-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
PrawnStar: Sorry, I just don't like people criticizing my work when I'm doing it out of my own time for their enjoyment. I'd appreciate it if you'd discontinue any further scrutiny.
Expect an update later tonight (est. 11:00 CST)
Expect an update later tonight (est. 11:00 CST)
Tribulation: Great read! Perfect length and picture to text ratio for me. Looking forward to the next update 
Signed,
Wookiee lurker
Signed,
Wookiee lurker
Last edited:
Let's see... The Union has lost California. The Confederacy has lost Texas. Johnston, Hood, and a good number of the South's troops are no longer available, while the North has lost Fremont. Nowhere close to a fair trade.OAM said:
Plus, the South no longer has the opportunity to expand slavery westward. IRL, this would be a disaster of epic proportions for the South, and I doubt the US government or the Texas government would have agreed to ending slavery in the southwest.
dublish said:
Quite the contrary. Stephen Austin (had he survived) was working towards a liberal Texan society, and an attribute of this society included abolitionism. Had he or the Republic survived their respective deaths, there is not a doubt in my mind or any scholar's minds that eventually, Texas would have abolished slavery, even before the United States.
For Houston, at least in this AAR, it's a battle of principle. What did Houston value more, the slaves or his dreams of westward expansion? Houston loved both very much, but in this situation, he picked westward expansionism, which many Texas scholars and historians would also agree was his primary concern for the Republic prior to annexation.
My point was that the Southern states would never have allowed the Federal government to sign such an agreement with an independent Texas, as it effectively blocks the expansion of slavery westwards, thus handing control of Congress to the increasingly abolitionist North.Tribulation said:
Tribulation said:
Yippe! I mean ummm, eh... lol
Anywho, what I was implying was bascily we are going to have to wait and see, but I doubt CSA survives. In all my games Texas traps a large part of the Union army and makes them defect though....
dublish said:
If the federal government was under a huge majority rule from the abolitionist Whigs and Texas also had sentiment to abolish its slavery movement, I see no reason as to why it could not negotiate or as to why this would not lead to a plausible early Civil War in the game (which it does).
I've just started reading this, and it's pretty damn good!
I propose a rapid annexation of everything north of Sonora
I propose a rapid annexation of everything north of Sonora
Interesting developments. It appears that Texas thus far is committed to buying its way.
I seem to remember nearly a quarter of the pre-war Union army did defect in Texas IRL. Can't remember where I heard it though...OAM said:
The signing of the Treaty of Austin had caused widespread dismay not only throughout the Republic, but also throughout the states of its American neighbor. The southern states of America had long been promoters of the institution of slavery, and now, with the Republic abolishing its existence and with the southern states unable to advance its "peculiar institution" westward, a huge backlash of the southern United States began to harm the relations of Texas with America and cause a massive amount of internal strife within the United States. Riots in northern Virginia, combined with the massive upheaval of nearly every person of souther descent in the North, concluded with the walk-out of those born south of the Mason-Dixon in both the House and Senate. Millard Fillmore's inability to effectively lead the country only caused worse problems, and the struggle to bring back conservatives into the Union was left up to the state governors and city mayors of the south.
The most brutal of these riots were the Richmond, Virginia riots, which encompassed the entire state of Virginia by the end of its peak. Dozens of free black Americans were lynched or savagely beaten to death, and it took the entire force of the Northern Virginia State Militia to quell the violence, lead by a brilliant U.S. Army colonel named Robert Lee.
The Richmond Riots of 1851 were the most brutal of the Dixie Riots.
In Texas, the increase in government funds lead to a general increase in the quality of life that Perez had failed to continue. Although the people did know he had caused several social reforms that won him some positive feedback from the people, his betrayal of the Republic still gave him a sour tone in the terms of public reception in the eyes of the average citizen. Houston's continuance of social reforms following the Perez presidency only strengthened his popularity.
Quality of life in Amarillo greatly increased the gap between rich and poor.
This increase in rich lead to Texas's first source of real industry. The capitalists that had been encouraged to form in Texas in the Houston and Perez presidencies were finally beginning to make their first footprints on Texas's economic structure. A fertilizer factory was set up by Texan Fertilization Incorporated, a large company that would grow remarkably large and profitable throughout its lifetime.
Texan Fertilization Incorporated was the first real major industrial company that sprang up inside the Republic.
Houston's pro military stance also lead to more funding for the MIRT, or Military Institute of the Republic of Texas, which began to provide more great leaders for the Republic. General Ruiz, a Houston-city and Texan native, was the first of these great leaders, and took his place behind the hero General McCulloch, whom had only years before uncovered the entire Perez conspiracy scandal.
General Ruiz became a central figure in the Army of Texas.
Houston's first term, however, was short lived, despite its accomplishments. As quickly as it had come, it ended, and immediately, the Freedom Party accepted Houston's request to begin campaigning for election to a second term. The Democrats responded by nominating Juan Seguin, a Tejano. This proved to be a disastrous mistake. As the animosity towards the Tejanos grew following the Tejano Riots of 1851, Seguin and the Democratic Party's chances shrunk, and within 9 months of election day, there was little confidence amongst the Democratic Party that there would be any executive change.
[sie=1]Early opinion polling of the Election of 1854 showed that the conservatives still had a gigantic lead.[/size]
- - -
In America, the slavery issue remained at the forefront of its politics. In the Kansas-Nebraska act, an act that wished to settle the issue of slavery in both the territories of Kansas and Nebraska, a term coined as "popular slavery" was coined, and gave populations of the Kansas and Nebraska territories to choose for themselves as to whether or not they would allow slavery in either of their territories. As the regulations for voting on the referendum became looser, more men began to funnel into the two territories, and by the end of the deadline, Kansas had voted for slavery, whilst Nebraska had rejected it. The subsequent acceptance of slavery in Kansas ultimately lead to a clash of civil disobedience that would result in small scale warfare amongst abolitionists and slaveholders throughout the territory.
The popular vote in Kansas-Nebraska ultimately lead to "Bleeding Kansas".
- - -
Sam Houston immediately claimed neutrality in the affair, noting that the issue of slavery in other nations was not an immediate concern to the Republic. This won him over many of the former slave holders, despite the fact that they had been robbed of what they viewed as their inherent "possessions" from an overtly strong federal government. Nonetheless, this did not stop Sam Houston from winning over support from all sides of the political spectrum, and as the results came in, as predicted, Houston had won the election of 1854 and had started his 2nd term as President of the Republic.
The outcome of the election of 1854.
Freedom Party - 80% of Vote
360 Commons seats, 80 Senate seats, 1 Presidential seat
Democratic Party - 18% of Vote
82 Commons seats, 18 Senate seats
New Texas Party - 1% of Vote
- 4 Commons seats, 1 Senate seat
Socialist Party - 1% of Vote
- 4 Commons seats, 1 Senate seat
The crushing loss of the Democratic Party set the stage for a second round of Tejano violence across the cities of Austin, Houston, Lubbock and El Paso. The violence was quickly oppressed by the Army of Texas under Generals Ruiz and McCulloch, but the revolts of the Tejanos and their refusals did not end at physical violence. Tejanos immediately began to form cliques, lead by their leader, Juan Seguin, that called for a boycott of goods created by Texas, and also refused to pay any tax levied by the Texan legislature until Texas renounced its claims on El Rosario and Loreto in Baja California.
As Houston continually refused the Tejano requests, they grew more and more militant, reminiscent of their insubordination in 1852. Finally, the Tejanos began to meet stern resistance thanks to the Anglo-Texan population, and in 1855, Houston gave the Tejano cliques a covert compromise: emigrate back to Mexico or assimilate.
The Tejano refusal of Texan authority ultimately lead to their expulsion at the hands of Sam Houston in 1855.
The event have a mistake: It's says "The Explusion of the Tejanos", when it should be "The Expulsion of the Tejanos".
Nothing more to say, it's a really good AAR. Not to long, not to many pictures...
Nothing more to say, it's a really good AAR. Not to long, not to many pictures...
The mistakes that have mounted may have been sorted out by Houstons shrewd and harsh decision
- Status