A Confederate insurgency in the former Confederate States of America after the end of the American Civil War

[WolfBear]

What if there would have been a Confederate insurgency in the former Confederate States of America after the end of the American Civil War? Just how much difficulty would the Union have had in stamping out and crushing this insurgency and what effect would this have on the Union's subsequent treatment of the former Confederacy during Reconstruction and beyond?

Something worth noting is that the ex-Confederate terrain that is the most suitable for an insurgency, specifically the Appalachian Mountains, was also the most pro-Republican part of the Southern US in the years and decades after the end of the American Civil War:

Even in 1916, at the height of Jim Crow, the Republican Party (pro-Union and anti-Confederate during the American Civil War) was still competitive in Appalachia due to the fact that, unlike in the rest of the ex-Confederacy, the Republican Party's support in Appalachia was mostly based on whites rather than blacks:

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

A serious, widespread insurgency could hurt the American economy quite a lot, as most goods will be moved either by railroads, or by narrow rivers, both of which cross hundreds of miles. Very exposed and difficult to protect. It would be very easy for insurgents to cut train tracks or hold up trains, or to fire upon a boat travelling down a river or board it. Snipping telephone lines, and so on. I'd imagine that the feds would respond being harsh on the South. More and more disenfranchised people flocking to the the insurgency. Eventually the people of the North will become so tired that they vote to give in to some of the insurgency's demands. The South completely regaining their independence is unlikely, though.

Overall, there will have been less economic growth in America. By the time WW1 rolls around, America won't be as strong as it was in OTL, and there might not be enough popular support for an intervention to be a possibility at all. The allies in Europe will be worse off and there will be no decisive victory over the Central Powers. Germany might be better off than in OTL, meaning that the conditions that led to the rise of the Nazi party probably don't happen. Conflict might be more centered in the the East and the Far East than in Europe.

 

[Sailor.X]

It would result in a Union response that would make Sherman's March to the Sea look like how to make friends and influence people exercise. It would basically destroy the South. Like more than just Georgia leveled. Reconstruction would not be extended to the Southerners and that part of the Nation would be a Rump State within the US as a whole. permanently behind the North in all things. And may not recover until well in the 20th Century.

 

[Circle of Willis]

It would result in a Union response that would make Sherman's March to the Sea look like how to make friends and influence people exercise. It would basically destroy the South. Like more than just Georgia leveled. Reconstruction would not be extended to the Southerners and that part of the Nation would be a Rump State within the US as a whole. permanently behind the North in all things. And may not recover until well in the 20th Century.

I'd concur with this judgment. It wasn't the exact same question but I did ask about another way the Confederacy could've died harder in the past (just by assassinating not only Lincoln but more of his line of succession as well) and the consensus seems to have been that the CSA really wasn't in any shape to carry on a successful insurgency by 1865. IIRC the Northern will to keep on fighting & grinding the South to dust historically evaporated in the 1870s because by then it was clear that the ex-Confederates were no longer entertaining the idea of reviving Confederacy, just to enforce the black codes/Jim Crow (quite acceptable terms to the vast majority of Northerners back then, I don't think even most abolitionists wanted equal civil rights for blacks on top of the end of slavery), which definitely wouldn't be the case if they remained up in arms even past the bitter end.

And as recognized in the OP, some of the best terrain in the South to cover an insurgency is already held by the staunchest of Southern Unionists (aside from West Virginia, East Tennessee was adamantly Unionist and there were even Unionists in central Texas, mostly German immigrants I believe). Plus the black population across the entire South (who comprise the majority in some of the most fiery of the fire-breathing states, like Mississippi and South Carolina) will have no interest in helping Confederate guerrillas and a hell of a lot in helping the US Army suppress them for obvious reasons.

In addition, it should be noted that the powers of the day really weren't squeamish about counterinsurgency, even when the partisans they were targeting were fellow white dudes. The Prussians bluntly shot francs-tireurs out of hand in the FPW around this same time and the British would invent concentration camps to break the back of the Boer resistance a few decades later, if the former Confederacy insists on going full Solano Lopez & fighting to the absolute last man, woman and child I'd imagine the Union is likelier to turn Alaska & Arizona into gulags for Southerners than to just back down and be all 'K fine, you can have your independence after all'. Some of the wilder ideas the Radical Republicans had, like abolishing the preexisting Southern states because they'd committed 'state suicide' (reducing them to conquered territories) and drawing new ones to replace them, might be seriously entertained as well - surely you can come up with some pretty nutty borders when gerrymandering the new states to create black- and Southern Unionist-majority ones that the GOP will presumably expect to vote for them forever.

Tl;dr Lee absolutely did the smart thing when he turned down E. Porter Alexander's recommendation of going guerrilla after being cornered at Appomattox.

 

[Sailor.X]

I'd concur with this judgment. It wasn't the exact same question but I did ask about another way the Confederacy could've died harder in the past (just by assassinating not only Lincoln but more of his line of succession as well) and the consensus seems to have been that the CSA really wasn't in any shape to carry on a successful insurgency by 1865. IIRC the Northern will to keep on fighting & grinding the South to dust historically evaporated in the 1870s because by then it was clear that the ex-Confederates were no longer entertaining the idea of reviving Confederacy, just to enforce the black codes/Jim Crow (quite acceptable terms to the vast majority of Northerners back then, I don't think even most abolitionists wanted equal civil rights for blacks on top of the end of slavery), which definitely wouldn't be the case if they remained up in arms even past the bitter end.

And as recognized in the OP, some of the best terrain in the South to cover an insurgency is already held by the staunchest of Southern Unionists (aside from West Virginia, East Tennessee was adamantly Unionist and there were even Unionists in central Texas, mostly German immigrants I believe). Plus the black population across the entire South (who comprise the majority in some of the most fiery of the fire-breathing states, like Mississippi and South Carolina) will have no interest in helping Confederate guerrillas and a hell of a lot in helping the US Army suppress them for obvious reasons.

In addition, it should be noted that the powers of the day really weren't squeamish about counterinsurgency, even when the partisans they were targeting were fellow white dudes. The Prussians bluntly shot francs-tireurs out of hand in the FPW around this same time and the British would invent concentration camps to break the back of the Boer resistance a few decades later, if the former Confederacy insists on going full Solano Lopez & fighting to the absolute last man, woman and child I'd imagine the Union is likelier to turn Alaska & Arizona into gulags for Southerners than to just back down and be all 'K fine, you can have your independence after all'. Some of the wilder ideas the Radical Republicans had, like abolishing the preexisting Southern states because they'd committed 'state suicide' (reducing them to conquered territories) and drawing new ones to replace them, might be seriously entertained as well - surely you can come up with some pretty nutty borders when gerrymandering the new states to create black- and Southern Unionist-majority ones that the GOP will presumably expect to vote for them forever.

Tl;dr Lee absolutely did the smart thing when he turned down E. Porter Alexander's recommendation of going guerrilla after being cornered at Appomattox.

Looks at the Gerrymander map....... Oh Lawd!!! lol.

 

[WolfBear]

Looks at the Gerrymander map....... Oh Lawd!!! lol.

Here's the map itself:

 

[stevep]

What if there would have been a Confederate insurgency in the former Confederate States of America after the end of the American Civil War? Just how much difficulty would the Union have had in stamping out and crushing this insurgency and what effect would this have on the Union's subsequent treatment of the former Confederacy during Reconstruction and beyond?

Something worth noting is that the ex-Confederate terrain that is the most suitable for an insurgency, specifically the Appalachian Mountains, was also the most pro-Republican part of the Southern US in the years and decades after the end of the American Civil War:

Even in 1916, at the height of Jim Crow, the Republican Party (pro-Union and anti-Confederate during the American Civil War) was still competitive in Appalachia due to the fact that, unlike in the rest of the ex-Confederacy, the Republican Party's support in Appalachia was mostly based on whites rather than blacks:

I would agree that any such insurgence is likely to be very firmly, not to say brutally suppressed.

There is one other possibility which might, and I say might, allow an insurgency a hope. If say after defeating the south and then forcing the French out of Mexico the US gets into a rumble with the UK. It would have a lot of veteran troops to recall to service and has built up a decent gun industry by this time but that could be one hell of a fight and in those circumstances you might see a de-facto agreement between the UK and the former rebels. That the former would send aid to the latter in terms of weapons, naval support and possibly also some regular forces to aid them as that would take some of the pressure off the defence of Canada.

Of course this would be under the clear assumption that slavery was dead and wouldn't be restored and its still going to be very tough for the rebels but its probably the only realistic chance for a revived confederacy.

Otherwise any insurgency, while its likely to further devastate the south and be a significant economic problem for the US as a whole is unlikely to last long. You could end up with something like intermittent terrorist activities in following decades and generations but their unlikely to change the result of the civil war in terms of southern independence.

 

[S'task]

It should be noted that there were actual Confederate partisans who continued fighting after the Civil War. They were mostly in the West where they could easily hide in the vast expanse of land. The thing is, most people don't know them as partisans since they didn't make their politics as big a thing as their robberies, and so ended up treated more as outlaws than enemy combatants.

But you HAVE heard of them... the most famous of which was Jesse James and his James-Younger gang.

Yup... many of the famous outlaw gangs of the Old West originated with Confederate partisans and sympathizers. Another of those gangs was the Cochise County Cowboys. Don't remember that name? Not as surprising, as it was the ones who brought them down that became legends. You might not remember the Cowboys, but you certainly remember Wyatt Earp and the Shootout at the OK Corral.