For Billy Joe: Worlds Without the United States
16 Comments Published by tet on Wednesday, November 14 at 8:12 PM.
The alternate-history genre of science-fiction has been popular at least since the days of the pulps and Murray Leinster's Sideways in Time. At the very least, it's a great deal of fun to ask "what if." At its best, it is thought-provoking and teaches us a great deal about the forces that have shaped our world.
There are several schools of thought about history. Some scholars believe that men are made by the times in which they live, and therefore even small changes in history would produce far different results. Others espouse the "great man" theory of history and feel that a Napoleon or Julius Caesar would have been important whether France was a kingdom or empire and whether Romans spoke Latin or Greek.
I personally feel that the flow of history is a lot like an engineering system. There are connections that have a tendency to push deviating history back towards what exists in our world. The defeat of Germany in World War One, for instance, would have a tendency to cause resentment against the victors no matter if Communist Russia came into being or not. There are also connections that are very dependent on a chain of events. Immediately before the battle of Antietam of the Civil War, a set of Lee's battle plans, wrapped around three cigars, fell into the hands of the Union. Because of this accident, the South lost an opportunity to deliver a telling blow to the North which may have ended with Lincoln's defeat in the 1864 election.
1864--The Union Sundered
We'll start with this alternate first. Because the cigars were never found, Dixie's 1862 invasion of the North reached clear into Pennsylvania and flanked Washington DC from the Maryland side. The Capital was captured and burned, the Union government then moved to Philadelphia. The war went badly enough that Lincoln was defeated in the 1864 election by McClellan.
This alternate has been described several times, most notably by Harry Turtledove in the novel series beginning with How Few Remain. Of all of the alternates that I'll be discussing here, it'll probably result in the most familiar world technologically.
An independent Confederacy allied with the French and British would mean that there would be four potentially hostile nations on the North American continent. The Union would be surrounded by Canada on the north and Dixie to the south, but would still be transcontinental. (The transcontinental railroad was finished in our history only three years after the end of the war.) The Confederacy would find itself without access to the Pacific Ocean, setting the stage for a Mexican-Confederate War to enable a railroad across the continent south of California.
The amount of resentment that would be present in a losing Union is not to be underestimated, either. It would, in my opinion, rival that of Germany during the 1930s against the victorious Allies. The stage, therefore, would be set for repeat engagements, perhaps one per generation for a century or more. Interestingly enough, this would in all likelihood give us a rate of technological advancement that would rival our own world, since much of the technological progress in the 20th Century can be traced to military needs.
To say that the prospects for the Southern blacks in this scenario would be dismal is putting it very mildly. Even if de jure slavery ended soon after the war, a strictly American version of apartheid would be set up in its place. People of color of any kind would be a rarity in the North, although it is likely that immigrants from European nations would still be welcomed to fill the opening West.
It is likely that the North would be desperately searching for allies, being surrounded by hostile forces on either side. One leader who expressed admiration for the Union side in the Civil War was Otto von Bismarck of Prussia. Since his nation and the soon to be unified Germany needed counterweights to the British and French power in Europe, the newly industrialized North would fill the bill remarkably well.
So, what we would end up here is a set of world wars in the 20th Century with the Union, Germany and Mexico versus Britain, France and the Confederacy. Russia in this case could sit it out and wait for one side to show weakness, or come in on the side of its allies in our world.
The New World could quite possibly be uninhabitable by 2000 due to a nuclear exchange between the two fratricidal nations in North America.
1792--Constitution never ratified
In this alternate, the squabbling colonies never agree to a republican form of government and remain as independent entities.
What I believe would then transpire would be an English-speaking version of Central America. The various European powers would begin vying for position, especially since the French Revolution would occur on schedule. The individual states would be prone to border skirmishes, often bringing in various Native tribes as allies.
The fate of the individual colonies would probably range from Georgia ending up as a Banana Republic to New York, Massachusetts and Virginia being moderately successful small democracies. The rest would be somewhere in between.
It is likely in this case that the British and French would be fighting in the middle of the continent by the middle of the 19th Century. The early 19th Century rebellions in South American would still occur, but would be brutally smashed by the Spanish and Portuguese because of lack of a Monroe Doctrine deterring large scale European intervention. It is quite possible that the Russians would colonize Alaska and the West Coast, coming clear down into California. San Francisco in this world would be called Novyi Odessa.
Japan would not be opened to the West by gunboat diplomacy, so I imagine it would not come out on its own until as much as a generation later. It would therefore lag technologically to the extent that it would not be a major economic force until at least the late 20th Century, similar to China in our world.
It is likely that the more powerful France and England in this world would dominate Central Europe, so a united Germany and Italy are considerably less likely.
How important is the United States to the rest of the world politically?
To tell the truth, to the Old World before the 20th Century, not much. Prior to the Spanish-American War, American interests were linked closely to the fate of the Western Hemisphere alone. Therefore, in most of these alternates, the Arabic World, Africa, and the Far East aren't changed at all, except by the ways in which the events on the American continent change the opportunities of the European powers. It is likely, though, that anything that delays the United States moving Westward would probably allow the Native Americans to recover from the virgin field epidemics of the 16th Century and use the steadily improving weather as the Little Ice Age ended to regain enough military and political power to be a force that needed to be handled with negotiation and treaty, rather than genocide. The changing power structure in Europe, meanwhile, leads to the next alternate, which I find the most interesting of all.....
1776--They all hang together--The American Revolution is Crushed
This is interesting, first of all, because of the effect that it would have on the spread of liberal and revolutionary thought in both Europe and South America. Without an American Revolution, it is likely that the French revolution would never have occurred. However, all is not sunshine and roses.
There's still the matter of a certain Corsican corporal, that I believe would be as ambitious under a King as he was under a revolutionary government. This is further complicated by the one-third of the American colonists who are still actively pursuing a guerilla war against the British.
Upshot? The Napoleonic Wars occur on schedule, but the British lose. The British dominance of the seas is ended. Without the political pressure of a British-Russian alliance, Napoleon decides to make the best of it and stops his ambitions with Poland and doesn't invade Russia in 1812. The French Empire runs from the North Sea through North Africa and from the Pyrenees to the Vistula and lasts for well over a century. Since the French intelligencia were not killed by the Revolution, the Enlightenment comes a generation later, but is closely watched by the Imperial authorities to make sure that it doesn't get too extreme. Marxism is very unlikely in this alternate.
Interesting side effects: The British aren't able to eliminate the slave trade, so Africans continue to be moved to the New World for an additional two generations. India and the Far East are dominated by French and allied traders, rather than British.
The New World is French-dominated. It is possible that both Canada and the colonies become French possessions, depending on how fast the French Empire industrializes. By the end of the 20th Century, we've got a Francophone world in which the Asians are just begining to regain their freedom. The English-speaking world is more or less a footnote to history.
1588--Spanish Armada succeeds--England never colonizes America
I call this the Church Triumphant scenario. The Reformation is crushed and Spain and France begin the 17th Century in firm control of Europe. The German states are subjugated, but never undergo the trauma that is the Thirty Years' War.
The Spanish and French take North America by storm. A wave of colonists and conquerers move from both north and south in a manner reminiscent of the Arab wars of conquest. "Convert or die," the soldiers say. Unfortunately, even conversion does not save the lives of many natives who are worked to death by their new masters. As they die, their places are taken by hordes of African slaves brought over to toil in the noblemen's fields.
The victorious nations use the resources of the New World to finish their wars of conquest. By 1700, there are no Protestant nations left as Sweden becomes the last to fall. The Turks are moved from the gates of Vienna to the Bosporus by 1800 and Russia comes back to the One True and Catholic Church by 1850 or so. By the mid-20th Century, the Christian nations are in the midst of a war with the Arabs over the oil-producing lands of the Middle East.
Lots of wars in this alternate, therefore tech level similar to ours. No Enlightenment at all. Religions often work best when there is a powerful opposing religion to act as a counterweight. Without Protestantism, there would have not been an effective brake on the political ambitions of the Church and I fear that the rich temptation of the New World would be enough to corrupt It.
No Eastern Seaboard, therefore no English colonies
In this scenario, there is no land between the St. Lawrence and Florida until one gets to the foothills of the Appalachians. There are no protected ports, therefore the English and Dutch are crowded out early and look for colonies elsewhere.
Without a foothold on the coast, colonization is much more difficult. The French from the north and the Spanish from the south are forced to move slowly since they are still diverting resources to deal with the British and Dutch in Europe. With the extra time and Spanish horses, the Plains Tribes are able to recover their population as the weather improves. By 1800 or so, there are two or three independent Native nations in the Central Plains.
In this world, all of the European powers are weakened and less able to wage war. Therefore, the industrial revolution does not begin until after 1850 or so. Slavery lasts a bit longer due to the need for muscle-power in agriculture. There is no English domination of the colonial world, it's divided up evenly between the British, the Dutch, French and Spanish.
I can see this as a gentler world by the late 20th Century. Without a few dominant world powers, there are a lot of brushfire wars but no world wars. Technological change occurred more slowly and was more evenly divided between the first, second and third worlds. This might not be a bad place to live, especially if you're not white.
No New World at all, just ocean
This is very interesting. Let's say that the weather patterns are the same as in our world. (This isn't likely, but without that assumption, the world is way too different to even consider--without the Gulf Stream, Europe wouldn't have emerged from the Ice Age until the Early Medieval Warm Period.)
Let's also say that the history of the Old World is the same until 1492. In many ways, this is the reverse of the 1588 scenario. Without the gold brought from the New World, the Catholic nations of Europe are much less powerful. Therefore, the Reformation is much more successful. Europe and the Old World come to be heavily influenced by British, Dutch and Swedish fleets.
This could lead to very interesting philosophical developments. Rather than the Enlightenment, I can see the Empowerment. Imagine Capitalism being as deeply psychotic as Marxism and seen as the way in which the world will be perfected. The poor, disadvantaged and weak are in their benighted state due to a higher plan.
Interestingly enough, I can see slavery ending in this world prior to the middle of the 18th Century simply due to a lack of need for them. The Triangular Trade routes don't exist and all of the commerce moves around the horn of Africa. Africa would take the place of the New World in this scenario. It would be slower and tougher, but eventually the jungles would be conquered and the resources taken.
Rather than coal mines, I can see the digging of the Suez Canal in the mid to late 1700s being the source of the steam engines powering the Industrial Revolution. Asia would be subjugated early and often. It is actually possible that the West would conquer China in this alternate.
If the Ring of Fire still exists, there would probably be a chain of islands where the Rockies and Andes are in our world. With the distances as far from Europe and Asia as they are, I can see a Polynesian state coming into existence by the mid-19th Century. It is possible that they could evolve into a sort of Super-Japan in the century following that. The stage could be set for a completely naval world war as the superpowers take sides to divide up the offshore resources of the mid-Ocean lands.
Summary
For the most part, I believe that the United States has provided many things to the world over the last two hundred plus years. Initially, it and the entire New World provided resources to power the empires of Europe. Then, it provided an example of how the liberal thought of the Enlightenment could produce a nation of free Europeans. It used its power to defend other nations that also sought liberty in its hemisphere. As time progressed, it became a counter-weight to political ambitions of other world powers and eventually, after the Industrial Revolution, came to dominate the world's economy. In short, it became the only nation capable of inventing the Internet and giving it away.
While this was occuring, it sometimes faltered and took the easy way, rather than the moral way. However, within it still lies the seeds of the revolution that will take mankind to its next evolutionary step.
Tom
There are several schools of thought about history. Some scholars believe that men are made by the times in which they live, and therefore even small changes in history would produce far different results. Others espouse the "great man" theory of history and feel that a Napoleon or Julius Caesar would have been important whether France was a kingdom or empire and whether Romans spoke Latin or Greek.
I personally feel that the flow of history is a lot like an engineering system. There are connections that have a tendency to push deviating history back towards what exists in our world. The defeat of Germany in World War One, for instance, would have a tendency to cause resentment against the victors no matter if Communist Russia came into being or not. There are also connections that are very dependent on a chain of events. Immediately before the battle of Antietam of the Civil War, a set of Lee's battle plans, wrapped around three cigars, fell into the hands of the Union. Because of this accident, the South lost an opportunity to deliver a telling blow to the North which may have ended with Lincoln's defeat in the 1864 election.
1864--The Union Sundered
We'll start with this alternate first. Because the cigars were never found, Dixie's 1862 invasion of the North reached clear into Pennsylvania and flanked Washington DC from the Maryland side. The Capital was captured and burned, the Union government then moved to Philadelphia. The war went badly enough that Lincoln was defeated in the 1864 election by McClellan.
This alternate has been described several times, most notably by Harry Turtledove in the novel series beginning with How Few Remain. Of all of the alternates that I'll be discussing here, it'll probably result in the most familiar world technologically.
An independent Confederacy allied with the French and British would mean that there would be four potentially hostile nations on the North American continent. The Union would be surrounded by Canada on the north and Dixie to the south, but would still be transcontinental. (The transcontinental railroad was finished in our history only three years after the end of the war.) The Confederacy would find itself without access to the Pacific Ocean, setting the stage for a Mexican-Confederate War to enable a railroad across the continent south of California.
The amount of resentment that would be present in a losing Union is not to be underestimated, either. It would, in my opinion, rival that of Germany during the 1930s against the victorious Allies. The stage, therefore, would be set for repeat engagements, perhaps one per generation for a century or more. Interestingly enough, this would in all likelihood give us a rate of technological advancement that would rival our own world, since much of the technological progress in the 20th Century can be traced to military needs.
To say that the prospects for the Southern blacks in this scenario would be dismal is putting it very mildly. Even if de jure slavery ended soon after the war, a strictly American version of apartheid would be set up in its place. People of color of any kind would be a rarity in the North, although it is likely that immigrants from European nations would still be welcomed to fill the opening West.
It is likely that the North would be desperately searching for allies, being surrounded by hostile forces on either side. One leader who expressed admiration for the Union side in the Civil War was Otto von Bismarck of Prussia. Since his nation and the soon to be unified Germany needed counterweights to the British and French power in Europe, the newly industrialized North would fill the bill remarkably well.
So, what we would end up here is a set of world wars in the 20th Century with the Union, Germany and Mexico versus Britain, France and the Confederacy. Russia in this case could sit it out and wait for one side to show weakness, or come in on the side of its allies in our world.
The New World could quite possibly be uninhabitable by 2000 due to a nuclear exchange between the two fratricidal nations in North America.
1792--Constitution never ratified
In this alternate, the squabbling colonies never agree to a republican form of government and remain as independent entities.
What I believe would then transpire would be an English-speaking version of Central America. The various European powers would begin vying for position, especially since the French Revolution would occur on schedule. The individual states would be prone to border skirmishes, often bringing in various Native tribes as allies.
The fate of the individual colonies would probably range from Georgia ending up as a Banana Republic to New York, Massachusetts and Virginia being moderately successful small democracies. The rest would be somewhere in between.
It is likely in this case that the British and French would be fighting in the middle of the continent by the middle of the 19th Century. The early 19th Century rebellions in South American would still occur, but would be brutally smashed by the Spanish and Portuguese because of lack of a Monroe Doctrine deterring large scale European intervention. It is quite possible that the Russians would colonize Alaska and the West Coast, coming clear down into California. San Francisco in this world would be called Novyi Odessa.
Japan would not be opened to the West by gunboat diplomacy, so I imagine it would not come out on its own until as much as a generation later. It would therefore lag technologically to the extent that it would not be a major economic force until at least the late 20th Century, similar to China in our world.
It is likely that the more powerful France and England in this world would dominate Central Europe, so a united Germany and Italy are considerably less likely.
How important is the United States to the rest of the world politically?
To tell the truth, to the Old World before the 20th Century, not much. Prior to the Spanish-American War, American interests were linked closely to the fate of the Western Hemisphere alone. Therefore, in most of these alternates, the Arabic World, Africa, and the Far East aren't changed at all, except by the ways in which the events on the American continent change the opportunities of the European powers. It is likely, though, that anything that delays the United States moving Westward would probably allow the Native Americans to recover from the virgin field epidemics of the 16th Century and use the steadily improving weather as the Little Ice Age ended to regain enough military and political power to be a force that needed to be handled with negotiation and treaty, rather than genocide. The changing power structure in Europe, meanwhile, leads to the next alternate, which I find the most interesting of all.....
1776--They all hang together--The American Revolution is Crushed
This is interesting, first of all, because of the effect that it would have on the spread of liberal and revolutionary thought in both Europe and South America. Without an American Revolution, it is likely that the French revolution would never have occurred. However, all is not sunshine and roses.
There's still the matter of a certain Corsican corporal, that I believe would be as ambitious under a King as he was under a revolutionary government. This is further complicated by the one-third of the American colonists who are still actively pursuing a guerilla war against the British.
Upshot? The Napoleonic Wars occur on schedule, but the British lose. The British dominance of the seas is ended. Without the political pressure of a British-Russian alliance, Napoleon decides to make the best of it and stops his ambitions with Poland and doesn't invade Russia in 1812. The French Empire runs from the North Sea through North Africa and from the Pyrenees to the Vistula and lasts for well over a century. Since the French intelligencia were not killed by the Revolution, the Enlightenment comes a generation later, but is closely watched by the Imperial authorities to make sure that it doesn't get too extreme. Marxism is very unlikely in this alternate.
Interesting side effects: The British aren't able to eliminate the slave trade, so Africans continue to be moved to the New World for an additional two generations. India and the Far East are dominated by French and allied traders, rather than British.
The New World is French-dominated. It is possible that both Canada and the colonies become French possessions, depending on how fast the French Empire industrializes. By the end of the 20th Century, we've got a Francophone world in which the Asians are just begining to regain their freedom. The English-speaking world is more or less a footnote to history.
1588--Spanish Armada succeeds--England never colonizes America
I call this the Church Triumphant scenario. The Reformation is crushed and Spain and France begin the 17th Century in firm control of Europe. The German states are subjugated, but never undergo the trauma that is the Thirty Years' War.
The Spanish and French take North America by storm. A wave of colonists and conquerers move from both north and south in a manner reminiscent of the Arab wars of conquest. "Convert or die," the soldiers say. Unfortunately, even conversion does not save the lives of many natives who are worked to death by their new masters. As they die, their places are taken by hordes of African slaves brought over to toil in the noblemen's fields.
The victorious nations use the resources of the New World to finish their wars of conquest. By 1700, there are no Protestant nations left as Sweden becomes the last to fall. The Turks are moved from the gates of Vienna to the Bosporus by 1800 and Russia comes back to the One True and Catholic Church by 1850 or so. By the mid-20th Century, the Christian nations are in the midst of a war with the Arabs over the oil-producing lands of the Middle East.
Lots of wars in this alternate, therefore tech level similar to ours. No Enlightenment at all. Religions often work best when there is a powerful opposing religion to act as a counterweight. Without Protestantism, there would have not been an effective brake on the political ambitions of the Church and I fear that the rich temptation of the New World would be enough to corrupt It.
No Eastern Seaboard, therefore no English colonies
In this scenario, there is no land between the St. Lawrence and Florida until one gets to the foothills of the Appalachians. There are no protected ports, therefore the English and Dutch are crowded out early and look for colonies elsewhere.
Without a foothold on the coast, colonization is much more difficult. The French from the north and the Spanish from the south are forced to move slowly since they are still diverting resources to deal with the British and Dutch in Europe. With the extra time and Spanish horses, the Plains Tribes are able to recover their population as the weather improves. By 1800 or so, there are two or three independent Native nations in the Central Plains.
In this world, all of the European powers are weakened and less able to wage war. Therefore, the industrial revolution does not begin until after 1850 or so. Slavery lasts a bit longer due to the need for muscle-power in agriculture. There is no English domination of the colonial world, it's divided up evenly between the British, the Dutch, French and Spanish.
I can see this as a gentler world by the late 20th Century. Without a few dominant world powers, there are a lot of brushfire wars but no world wars. Technological change occurred more slowly and was more evenly divided between the first, second and third worlds. This might not be a bad place to live, especially if you're not white.
No New World at all, just ocean
This is very interesting. Let's say that the weather patterns are the same as in our world. (This isn't likely, but without that assumption, the world is way too different to even consider--without the Gulf Stream, Europe wouldn't have emerged from the Ice Age until the Early Medieval Warm Period.)
Let's also say that the history of the Old World is the same until 1492. In many ways, this is the reverse of the 1588 scenario. Without the gold brought from the New World, the Catholic nations of Europe are much less powerful. Therefore, the Reformation is much more successful. Europe and the Old World come to be heavily influenced by British, Dutch and Swedish fleets.
This could lead to very interesting philosophical developments. Rather than the Enlightenment, I can see the Empowerment. Imagine Capitalism being as deeply psychotic as Marxism and seen as the way in which the world will be perfected. The poor, disadvantaged and weak are in their benighted state due to a higher plan.
Interestingly enough, I can see slavery ending in this world prior to the middle of the 18th Century simply due to a lack of need for them. The Triangular Trade routes don't exist and all of the commerce moves around the horn of Africa. Africa would take the place of the New World in this scenario. It would be slower and tougher, but eventually the jungles would be conquered and the resources taken.
Rather than coal mines, I can see the digging of the Suez Canal in the mid to late 1700s being the source of the steam engines powering the Industrial Revolution. Asia would be subjugated early and often. It is actually possible that the West would conquer China in this alternate.
If the Ring of Fire still exists, there would probably be a chain of islands where the Rockies and Andes are in our world. With the distances as far from Europe and Asia as they are, I can see a Polynesian state coming into existence by the mid-19th Century. It is possible that they could evolve into a sort of Super-Japan in the century following that. The stage could be set for a completely naval world war as the superpowers take sides to divide up the offshore resources of the mid-Ocean lands.
Summary
For the most part, I believe that the United States has provided many things to the world over the last two hundred plus years. Initially, it and the entire New World provided resources to power the empires of Europe. Then, it provided an example of how the liberal thought of the Enlightenment could produce a nation of free Europeans. It used its power to defend other nations that also sought liberty in its hemisphere. As time progressed, it became a counter-weight to political ambitions of other world powers and eventually, after the Industrial Revolution, came to dominate the world's economy. In short, it became the only nation capable of inventing the Internet and giving it away.
While this was occuring, it sometimes faltered and took the easy way, rather than the moral way. However, within it still lies the seeds of the revolution that will take mankind to its next evolutionary step.
Tom
Labels: alternate history, politics, Tet
Having found a fellow fan of Turtledove and alternative historical fiction, I got a question for you.
I heard from a friend who heard it from a friend that Churchill wrote either an essay or story about what would have been if the South had won the Civil War. Obviously, I am interested in reading about it, since it predates most substantial alternative historical fiction works and its Churchill. Do you know the name of the work, and where I could get it?
From the Winston Churchill Journal
Bravo Tet !!!!- (more comments to come)
Vive le little Corsican corporal :-) !
Jerome
Interesting histories. Quick thought I had while reading this is that I highly doubt China would have been conquered by Europeans because without the wealth generated by the New World, Europe would have moved slower and China would likely have had more time to prepare as the Dutch and British (or French) were rocking out India.
You might be right. I wonder what the balance of payments was for the New World colonies after the initial gold boom of the 16th Century.
I'm pretty sure that conquest of China's not likely. It might be possible with sufficient resources taken from an earlier exploited Africa. Even in our world, China really didn't see the barbarians from Europe as a danger until well into the mid-19th Century, so I can't see them preparing much.
Tom
Tom, I appreciate all your AH scenarii. About the one without a north/south American continent: the Portuguese and Spaniards could actually, with not-that-huge technical improvements in navigation, have succeeded in their initial plan to trade with China/Far East via the western route. If so, it would actually have led to a flourishing trade between Europe and China. No American gold pouring in Spain, so European wealth would have been built a la Dutch, i.e., based on commerce and technological advances. No gunboat diplomacy with China, and possibly a much earlier industrial age....
Jerome
Jerome, the cross-two oceans scenario won't work in the 16th Century for the Spanish and Portuguese.
The biggest problem is food storage. Without refrigeration, the foods that were able to be preserved could not sustain a sea voyage of that distance. The navigation technologies were certainly high enough, but if you carefully examine the history of Magellan's circumnavigation, you'll note that almost his entire crew perished from weakness due to vitamin deficiencies. He lost 232 out of 270 sailors who started the trip, including himself.
Earliest regular trips across the World Ocean would probably be in the late 18th Century and would be dependent on the date that the effectiveness of sauerkraut (or citrus fruits) in the prevention of scurvy was discovered. Trade with the Polynesians in the Rocky or Andes Islands would come somewhat earlier, depending on what grew there.
Tom
One other factor on the last question:
If you look at a globe, the trip from Europe to India and back around the Cape of Good Hope is actually about half the distance one would travel circumnavigating the globe. The reason Columbus was looking for a fast route to the Indes going West was that their estimate for the Earth's diameter was quite a bit off. (No one but ignorant peasants actually thought the world was flat at the end of the 15th Centuries. Hell, the Greeks and Egyptians knew the world was round.)
This and the above is why no one but explorers and scientists bothered to go around Cape Horn until steam power.
Tom
Insert "from Europe" into that last sentence after "scientists." Americans did it all the time to get to the West Coast.
Tom
Oh, Prescott, do you know who wrote the first alternative history story and what it posited?
Tom
I am not sure about your union surrenders history. If the Confederacy remained independent, there might be some hard feelings for a time, but I think that there is a strong liklihood that the two nations would settle into a peaceful, perhaps even amicable relationship. The powers that be in both countries would be the same color, same religion, and speak the same language. We had the Revolutionary war and then the War of 1812 against Britain, but they soon became friends and allies.
It simply makes too little sence for either country to have an ongoing blood feud for centuries. We'd have to live next to each other after all. Americans were never the type to hold grudges that long anyway, a new country with a short memory and all that.
I think far more likely is that, soon the Union and the Confederacy just agree not to talk about the war or slavery and carry on peacefully. Over time, the Union would become more and more industrializied and the Confederacy would continue their slave labor based agrarian economy. This means, of course that the Union slowly gets richer and more powerful and the Confederacy does not
I also think you may overstimate how much the Europeans would care about our affairs. Sure, they had always been happy to use the New World as an opportunity to kick each other in the shins a little bit, but we were never the main attraction. It wasn't until WWI than the U.S. actually projected power into Europe, and it is likely that a the fractured Union would have been unable to do even that. What incentive would the Euros have to let either "States of America" play their games with them?
So, all we are left with is a Union which is becoming a comfortable and respectable industrialized nation, and a stagnating Confederacy which is looking increasingly backwards as time leaves it behind. If they're lucky, they'll figure out a way to transition away from slave planatations and to factories peacefully. If they're not, race-based civil war it is.
Livy wrote about what would happen if Alexander had gone west instead of east for his empire.
Since all of this is hypothetical, DF, I have to give you credit for your thoughts.
Some comments, though:
1) Even in our world, 5-10% of the white descendents of Confederates still express resentment against the victorious Union and believe that the world would have been better if Dixie had won. Man, ask one of them about Lincoln sometime and get a real earful!
Northern Ireland is an excellent example of two groups of people who are the same color, speak the same language and still hate each other's guts. The Scots who became Orangemen were brought over by Oliver Cromwell in the 17th Century, for goodness' sake, and they and the native Irish were blowing each other up until a year or two ago.
You can say, "well, they've got two different religions," but I hold that the fundamental differences in philosophy between an agrarian, slave-holding society and an industrialized immigrant society are larger than those between the two warring factions in Ulster.
2) The New World was important to Europe economically in the 19th Century. The North was seen mainly as a trading rival by the French and British, but Dixie, on the other hand, was a trading partner.
A much more successful Dixie would greatly encourage the Continentals to support it. It would be the British influence, as a matter of fact, that I expect would finally end slavery in the South. The partnership is really natural, to tell the truth. I see Europe as the great equalizer between the two nations in the middle part of North America, providing the means to keep the Confederacy technologically in step with the North.
3) The lack of a trans-continental railroad route would be a constant thorn in the side of Dixie after 1868. It is hard for us nowadays to imagine the horrors of a Cape Horn passage. For the most part, it was impossible during the Southern Hemisphere winter months, even under steam.
If there was no Mexican treaty or war allowing a Confederate Railroad, I could see the possibility of a Panama or Columbian Canal dug with slave or "free" black labor. The death toll would be horrendous due to malaria in this case. That might end up even being the "final solution" to the "problem" of an unwanted African population in Dixie following emancipation.
Most excellent, Prescott! Livy, of course, had the Roman generals of the 4th Century BCE kicking Alexander's ass all the way back to Macedonia.
We need to sit down sometime and toast the Little Scaly Devils and the envoys of the Eternal Persian Empire. I just wish HT would quit telling the story of WW2 over and over again. Hell, the second time he did it with dragons for Dagon's sake!
Tom
in worlds with out the united states this is considered par for the course
Thank you Tom, I enjoyed this. Very thoughtful and thorough process. My economics gene was hoping for more discussion of currencies and market and GDP growth, etc., but I think you did a great job.
<3
Billy
Along these lines I just found a map of what the US could have looked like, if every nationalistic urge had been satisfied.
, the balkans version.
http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/balkanus1.gif