Getting Secession Right

[BlkbrryTheGreat]

I just hope Paradox gets seccession right in the US CW. Secession actually occured in TWO waves, the first was the secession of the Deep South following the election of Lincoln. The second wave of secession only occured after it became clear that Linclon wouldn't let the Deep South peacefully succeed (Secession was considered a legitimate right of the States in that Era. )

IMO, it should be possible to let the Deep South go peacefully, while at the same time retaining the states that you would have otherwise lost.

(Edit for spelling)

 

[Havard]

What are you talking about?

Secession?

 

[irishpony]

secession is leaving the united states for any reason the first to do it was south carilina i think

 

[Tim O]

Originally posted by BlkbrryTheGreat
I just hope Paradox gets seccession right in the US CW. Secession actually occured in TWO waves, the first was the secession of the Deep South following the election of Lincoln. The second wave of secession only occured after it became clear that Linclon wouldn't let the Deep South peacefully succeed (Secession was considered a legitimate right of the States in that Era. )

IMO, it should be possible to let the Deep South go peacefully, while at the same time retaining the states that you would have otherwise lost.

(Edit for spelling)

That's right, but what player is just going to let seven states go And why?

 

[Papa Chubby]

Maybe somebody who wants to play as the confederates without going through the civil war.

 

[Tim O]

What's the point of playing the CSA if you're not gonna fight the civil war. Also the CSA would be pretty weak without Virginia, Tennesse, Arkansas, and North Carolina.

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by irishpony
secession is leaving the united states for any reason the first to do it was south carilina i think

I know what secession is... just couldn't figure out what succession had to do with the ACW...

Reading the thread title I assumed it was about royal succession...

As for the US south secession - I see no reason why that can't be handles in several steps. If they are in as events there can be a chain of events depending on different triggers

 

[unmerged(10945)]

Originally posted by BlkbrryTheGreat
IMO, it should be possible to let the Deep South go peacefully, while at the same time retaining the states that you would have otherwise lost.

(Edit for spelling)

This should have disasterous consequences for the US, as fighting and winning the Civil War is what made the US into one strong centralized nation. Without that, the secessions of 1860-61 should only be the first wave of problems the country has with regional movements.

 

[unmerged(12746)]

Originally posted by Timothy Ortiz
What's the point of playing the CSA if you're not gonna fight the civil war. Also the CSA would be pretty weak without Virginia, Tennesse, Arkansas, and North Carolina.

Agreed, I will be intrested to see how secession is handled and if its handled in stages fine, and without Virginia its going to really be weak, Richmond and DC arent to far apart and the capitals so I hope like hell there is a moving capital mechinism like HOI or the CSA could be over fast anyway.

Odin

 

[unmerged(4007)]

Historically there was no way the South was going to go peacefully. The fire-eaters on both sides always wanted war. And the issues that bred the Civil War are already present at the game's beginning, so it's still the "irrepressible conflict."

 

[unmerged(6876)]

Since are talking about secession ... What about the New England states? They considered secession at one point (1808), when the Federal government implemented policies that greatly impacted their trade. Would that just be increased RR?

 

[Tim O]

YOu're thinking of the war of 1812, howevfer by this time frame those states had become staunchly Unionist.

 

[Hive]

But if the deep south is allowed break away w/o any war, then there should be further what-if secessions in the future IMHO. As I see it, Lincoln had 2 choices: fight for the Union, or allow it to slowly dissolve.

 

[unmerged(10945)]

Originally posted by Hive
But if the deep south is allowed break away w/o any war, then there should be further what-if secessions in the future IMHO. As I see it, Lincoln had 2 choices: fight for the Union, or allow it to slowly dissolve.

Exactly, hopefully there will be events or other ways to represent this.

 

[unmerged(4007)]

Umm no, as I noted, dissolution was not a political possibility. That wasn't even seriously contemplated when the war began.

 

[IEX Totalview]

Originally posted by Hive
But if the deep south is allowed break away w/o any war, then there should be further what-if secessions in the future IMHO. As I see it, Lincoln had 2 choices: fight for the Union, or allow it to slowly dissolve.

Maybe, maybe not. One obvious solution (IRL) would have been to let the seven break away. then the remaining states could amend the constitution to forever prohibit seccession.

There were at least some in the North who would have been happy to let the South go. Considering the antebellum South had disproportinate political power in the executive (5 of the first 15 presidents were Virginians alone) and in the Senate, some commercial interests of the North would have found their political power greatly increased by seccession.

 

[Mr.Bigglesworth]

Originally posted by IEX Totalview
...the remaining states could amend the constitution to forever prohibit seccession.

The right to secede already is not in the constitution, so that's not a problem

Originally posted by IEX Totalview
There were at least some in the North who would have been happy to let the South go. Considering the antebellum South had disproportinate political power in the executive (5 of the first 15 presidents were Virginians alone) and in the Senate, some commercial interests of the North would have found their political power greatly increased by seccession.

Virginia did not secede until after Fort Sumter fell, when war had already started. I'm sure there were people that wanted any southerner to leave the Union, and more could care less about the lower south, but no majority anywhere wanted to split the entire country apart. And there were 16 free states and 15 slave states, so I wouldn't say that the south had disproportionate power in the senate.

 

[Mr.Bigglesworth]

Originally posted by shawng1
Umm no, as I noted, dissolution was not a political possibility. That wasn't even seriously contemplated when the war began.

The choice was allow the dissolution of the Union (secession), compromise (Many people of the time period believed that the Crittenden proposal would be a compromise that would save the Union), or fight for the status quo. Fire-eaters on both sides of any conflict want war, that doesn't mean that war is a foregone conclusion. Lincoln decided that the only course of action was to fight to keep the Union together.

 

[unmerged(4007)]

Bigglesworth,

If you read the histories, you'll see the VAST majority consider the conflict "irrepresible." The idea of an alternative, now or then, was pie-in-the-sky.

 

[Owl]

Reality is overrated

Originally posted by shawng1
Bigglesworth,

If you read the histories, you'll see the VAST majority consider the conflict "irrepresible." The idea of an alternative, now or then, was pie-in-the-sky.

Bah there is always an alternative, especially when I'm playing.

Admittedly by 1860 IRL it's difficult to see how things could have been resolved peacefully, but in the game we will have thirty years leading up to Secession to see if we can improve on reality.