Restricted Retrieved 8: Without Foreign Recognition, Was the CSA a Nation?

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
No one is doubting the existence of the rebellion.
True, except that if the "CSA did not exist" in some form there would not have been a rebellion.
The issue here is what the so-called 'Confederate States of America" was (or, if one prefers, were). It certainly was a force fighting against the established, legal United States government. Was it just a rather large organization of rebels or an independent nation?
Lincoln and his administration considered them rebels. They considered themselves as independent. Even today there is disagreement, although one highly respected Historian, Gary Gallagher, is of the opinion that the conflict was between two separate, independent nations.
 

O' Be Joyful

Sergeant Major
Emperor Norton I...anybody?? :wink:

September 17, 1859 – Joshua A. Norton, who lost his money in an attempt to corner the rice market, today declared himself Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico.
December 2, 1859 – Norton I dismissed Gov. Wise of Virginia for hanging John Brown and appointed John C. Breckenridge of Kentucky to replace him.
February 1, 1860 – Decree from Norton I ordered representatives of the different states to assemble at Platt’s Music Hall to change laws to ameloriate the evils under which the country was laboring.
July 16, 1860 – Decree from Norton I dissolved the United States of America.
October 1, 1860 – Decree from Norton I barred Congress from meeting in Washington, D.C.


http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist1/norton.html

I am behind again in this thread, but a further thought.

There have been, numerous occasions where...I have thought to myself, Norton I wasn't so crazy after all. But, in fact...Inspired.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
Court cases take years to get Supreme Court. Four years is relatively fast. Texas v.White was based in antebellum law.
Leftyhunter
Actually closer to nine years, but whatever the time lapse, it would seem the Northern court was so unsure about an antebellum law that it deemed it necessary pass another law while the captive South was powerless during the throes of Radical Reconstruction.
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Actually closer to nine years, but whatever the time lapse, it would seem the Northern court was so unsure about an antebellum law that it deemed it necessary pass another law while the captive South was powerless during the throes of Radical Reconstruction.
Not sure what you mean by "captive South". Former Rebels who took a loyalty oath were quickly allowed to vote . The same former Rebels denied black Southerners the right to vote for a good one hundred .
Leftyhunter
 

19thGeorgia

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Not sure what you mean by "captive South". Former Rebels who took a loyalty oath were quickly allowed to vote . The same former Rebels denied black Southerners the right to vote for a good one hundred .
Leftyhunter
This is false. The Radical governments in the South disfranchised as many whites as they could.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
Not sure what you mean by "captive South". Former Rebels who took a loyalty oath were quickly allowed to vote . The same former Rebels denied black Southerners the right to vote for a good one hundred .
Leftyhunter
If white Southerners weren't under duress, Radical reconstruction would have ended, in at least nine of the states, shortly after "former rebels" received the vote.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
If white Southerners weren't under duress, Radical reconstruction would have ended, in at least nine of the states, shortly after "former rebels" received the vote.

Well, since the Confederacy did not exist in a political sense and ceased to exist as a revolutionary entity after 1865, Reconstruction is a concern of this thread how?
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
Well, since the Confederacy did not exist in a political sense and ceased to exist as a revolutionary entity after 1865, Reconstruction is a concern of this thread how?
Another poster repeatedly injecting the Reconstruction era 1869 Texas vs White court decision into the discussion.
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
If white Southerners weren't under duress, Radical reconstruction would have ended, in at least nine of the states, shortly after "former rebels" received the vote.
The black Southerners suffered far more duress under Reconstruction then any white Southerners

Leftyhunter
 

19thGeorgia

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Jefferson Davis was not a President of a sovereign nation because the CSA did not exist.
Robert E. Lee was not a commissioned officer in a sovereign nation's army because the CSA did not exist.
Why would those European nations make declarations of neutrality about something that did not exist?
 

19thGeorgia

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Jefferson Davis was not a President of a sovereign nation because the CSA did not exist.
Robert E. Lee was not a commissioned officer in a sovereign nation's army because the CSA did not exist.
Why would those European nations make declarations of neutrality about something that did not exist?
 

Similar threads

Top