of America it did it not out of love of slavery or the like, but because the CSA allowed more freedom for member states, and maybe once the war was over, would have separated yet again to reestablish its own republic.
How likely does this seem?

Counterfactual. Texas made it rather clear in its declaration that it was specifically seceding because of racism and slavery.

[Jinos]

I have an interesting idea, if anyone is willing to listen.

A referendum was held after the Republic of Texas was annexed into the United States, and it revealed that while the LoNe Star Republic's government (with notable exceptions, like Sam Houston) wanted annexation, the Texans did not. While Texas did allow slavery, it was clear the cotton-driven slave system wouldn't work quite as well and was not as common. After all, Texas is much better suited for ranching and port trading.
Wo when Texas joined the Confederate States of America it did it not out of love of slavery or the like, but because the CSA allowed more freedom for member states, and maybe once the war was over, would have separated yet again to reestablish its own republic.
How likely does this seem?

The South invaded seceding states (West Virginia). The South also invaded the -initially neutral - Kentucky for no particular reason, other than wanting to set things on fire.

And while we're at it, Texas also just so happened to on the way to westward expansion or the - seriously considered - invasion and colonisation of Mexico by the South. Neither would be possible with a seceding Texas.

The idea that the South would let any of its memberstates secede - yet alone that it'd let a state of such strategic importance as Texas secede - is ludicrous in the extreme.

Which merely reinforces the point that the CSA is fucked either way. It was only ever united in the face of the Union. Without that threat coercing the cooperation of those states, it would not stick together - after all, it could hardly fight a war using the same pretense as the Union after it just gained its independence against said pretense. And even if it did, further in fighting would just weaken them to a Northern invasion.

[The United Remnants of America]

My opinion: No.

[Coia]

I have an interesting idea, if anyone is willing to listen.

A referendum was held after the Republic of Texas was annexed into the United States, and it revealed that while the LoNe Star Republic's government (with notable exceptions, like Sam Houston) wanted annexation, the Texans did not. While Texas did allow slavery, it was clear the cotton-driven slave system wouldn't work quite as well and was not as common. After all, Texas is much better suited for ranching and port trading.
Wo when Texas joined the Confederate States of America it did it not out of love of slavery or the like, but because the CSA allowed more freedom for member states, and maybe once the war was over, would have separated yet again to reestablish its own republic.
How likely does this seem?

The South invaded seceding states (West Virginia). The South also invaded the -initially neutral - Kentucky for no particular reason, other than wanting to set things on fire.
They also had parts of New Mexico and Arizona
And while we're at it, Texas also just so happened to on the way to westward expansion or the - seriously considered - invasion and colonisation of Mexico by the South. Neither would be possible with a seceding Texas.

The idea that the South would let any of its memberstates secede - yet alone that it'd let a state of such strategic importance as Texas secede - is ludicrous in the extreme.

[Republic of Coldwater]

I don't think the Union would want to blockade the south, especially after being militarily defeated. It wouldn't be politically feasible, especially after a loss of a war. They would be able to export Cotton Again, and as such, their economy would come back on track.

I don't think you understand. The blockade already did its damage, whether it remains is irrelevant. By the time the war ends, Egypt and India would be out exporting the CSA in cotton. A sudden influx would mean a collapse in cotton prices, the only way for that to be avoided is to sell to the North...which has huge tariffs since a domestic market the south relied on for decades suddenly becomes a foreign one. And that is if the North doesn't want to wage an economic war on the south by importing egyptian cotton instead of southern (and it's not like the north couldn't afford the switch, since the Egyptians were desperate to sell in the aftermath of the ACW since they banked everything on becoming a cotton producing nation and were economically devastated in the coming decades).

I'm sure that the Southern Economy wouldn't do very well after the war, but the north would be in no position to invade, and the south re-exporting cotton will result in a drop of cotton prices, but it would eventually elevate the economy once higher demand sets in thanks to a higher supply (Indian, Egyptian and Southern Cotton).

[Stormaen]

If the Confederates had won, their agrarian economy would've collapsed at some point. They might well have possibly freed their slaves by the end of the 19th century but I disagree with the OP and think that segregation would've lasted until well into the late-20th century, regardless of international pressure (just look at South Africa).

However, I think the ultimate fate would've always been to rejoin the Union. The CSA wouldn't survive alone and through social and diplomatic pressure would have inevitably sooner or later had to rejoin the United States. If anything, it would've been on less preferable terms than the immediate aftermath of the civil war and the Reconstruction years.

[Laerod]

I'm sure that the Southern Economy wouldn't do very well after the war, but the north would be in no position to invade,

Why would the North be in no position to invade? They had the manpower and guns that the South didn't and wouldn't have.

and the south re-exporting cotton will result in a drop of cotton prices, but it would eventually elevate the economy once higher demand sets in thanks to a higher supply (Indian, Egyptian and Southern Cotton).

Higher supply generally doesn't create higher demand and especially not higher prices. And that's talking about very exceptional products (ivory for instance). With raw materials such as cotton that's never going to happen.

[Saiwania]

There is just no way that the Confederate States of America would've been able to fully conquer the northern states against their industrial might and at best would've only remained independent temporarily.

I could see the US slowly reconquering the southern states in a piece meal fashion as the confederacy got economically weaker. If the US lost, it would've resumed invading the south whenever the opportunity presented itself as the vulnerabilities became more visible.

[Toronina]

I agree with most of the others. It would collapse and die eventually.

[The Holy Therns]

They didn't have the industrial strength to last much longer than they did, and no way to secure allies. It's a common and quaint speculation, but the "if" here is about as likely as the Earth-Rainicorn War.

[Draakonite]

If the confederacy won the first war, they would have lost the second 10 years later.

[Manisdog]

Don't know about slaves but Obama would certainly not be president

[Ifreann]

The Union would have gained the Reconquest Casus Belli against the Confederacy.

[Big Jim P]

I'd maybe live there.
I was born in Texas but am not your stereotypical redneck.

Same here, and I will be returning next Sept.