There is no way really the south could have won unless they allied with Great Britain. They needed an industrial base. Since England had outlawed slavery, that couldn't have happened.
I am glad that the trend went away from the Puritans and in favor of religious freedom.
As for the monarchy coming back to Britain--the Puritans made a mess of England and the people were glad to go back to having a monarchy--even a Catholic one but the Glorious Revolution had them switch to a Protestant one later.
2007-12-28 06:14:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by redunicorn 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
If the South had won the American Civil War, there would probably have been no end in sight on the issue of slavery. It may have taken another decade to put an end to it.
In some ways the Puritans still hold power here in UK in that the power base is actually the House of Commons [the Common People] and not the monarchy, which acts as nothing more than a rubber stamp in effect.
The real liberty lies in the United States of America. It alone has what I call a free and open democracy.
Meanwhile, here in UK, most issues are hidden behind a smoke screen much of the time or a very thick fog.
Unlike the Americans who just could not wait, the British on the whole have much more patience - maybe one day, etc.
2007-12-28 19:58:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The war was probably inevitable, however, the south would have lost under any circumstance. Had it been delayed, say until the beginning of the twenty century, the ramifications for death and destruction due to the improvement of weaponry would have made it much worst. Slavery was quickly becoming a bankrupt institution as it was, but people are inherently evil and will do almost anything to maintain power over others. And as far as I know the puritans have never been in charge of much. Even the signers of the declaration of independence were mostly agnostics or atheists. This country was founded on moral not religious principles.
2007-12-28 07:47:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Kim 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
There's a movie I saw not long ago (on Bravo, I think) called
"C.S.A.: The Confederate States of America (2004)"
imdb writes:
"Through the eyes of a british "documentary", this film takes a satirically humorous, and sometimes frightening, look at the history of an America where the South won the Civil War."
True enough > some humor, some scary, but still a look at human nature in extreme situations.
As for puritans...well! That's a good idea for a movie!!!
2007-12-28 06:20:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Read Henry Turtledove's - The guns of the south. He wrote an interesting alternate history novel about the south winning the war.
Aside from that book I indicated, I think that Slavery would have lasted another 50 years or so but it would have ended due to world pressures. Not sure if there would have a CSA and a USA because the South could have taken the whole thing if they won. The late 19th century and early 20th century presidents would have been different and no telling what other changes would have cascaded from that.
2007-12-28 06:16:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by mark 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
There could stay 2 separate countries. The CSA could have ended slavery themselves interior 10-15 years. The races could have a much greater effective beginning up for peace between as many of the justifications for racism interior the South at the instant is an on the spot consequence of Reconstruction and subjugation by skill of the U. S.. the rustic could have a weaker state and native government with a good greater overbearing Federal government than is at present right here. The CSA could proceed to have a stable State and native government with a small streamlined nicely prepared Centralised government. guy or woman rights could be in place interior the CSA yet no longer interior the rustic. Democrats may be the conservatives and different events could flesh out something interior the CSA. interior the rustic the liberals could stay the Republicans. The Democrats could stay the conservatives interior the rustic to boot. a number of of the northern Mexican providences could have entered the CSA giving them get right of entry to to the two oceans. the rustic could have persevered to amplify west to boot giving her get right of entry to to the two oceans. The CSA could be better economically than the rustic. the two could grow to be superpowers separately and for various motives. the rustic could have entered the two wars as she did. The CSA could have despatched help yet does no longer have invaded yet another usa.
2016-10-02 11:56:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by nembhard 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The slave thing would not be any good, though I don't think that would have lasted much longer even if the south had won. Other than that, I think the country would be in much better shape. We are so much kinder and more caring in the south (think southern hospitatlity), we know everyone's place in the community, we are God-fearing people, and we still have our morals and values, and money is not a top priority, our families are. Plus, alot of women down here still raise their own children (wow!). Oh well. We're still doing good down here anyway.
Edit---Of course this is generally speaking about public norms.
2007-12-28 06:18:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by christina 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Since it was not a civil war (a war where two factions are fighting to control the one central government) there would have been two separate countries, The USA and CSA. Slavery would still have disappeared because it was already becoming unprofitable to keep slaves and the advent of agricultural technology would have hastened that. Trade between the two countries would have improved, since that is essentially what the war was over anyway. Other than that it is hard to tell, perhaps they would have joined again in the next 100 years.
2007-12-28 06:13:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by Wiz 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
a southern victory would have cost lincoln his reelection because he was already getting hammered by congress for political issues. it also could have caused his depression to worsen so he might have wound up having a serious stroke.
france would have stayed a southern ally. given the rest of lincoln's cabinet didn't give a crap about slavery blacks in the south would have been on their own and would most likely have started their own uprising or they would have started heading west to the terrirtories, or to canada or mexico leaving the south's economy in danger which would have lead to a trade agreement resulting in the terrories staying terrories and slave free in return for trade.france would have continued being a southern ally and england probably would have stayed neutral. then you have ww1 with the north staying neutral and the south backing france, putting a further strain on their economy up until it's collapse in the dustbowl and the market crash. the north survives and pulls aide unless the south agrees to reunify.
2007-12-28 06:19:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
There would have been another war a bit later on if the civil war had been lost the first time.
If the puritans still held power, we would not have advanced in knowledge and industry, and we would not have been a world power.
Some other country might have taken us over later on.
2007-12-28 06:11:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by suigeneris-impetus 6
·
5⤊
1⤋