AHC: Mormon fascist state
- Thread starter Zuvarq
- Start date
Wolfpaw
Banned
What on earth is a pseudo-fascist state? You mean like Francoist Spain after the '40s? Or Salazarist Portugal, where they're really just incredibly reactionary Catholic regimes?
Anyways, and independent Deseret that loses (yet survives) a traumatic war might go fascist, but I suspect that the power of the LDS Church would lend Deseret towards clerical fascism. Of course, we're going to need a charismatic Leader who is above and beyond all others in the nation's political, spiritual, and moral authority, which might not jibe with the whole "Quorum of Apostles" business.
Frankly, I see Deseret being more similar to Iran in terms of governance.
Anyways, and independent Deseret that loses (yet survives) a traumatic war might go fascist, but I suspect that the power of the LDS Church would lend Deseret towards clerical fascism. Of course, we're going to need a charismatic Leader who is above and beyond all others in the nation's political, spiritual, and moral authority, which might not jibe with the whole "Quorum of Apostles" business.
Frankly, I see Deseret being more similar to Iran in terms of governance.
That's exactly what I mean.
Oligarchic/autocratic, militarist/expansionist theocracy would also count as pseudo-fascism.
It would have to be pseudo-Fascist, given that Fascism doesn't exist until 1920. Also I very highly doubt that anything close to this would ever happen. An independent Utah is almost immediately ASB, a fascist Utah is even moreso.
Zioneer
Banned
That's essentially what I think an independent fascist-esque Deseret would end up being. The Supreme Leader/Prophet is the last line of authority, but the governing decisions would be through the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.
But an independent Deseret, unless incredibly lucky and combining with say, Southern California, could probably not survive.
well after the civil war there was a moromon movement in the west calling for a state of deseret which encompassed utah, nevada, and parts of socal, colorado, idaho, wyoming. maybe they get violent after the feds say no to their request for statehood and declare independence. the union, having just gotten out of one bloody civil war doesn't want to dive straight into another one and recognized deseretese independence while planning to take them back later and then never getting around to it.
Movement...no. Brigham Young WANTED the State of Deseret. There little to absolutely no support for it and the US would never have given them all of that territory, which was essentially planned gerrymandering on the part of the LDS Chucrh. The Utah Territory was the best they could have gotten. Also it was a proposal made in 1849, well before the Civil War.
It is ASB with the federal victory in the U.S. civil war. But... what if confederate victories in 1862 in conjunction with say, the death of Lincoln due to illness led to at least temporary CSA independence. The war is then followed by long, exhausting clashes as each nation attempts to claim border states or areas.
A battered and bruised federal government would be far less capable of dictating terms to the Mormons.
Kaptin Kurk
Banned
Do you mean independent state? Or U.S. state? A psuedo-fascist Mormon state might be possible, even operating within the confines of the United States, but not a truly fascists one. An Independent Mormon state in North America probably needs PoDs before the American Revolution....Perhaps a small South American state could be a candidate, but I'm not sure how big the Mormons would be on spreading the word there in the 19th century. Although you could always have Napoleon or France win the Napoleonic wars to free up some territory.
Kaptin Kurk
Banned
Conversely, a battered and bruised U.S. might be looking for a way to redeem itself and view the Mormons as 'easier pickings'. Of course unless the CSA garanteed their independence or something. Would they? I think it'd be easier without a federal union ever being established in the first place, or falling apart before the Civil War.
In 1861, the Utah Territory was already solidified in it's borders, with the western portion being split into Nevada due to the growing population on Non-Mormons. Also let it be noted, this is not TL-191, the Mormons weren't rising to declare their independence, it just didn't happen. An independent Utah would be completely landlocked and entirely reliant on the USA for support. Also, even if Lincoln died, the Confederacy had no real chance of winning. Even if they somehow manage to win their independence, this is not Post-Versailles Germany here, this is pissed off US Federal government with a federal army against a very small rebellious area. Not even a question of if they beat them, it's when and how quick they beat them.
Zioneer
Banned
And don't forget that the Mormons, through all their colonies throughout the territories, effectively had a "shadow government" State of Deseret anyway. They had no need to have an independent state when they could just let the non-Mormons have their fun and control everything through local government.
What's the Mormon population like around the time period? Even with a Confederate victory in the Civil War, a proto-fascist/aggressive theocratic Mormon state is going to cause one of the two governments to attack it as soon as they get their feet back under them, unless the Mormons have a high enough population to really withstand invasion.
Nothing would get the Union public more riled up for war than a small aggressive dictatorship of secessionist cultists. Hell, if anything the US might be looking for something to kick a couple decades after a Civil War loss, and it will be very serious about hanging on to its remaining territory. The successful secession of a large chunk of the western territories after the South would probably be seen as evidence by other countries that the United States was collapsing entirely, and the US will be desperate to prevent that.
Nothing would get the Union public more riled up for war than a small aggressive dictatorship of secessionist cultists. Hell, if anything the US might be looking for something to kick a couple decades after a Civil War loss, and it will be very serious about hanging on to its remaining territory. The successful secession of a large chunk of the western territories after the South would probably be seen as evidence by other countries that the United States was collapsing entirely, and the US will be desperate to prevent that.
Federal victory was inevitable so long as the Federals retained the will to fight. That will, however, was some what fragile and waxed and waned several times.
Waxed in the patriotic rush after Fort Sumter, waned with the following confederate victories, waxed after Gettysburg / Vicksburg, waned in 1864 when they realized the CSA needed to be ground down, then waxed in 1865 when victory was coming. The death of Lincoln during a waning period could well have pushed the Federal will enough to be "unwilling".
I think you are right. Even with a stalemated civil war, the Mormons may well have to be content with just Utah and complete autonomy but not formal independence. My guess is that the exhausted union would accept de facto independence (union governor removed in favor of a Mormon etc.) for several decades. A full independence declaration, however, would be waving a red flag to an injured and angry bull.
I doubt the CSA would have either the interest (especially after the Mountain Meadow massacare of Arkansans) or the ability to guarantee their independence. Rather, they would simply support them under the "enemy of my enemy is my "friend" " concept.
Last edited:
JRScott
Banned
I'm thinking you don't really know much about the Mormons. The idea they'd make a fascists state pretty much goes against their religious beliefs.
Did you know they had women's suffrage long before the country did? The US Congress made them remove it as a condition of statehood along with several other things.
Have you ever studied their church welfare system? Far superior to anything the country practices.
Did you know they had women's suffrage long before the country did? The US Congress made them remove it as a condition of statehood along with several other things.
Have you ever studied their church welfare system? Far superior to anything the country practices.
Stereotypically blond, large families, large English population, little "breeding" with others, think the Native Americans used to have ridiculously large/Aryan civilizations, dark skinned people have the Mark of Cain, no tobacco, no alchohol... One could twist things around to seem like a Nazi state, though Hitler disliked most churches that where not a direct arm of the state. That and I think that Mormons got over killing people after their first heady days. I would suggest that they are mostly pacifist but my Mormon friends had relatives in the military. Then again, joining the American military might be seen as protecting others while the German military... A bit more offensive. There are plenty of ways to call certain aspects of Utah fascist, but that is because they organize things in the way that many governments around the world would and the term fascist has become a bit overused. Anyways, if you want the Mormons to have a fascist state then do something with the vast tracks of railroad grants, get them an alliance or hostility with some large Native American tribe, and maybe make some southern Metis state.
A linear depiction of political thought (left - central- right) is not always accurate. Rather, political thought is best shown as a circle in some instances.
In short, fascist and socialist concepts can get blurry and be shared by both groups. One can be both fascist and support some, or many socialist idealogical points and vis versa.
For example, was Huey Long fascist or socialist leaning? What about Father Coughlin?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Coughlin
Last edited:
Out of the major religions, only one hasn't had a fascist or authoritarian arguably-fascist state: Hinduism, and that's not because of any aspect of the religion but because India became independent peacefully and after the Axis had been defeated.
And religious texts can be interpreted in many ways. Not only that but Mormonism is a faith that really has the ability to change itself when needed or wanted.
Racial toleration and women's suffrage are completely different things, though.
No, I have not. But this is a what-if, not a modern commentary.
But the LDS church was really racist in the past, and Utah in general was too. Like the rest of America in the past. I would bet that during that era Mormon humanitarian services were only performed for whites.
A decade or so ago, a number of Mormons got excommunicated for preaching the coming of The One Mighty and Strong who was supposedly a divinely selected leader with political functions outside the Church hierarchy.
FYI.