Why the North Should have Given the South a Carthaginian Defeat.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,584
Location
los angeles ca
#41
Thanks for your response.
Not the first time they have differed with me.
Yet even at their height, none of those organizations had more than minority support from Southern Whites. Just think how much more successful they would have been if Southern Whites were treated as the OP suggests.
Why do you think the above racist paramilitaries had minority support? The De Jure Apartheid policies they advocated were never repealed but for the intervention of the federal government many decades later.
We can't prove or disprove a hypothetical different or harder version of Reconstruction. We do know certain nations did successfully implement a harsher version of Reconstruction.
Leftyhunter
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,584
Location
los angeles ca
#43
Thanks for your response.
A wave of retribution and more bloodshed would have done nothing to advance civil rights or heal the nation's wounds. It would have generated a far greater backlash among surviving Southerners than the relatively small number of terrorist actions conducted by the Klan.
One can argue that the environment would have become far more dangerous for Blacks had such a course been pursued.
As bad as Jim Crow and segregation were, the lot of Blacks in America was markedly improved and something new was added: opportunity.
Edited; modern politics. Opportunities for African Americans was very limited in the South. That is why many emigrated Edited.
Leftyhunter
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,584
Location
los angeles ca
#44
It's happened in society, we're not allowed to discuss modern era wars and politics.
The policies you advocated were never attempted during Reconstruction. I did as you know start a PM thread on how other nations took a different view of post Civil War Reconstruction.
Leftyhunter
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,513
#47
When did this emigration occur..?
Emigration for many- especially those going west- occurred during or just after reconstruction. An even greater emigration occurred in the next century and is beyond the scope of our discussion.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,513
#48
***Posted as Moderator***
The topic is a suggestion how the victorious United States should have treated the defeated South. Please stay on topic.
 

Viper21

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,336
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
#51
Emigration for many- especially those going west- occurred during or just after reconstruction. An even greater emigration occurred in the next century and is beyond the scope of our discussion.
I don't believe there was a mass exodus from the Southern states as implied by some. In 1870 (Reconstruction), the Black population in the US was 12.7% of the population (almost identical 150yrs later). It took 100yrs for a Yankee state to reach a Black population rate of 12.7% or higher. Several Southern states had a higher Black population % 20, 30, 40 yrs AFTER the war, than pre-war.


ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_African-American_population
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,513
#53
Who is endorsing a blood bath? History has shown the white racist paramilitaries folded like a cheap suit when confronted by determined opposition.
Leftyhunter
Thanks for your response.
Perhaps it will be helpful to repeat the 'suggestions' of the OP:
1). Jeff Davis and the rest of his blood thirsty bandits like Robert E. Lee should have been executed.​
2).The rest of the leaders were either executed or sentenced to life in prison.​
3).Civil War veterans along with pro-Confederates and Confederate sympathizers were sent to re-education camps to be indoctrinated.​
4).The Federal government controlled the political system until a fair and balanced democracy was established.​
5). The rest of the south should have been under a Vanguard state with the education system and all mundane activity was controlled by the government.​
That is a recipe for revolution: Executing leaders, imprisoning "veterans along with pro-Confederates and Confederate sympathizers", taking control of society. The "bloodbath" is twofold: the executions and the violent uprising that such cruel policies would have produced.
You are fond of discussing guerilla warfare: that is exactly what these policies would have guaranteed: a lengthy, bloody, cruel guerilla war.
 

lurid

Corporal
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
379
#56
Thanks for your response.
Perhaps it will be helpful to repeat the 'suggestions' of the OP:
1). Jeff Davis and the rest of his blood thirsty bandits like Robert E. Lee should have been executed.​
2).The rest of the leaders were either executed or sentenced to life in prison.​
3).Civil War veterans along with pro-Confederates and Confederate sympathizers were sent to re-education camps to be indoctrinated.​
4).The Federal government controlled the political system until a fair and balanced democracy was established.​
5). The rest of the south should have been under a Vanguard state with the education system and all mundane activity was controlled by the government.​
That is a recipe for revolution: Executing leaders, imprisoning "veterans along with pro-Confederates and Confederate sympathizers", taking control of society. The "bloodbath" is twofold: the executions and the violent uprising that such cruel policies would have produced.
You are fond of discussing guerilla warfare: that is exactly what these policies would have guaranteed: a lengthy, bloody, cruel guerilla war.
My policy what have brought geographical and political restoration to America. Moreover, it would have brought back the normalization of America territorial relations.

The south was completely finished economically by 1865:

1). $700 million National debt.

2). Lost all major infrastructure

3). All major crops were destroyed

4). All ports were blockaded

5). All railways that ran to ports were destroyed

6). Received no foreign aid

7). Famine

8). Disease riddled

9). Many CW survivors were disabled.

10). Money was worthless



And the list goes on and on. How long after 1865 do you think the Confederacy could have kept fighting?? Edited. I don't remotely endorse your "more" bloodshed theory, the south was finished.

Albeit, southerners are not a threat at all in today's society, but the KKK and the Lost Cause nonsense derived from not being morally and socially purged. Imo, it would have benefited southerners in the long haul: being indoctrinated into true American values would have been the best way to sling the south into modernity or fully embrace the Industrial Revolution. This would have made the south more economically competitive in the subsequent years following Reconstruction. But their oppressive and rebellious nature was allowed to fester and it hampered them during the big economic booms in the late 1800s and even in the early and mid 1900s.

All the major inventions that brought this country into superpower status came out of the north and west. I cannot think of "one" southern invention that was revolutionary enough to claim it as a technological advancement or any invention that elevated this nation. And I believe perfectly it stemmed from the south being allowed to remain non-conformists. Not all southerners...
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,513
#57
Something they weren't allowed to do in any sizable numbers until decades after the war.
Thanks for your response.
Depends on the definition of "sizeable numbers". There's a reason why the later period is called 'the Great Migration' while the post-war migration is unnamed. Lack of a catchy name doesn't change the facts. For example, there was significant migration from the upper former slave states to places like Kansas, where former slave Benjamin Singleton led the establishment of twenty Black communities.
By 1890, census data still showed the great majority of Blacks in the southeast, but there were significant numbers in eastern Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,427
Location
Laurinburg NC
#58
My policy what have brought geographical and political restoration to America. Moreover, it would have brought back the normalization of America territorial relations.

The south was completely finished economically by 1865:

1). $700 million National debt.

2). Lost all major infrastructure

3). All major crops were destroyed

4). All ports were blockaded

5). All railways that ran to ports were destroyed

6). Received no foreign aid

7). Famine

8). Disease riddled

9). Many CW survivors were disabled.

10). Money was worthless



And the list goes on and on. How long after 1865 do you think the Confederacy could have kept fighting?? Also, we're not allowed to use modern references to compare and contrast. But Vietnam in 1975 used the aforementioned strategy to purge all disloyalty and to establish unity, and it worked. I don't remotely endorse your "more" bloodshed theory, the south was finished.

Albeit, southerners are not a threat at all in today's society, but the KKK and the Lost Cause nonsense derived from not being morally and socially purged. Imo, it would have benefited southerners in the long haul: being indoctrinated into true American values would have been the best way to sling the south into modernity or fully embrace the Industrial Revolution. This would have made the south more economically competitive in the subsequent years following Reconstruction. But their oppressive and rebellious nature was allowed to fester and it hampered them during the big economic booms in the late 1800s and even in the early and mid 1900s.

All the major inventions that brought this country into superpower status came out of the north and west. I cannot think of "one" southern invention that was revolutionary enough to claim it as a technological advancement or any invention that elevated this nation. And I believe perfectly it stemmed from the south being allowed to remain non-conformists. Not all southerners...
Do you suggest a nonsensical TOV kind of indoctrination?
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,427
Location
Laurinburg NC
#60
Thanks for your response.
Depends on the definition of "sizeable numbers". There's a reason why the later period is called 'the Great Migration' while the post-war migration is unnamed. Lack of a catchy name doesn't change the facts. For example, there was significant migration from the upper former slave states to places like Kansas, where former slave Benjamin Singleton led the establishment of twenty Black communities.
By 1890, census data still showed the great majority of Blacks in the southeast, but there were significant numbers in eastern Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California.
I find it more apropos that there had been no significant increase in their numbers in the strongholds of the anti-Southern hand wringing hypocrites and former abolitionists – the north-east and parts of the mid-west.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top