You tell me.
There’s a part one to this as well, which you can find by going to the You Tube page.
Advertisements
You tell me.
There’s a part one to this as well, which you can find by going to the You Tube page.
Wishful Fantasy
If nothing else all the probabilities fall the Confederate way.
As General Grant observed after hearing all sorts of similar malarky, “ifs” don’t win a war. Honestly, I don’t know which is funnier, the scenarios or the spelling!
I see history as a very complicated and interrelated entity rather like weather. It is so complicated with some many parts(events) that are interrelated, that small and unpredictable events cause cascades of changes that become major events. For this reason predicting an alternative history more than a short time is just wild guesses directed by personal biases.
Brooks, you know I enjoy counterfactuals and “What Ifs?” as much as anybody but this one is a waste of 11 minutes and 46 seconds. In order to be believable, an alternative history needs to start with something that actually might have happened. Alternative Gettysburg narratives, for example, usually start with Lee acting on Longstreet’s suggestion to move around the Federal left or with the Confederates taking Cemetery Hill on the evening of July 1. Furthermore, good alterative histories — and there are some — only deal with a limited number of years. To try and “see the future” 100 years out based on the C.S.A. winning the war is just silly.
Personally, I don’t see a Federal loss at Shiloh being a trigger for anything, let alone French intervention. Even if Grant had surrendered on the first day, Buell would simply have fallen back to Nashville with his army and regrouped. Short on supplies and fought to a frazzle, Beauregard would not have pursued. If the French or the Brits were going to recognize the Confederacy, it seems to me they would have done so in response to the Confederate commissioners in 1861 or following the Confederate victory at First Manassas. A better story might begin with the Confederates capturing Washington after First Manassas.
So where is “The South Wins the War Part One?” Another dead give away on this one is all the misspelld wurds — French (with no capital F), apart instead of a part, stagnet instead of stagnant, oil sails instead of oil sales and loosing instead of losing. I actually found them more amusing than the story line.
Found it. At least it has the same/similar speling misteaks and a familiar format. Look for “Alternate History The South Wins the War!!”
Interestingly, there is no Soviet Union, but the new Communist USA flag has the Hammer and Sickle, although that symbol seems to have originated in Russia.
Funny that the closest allies of the CSA are France and Russia, two countries most TRUE SOUTHERNERS hate. Could the video be a plant by the vast leftwing conspiracy?
Why Communist. Fascist would be more likely, but commie looks worst to the audience.
The phrase “wistful thinking” would be too kind.
I couldn’t make it past the first few minutes. It’s silly.
Found your site after Googling “Cory Meyer” because I was supposedly him posting under another name on a southern nationalist site. I also got a kick out of seeing C. Chastain mentioned here as I have read some of her nonsense.
Hoping ex-Isle Vanek helps my Habs.
Few sites give you hockey and the CW. Glad I stumbled across it.
I would love to see an alternative history based on Stonewall Jackson’s actual plan to crush the north by destroying the Penna. coal fields and capturing Philadelphia. Oh wait, it’s “Stars and Bars Over Philadelphia” by historians David Walter and Don Ernsberger.