maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Mon May 21, 2018 6:46 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Trolls will feel the wrath of Kam



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:08 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 11147
Reputation points: 14675
Wonder if it'll be about the difficulty of governing a highly decentralised state, as the CSA would be?

There's the Confederated American States in Shadowrun as a sort of CSA takeoff. No slavery in it at all, mind, but they are almost the good guys in Shadowrun given the government there takes a dim view of megacorporate interests, fights evil Aztlan a lot, and seems to believe in individual freedom a lot more than the other states in Shadowrun do.

Don't tell the Lefties, they'll boycott Catalyst Games or something. :lol:

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 12:58 pm 
Online
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 10509
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 12999
Why would you say the CSA would be highly decentralised?

I had the impression the CSA was just about as decentralised as the U.S., perhaps less so.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 5:12 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 11147
Reputation points: 14675
Anthropoid wrote:
Why would you say the CSA would be highly decentralised?

I had the impression the CSA was just about as decentralised as the U.S., perhaps less so.


I seem to recall the CSA had serious problems during the war trying to create a centralised army and levying enough tax to pay for it. Kinda hard to declare secession, say its about state rights, and then try and overrule those rights after all.

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:40 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 11147
Reputation points: 14675
EUBanana wrote:
Anthropoid wrote:
Why would you say the CSA would be highly decentralised?

I had the impression the CSA was just about as decentralised as the U.S., perhaps less so.


I seem to recall the CSA had serious problems during the war trying to create a centralised army and levying enough tax to pay for it. Kinda hard to declare secession, say its about state rights, and then try and overrule those rights after all.


From having a read this could well be bullshit IRL. But for alternative history, maybe grist for the mill.

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:16 pm 
Online
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 10509
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 12999
I think they did have problems that can be summed up as "lack of centralization," whether than be authority, logistics, whatever.

However, as far as I know, the Union had just as much (if not MORE) problems that could be summed up as lack of centralization.

The idea that the war was about "States Rights" was just as absurd in that day and age as it is today. The war was about slaver's rights, and all the hooplah about "resisting" an encroaching Federal authority was a smoke screen. There was only ONE reason the oligarchs of the south felt it was in their best interest to go to war, the election of the Lincoln regime placed the clearest threat ever that the constraints which had been placed on slavery would not be willingly eased by the Federal government, and moreover that the progressive illegalization of slavery in the not too distant future was inevitable.

Most sothrons may not believe it, either now or then, but they are fools to fail to see what is so abundantly clear.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 2:48 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 14274
Reputation points: 1612
The war was about state rights to keep slavery. ;)

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:28 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 28693
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 19649
nero wrote:
The war was about state rights to keep slavery. ;)



To the best of my knowledge, the "states" did not keep(own) slaves, they were generally owned by individual slave holders. Therefore your snarky comment is not accurate.

I believe the argument was made that states had the right to determine whether the institution of slavery itself could be decided by individual states.

And as for the centralization issue, I also had the understanding that Confederate President Davis complained about his limitations to being able to call up troops from the various states. These troops were recruited (or called up) by the individual state governments. And this of course could cause issues when there were differences in how those forces should be deployed (by the state governor's desire or by the president's/central government's desire).

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:40 am 
Online
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 10509
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 12999
chijohnaok wrote:
nero wrote:
The war was about state rights to keep slavery. ;)



To the best of my knowledge, the "states" did not keep(own) slaves, they were generally owned by individual slave holders. Therefore your snarky comment is not accurate.

I believe the argument was made that states had the right to determine whether the institution of slavery itself could be decided by individual states.

And as for the centralization issue, I also had the understanding that Confederate President Davis complained about his limitations to being able to call up troops from the various states. These troops were recruited (or called up) by the individual state governments. And this of course could cause issues when there were differences in how those forces should be deployed (by the state governor's desire or by the president's/central government's desire).


Lincoln suffered much the same problems as far as I know.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:51 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 14274
Reputation points: 1612
chijohnaok wrote:
nero wrote:
The war was about state rights to keep slavery. ;)



To the best of my knowledge, the "states" did not keep(own) slaves, they were generally owned by individual slave holders. Therefore your snarky comment is not accurate.

I believe the argument was made that states had the right to determine whether the institution of slavery itself could be decided by individual states.

And as for the centralization issue, I also had the understanding that Confederate President Davis complained about his limitations to being able to call up troops from the various states. These troops were recruited (or called up) by the individual state governments. And this of course could cause issues when there were differences in how those forces should be deployed (by the state governor's desire or by the president's/central government's desire).

Who had the political power in the South; the slave owners. "State rights, our rights". ;)

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 'Confederate' alternate history HBO drama
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:49 pm 
Online
Hair in the soap
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:46 am
Posts: 18768
Reputation points: 17177
Anthropoid wrote:
chijohnaok wrote:


To the best of my knowledge, the "states" did not keep(own) slaves, they were generally owned by individual slave holders. Therefore your snarky comment is not accurate.

I believe the argument was made that states had the right to determine whether the institution of slavery itself could be decided by individual states.

And as for the centralization issue, I also had the understanding that Confederate President Davis complained about his limitations to being able to call up troops from the various states. These troops were recruited (or called up) by the individual state governments. And this of course could cause issues when there were differences in how those forces should be deployed (by the state governor's desire or by the president's/central government's desire).


Lincoln suffered much the same problems as far as I know.



The much more industrialized north had far better means to do so, however, and it showed in the Union's overwhelming progress, in that realm, during the war. The infrastructure, alone, left quite a spread between their comparative capabilities.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group