A New World Wreathed in Freedom - An Argentine Revolution TL

That still would be similar enough to OTL, 'Dessert Campaign' and especially this last bit, IMHO; it seems not consistent, with TTL UP's institutional framework and particularly with the what appears a very different attitudes and policies towards the Natives, applied elsewhere in the UP... But, of course, as OP, is up to you to establish and determine this TL's change and extension with respect to OTL.
Two big differences contribute to it: 1) the schools in question would be established in the latter half of the 19th century, long after the actual conquest of the region and 2) it would be imposed on tribes that - unlike the ones in Paraguay or Collao - haven't been christianized and integrated in some way for centuries. That's without taking into account that there's little to no incentive for the Qullan, Aymaran or Guaraní leadership to be especially sympathetic to tribes that resist their settlers too, with native regiments also participating in the conquest and benefiting from land grants.

That's not to say it's *as* bad as IOTL, for instance I would like to think that ITTL - with the precedent of integration already set - you'd see tribes that were wiped out IOTL surviving (if much reduced).
 
Last edited:
You seem to forget that not only Paraguay but all Alto Peru (Bolivia) and parts of Peru, are part of the UP. Without mention that the OTL 'Dessert campaign' was butterflied, so ITTL incorporation and colonization of the Patagonia to the UP, would be done in a radically different way to OTL... Also, you seem to assume, very little or null internal emigration and/or that the minorities or the Natives/Amerindians, would all of them stay in their own regions. When, I think that would be larger than OTL, either rural (seeking new lands) or urban emigration and that it would affect the UP demography and, of course electoral policies...
1) From what we've seen the opnmes where they had the most power was Paraguay. Bolivia was still pretty "colonial" just like the rest of the UP even if their antives are treated much better if only by virtue of how big of a chunk of their demographics they are.
2) I used Paraguay as an example (eg), you know.
3) What does migration have to do with anything? People would still care first and foremost about those of their own ethnic make up. This was the case all over history and was pretty much the case in the americas too. There aren't going to be laws fucking over an specific ethnicity but entire communities will be fucked over. So you could have, say Tobas living in Santa Cruz (or however it was called ITTL, I forgot) in some settler city while some local community is pushed out by the settler homesteads or big landholder (mostly through abuse of the law though I wouldn't be surprised if violence played a part). We often saw "white" minorities similarly abused in Europe's multi-ethnic empires in the same way, why would it suddenly be different here?
4) You fall into the incredibly boring tendency of ATL writers of making everything better. No one wants to read a wankfest where one country somehow pushes ahead of everyone else and reaches 21st century enlightened morals while their economy magically competes with the worlds powers. The UP is still a racist (by our standards) settler country who believes a bunch of crap that was common in the era. That they (settlers and settler descended inhabitants) somehow managed to learn how to (mostly) live in peace with a big chunk of the people their ancestors crushed under their irone soled boots and that said people also integrated fairly well into what came out doesn't change any of this.

Anyway, I know we don't see eye to eye in this matter but I just ask yoiu to look at your proposals and think "Would it be fun to read about (or realistic) if it was another country?" Would you read a TL where the US became enlightened and suddenly racism was no more, the blacks were freed and the natives peacefully integrated? With no buildup on the matter? Because here we had the bases to why thee UP wasn't as virulently racist and settler-style as OTL but not for the level of "equality" you seem to believe we'd see.

I liked how the UP only realistically offered so much. Even if they are shaping up to be US lite there is only so much an unready (because seriously, no one was) military can only offer so much to the mother of all wars happening thousands of kms from their hom turf. Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure their mountain regiments will probably get to become one of their specialities, or at least the ones that are best known outside the country.

My only "problem" (and I use airquotes because I get why it was done that way and don't really disagree) is that the War in Europe is too much the same, the same members, the same results, the same tactics and strategic moves ,etc. I get that planning a completely alternate Great War may not be feasible but I would have hoped for at least some more differences.
 
My only "problem" (and I use airquotes because I get why it was done that way and don't really disagree) is that the War in Europe is too much the same, the same members, the same results, the same tactics and strategic moves ,etc. I get that planning a completely alternate Great War may not be feasible but I would have hoped for at least some more differences.
If it's any consolation, WW2 should be plenty different, especially the Pacific Theatre. With a partitioned US with less Pacific Coast and who may not have Hawaii under control, the war radically changes.

Also completely off topic, but I just realized hoe annoying the domestic football league would be having to play matches in the altitude of Bolivia every season.
 
With no buildup on the matter?
I think that stylistically AH storytelling differences and what came across as you're appearing tendency to assume others ignorance, as the only cause, if you post it isn't 'correctly' understand or if it isn't done in the way that you wanted/intended...
But, IMO, at least, the above quoted, seems to be on the base of our disagreement... Cause, again, IMO, I tend think and interpret that most of the TTL UP necessary (sociopolitical) 'Buildup', that for you, this TL is lacking... I think that it was done and meant to be interpreted, mostly on TTL 'background' and/or to be extrapolated from this TL development...
 
I liked how the UP only realistically offered so much. Even if they are shaping up to be US lite there is only so much an unready (because seriously, no one was) military can only offer so much to the mother of all wars happening thousands of kms from their hom turf. Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure their mountain regiments will probably get to become one of their specialities, or at least the ones that are best known outside the country.
Yeah, at best you're looking at maybe a quarter million Platine troops between the Western and Alpine front. Welcome bodies for the slaughter to be sure, but a drop in the bucket of nearly 4 million allied troops by the end of the war in the French theater alone. The 50 or so thousand that would end up in the Alps aren't much larger a share of the troop total, but the mountain regiments are some of the oldest and most prestigious units in the Platine Army (as they were in the Argentine army IOTL), and even then, their impact is still marginal, just exaggerated by the fact that... well let's just say that the Alpine front was an embarassment of leadership from top to bottom on both sides of the war. Rommel somehow rolled up a whole front with 1/10 the forces he was facing, simply because of how paralyzed Italian leadership in that front was; all it takes is one unit on one mountain top to sound the alarm and fight back to prevent the collapse that followed Caporetto IOTL.
My only "problem" (and I use airquotes because I get why it was done that way and don't really disagree) is that the War in Europe is too much the same, the same members, the same results, the same tactics and strategic moves ,etc. I get that planning a completely alternate Great War may not be feasible but I would have hoped for at least some more differences.
I had originally started writing the Great War update (which is called that way precisely because I don't want to make any implications about a certain other world war) with the idea of trying to "rewrite it" wholesale within the context of TTL, but it is a gargantuan task. I've tried to keep it vague to make it easier for readers to essentially fill in the holes in their mind, since I understand that it's an unusual level of convergence over a century after the POD.

But ultimately, I made the choice to keep an oddly convergent Great War for two reasons: one, I think that a conflict like WW1 was inevitable, even by the time the butterflies broke out of my 1810 POD - quite simply, the great empires of the 19th century could not and would not end any other way. Two, I want to try and continue the TL into the 20th century, and this war was standing in the way. "Strangely convergent" was my way of cutting the Gordian knot that was my Great War writer's block; it's not perfect, but it also got us past it.
 
I think that stylistically AH storytelling differences and what came across as you're appearing tendency to assume others ignorance, as the only cause, if you post it isn't 'correctly' understand or if it isn't done in the way that you wanted/intended...
But, IMO, at least, the above quoted, seems to be on the base of our disagreement... Cause, again, IMO, I tend think and interpret that most of the TTL UP necessary (sociopolitical) 'Buildup', that for you, this TL is lacking... I think that it was done and meant to be interpreted, mostly on TTL 'background' and/or to be extrapolated from this TL development...
I barely understood a word of what you said but that aside, the story has plenty of buildup for an alternate ethnic makeup and socioeconomic standing of minorities, that isn't in doubt.

What it is in doubt is that such would lead to your fixfic tier everyone is friends with everyone while they sing kumbaya. The fact that the friking author said as much but that you are still pretending this is just me projecting is fucking hilarious. But anyway, you can keep on believing what you want.


But ultimately, I made the choice to keep an oddly convergent Great War for two reasons: one, I think that a conflict like WW1 was inevitable, even by the time the butterflies broke out of my 1810 POD - quite simply, the great empires of the 19th century could not and would not end any other way. Two, I want to try and continue the TL into the 20th century, and this war was standing in the way. "Strangely convergent" was my way of cutting the Gordian knot that was my Great War writer's block; it's not perfect, but it also got us past it
Oh no, I completely get this and I agree. I was just complaining aloud.

In general my only complain is that it fits too well with OTL. I think changing the years at least would have been better, maybe shake up the composition of the sides a little too (eg Austria-Hungary needs not be a thing for its constituent parts to join the Central powers).

Nevertheless, I (like you) think its better to get this done with and continue with the timeline instead of getting bogged down by what is essentially a "secondary storyline" as far as the UP's story goes.
 
Yeah, at best you're looking at maybe a quarter million Platine troops between the Western and Alpine front. Welcome bodies for the slaughter to be sure, but a drop in the bucket of nearly 4 million allied troops by the end of the war in the French theater alone. The 50 or so thousand that would end up in the Alps aren't much larger a share of the troop total, but the mountain regiments are some of the oldest and most prestigious units in the Platine Army (as they were in the Argentine army IOTL), and even then, their impact is still marginal, just exaggerated by the fact that... well let's just say that the Alpine front was an embarassment of leadership from top to bottom on both sides of the war. Rommel somehow rolled up a whole front with 1/10 the forces he was facing, simply because of how paralyzed Italian leadership in that front was; all it takes is one unit on one mountain top to sound the alarm and fight back to prevent the collapse that followed Caporetto IOTL.

I had originally started writing the Great War update (which is called that way precisely because I don't want to make any implications about a certain other world war) with the idea of trying to "rewrite it" wholesale within the context of TTL, but it is a gargantuan task. I've tried to keep it vague to make it easier for readers to essentially fill in the holes in their mind, since I understand that it's an unusual level of convergence over a century after the POD.

But ultimately, I made the choice to keep an oddly convergent Great War for two reasons: one, I think that a conflict like WW1 was inevitable, even by the time the butterflies broke out of my 1810 POD - quite simply, the great empires of the 19th century could not and would not end any other way. Two, I want to try and continue the TL into the 20th century, and this war was standing in the way. "Strangely convergent" was my way of cutting the Gordian knot that was my Great War writer's block; it's not perfect, but it also got us past it.
I liked it. I'm not supremely knowledgeable about Europe during that time period, so I wouldn't be able to point out any flaws I dont think, but I enjoyed the developments and I'm excited to see what happens next.
 
I barely understood a word of what you said but that aside, the story has plenty of buildup for an alternate ethnic makeup and socioeconomic standing of minorities, that isn't in doubt.

What it is in doubt is that such would lead to your fixfic tier everyone is friends with everyone while they sing kumbaya. The fact that the friking author said as much but that you are still pretending this is just me projecting is fucking hilarious.
It's very curious as you keep claiming that you aren't able to understand my post, but at same time you were able to develop and build a very aggressive, btw, rant in answer to it! Also, IDK why you think that is necessary to be so fucking aggressive against not only against me but everyone in this thread.
But anyway, you can keep on believing what you want.
Likewise.
 
Well the Great War post was lackluster but I understand how much of a gargantuan task it is to write an alternate Great War.

On the topic of USA, could you please inform how did Texas and California went independent? Was it due to some presidents changing from OTL? I know that Texas had their own nationalists so them going independent was pretty possible but I don't know much about California.

I wonder what La Plata is going to get from the Great War. I thought about some German colonies in the Pacific and Africa (Namibia) but I don't think the other Great Powers (British) will let them have it.
 
On the topic of USA, could you please inform how did Texas and California went independent? Was it due to some presidents changing from OTL? I know that Texas had their own nationalists so them going independent was pretty possible but I don't know much about California.
I would also like some more information on the topic, but allow me to point out hay California going independent could be a direct consequence of Texan Independence, purely due to geographic location given that Texas stands in the middle.
I wonder what La Plata is going to get from the Great War. I thought about some German colonies in the Pacific and Africa (Namibia) but I don't think the other Great Powers (British) will let them have it.
The UP don’t really need land colonies like German South West Africa, since they have more than enough land and natural resources to sustain and thrive. The only useful thing about it would be a naval base to keep some tighter control over the South Atlantic, but that would only require a small part.

Some islands in the Pacific may be possible if the British consider them worthless enough to give them to a friendly nation. They would probably be some of the small ones that would only be really useful as a naval base and a waypoint for trade, but not much more. The Samoa Islands could perhaps be a possibility

If this happens, and other American nations like Colombia also get some islands out of this deal, I could see it being relevant in a potential Pacific theatre for WW2.
 
Super excited to see this timeline update again! Although WWI being the same is a bit of a letdown from an “everything must be butterflied” alternate history perspective, I don’t really agree with that, and I think it makes more sense to keep things largely the same since this story heavily focuses on La Plata and Latin America in general. I’d rather have a well-written redux of OTL events from a different perspective than a lackluster attempt to jam in stereotypical alternate history tropes without any context beforehand. Timelines like this that are written for a specific nation don’t need to do the complete divergence from real people and events that only parallels OTL history like “Look To the West,” nor are they well-suited for a microscopic day-by-day examination of the effects of a single divergence like “A Blunted Sickle.” That being said, I remember arguing in this thread awhile ago that California and Texas would inevitably be subsumed into the United States, and I don’t really think that’s true anymore. Manifest Destiny was hardly inevitable, and seeing the effects of both nations remaining independent will be interesting even though this timeline is La Plata-focused.
 
Who owns Hawaii?

Also has any degree of arms industry developed in the UP during the war? I could see it happening due to the demand from the Europeans, added to the sudden stop to their exportations. Also how possible would it be to create a somewhat passable naval industry that would allow to build battleships by themselves?
 
On the topic of USA, could you please inform how did Texas and California went independent? Was it due to some presidents changing from OTL? I know that Texas had their own nationalists so them going independent was pretty possible but I don't know much about California.
Super excited to see this timeline update again! Although WWI being the same is a bit of a letdown from an “everything must be butterflied” alternate history perspective, I don’t really agree with that, and I think it makes more sense to keep things largely the same since this story heavily focuses on La Plata and Latin America in general. I’d rather have a well-written redux of OTL events from a different perspective than a lackluster attempt to jam in stereotypical alternate history tropes without any context beforehand. Timelines like this that are written for a specific nation don’t need to do the complete divergence from real people and events that only parallels OTL history like “Look To the West,” nor are they well-suited for a microscopic day-by-day examination of the effects of a single divergence like “A Blunted Sickle.” That being said, I remember arguing in this thread awhile ago that California and Texas would inevitably be subsumed into the United States, and I don’t really think that’s true anymore. Manifest Destiny was hardly inevitable, and seeing the effects of both nations remaining independent will be interesting even though this timeline is La Plata-focused.
Texas becomes independent in similar but not identical circumstances than IOTL, a combination of American filibusters and local anti-centralist tendencies exploding into an armed revolution that leads to Texan independence in 1836. California and Yucatan Republics are also proclaimed, but they are unable to defeat the Mexican forces sent to reconquer them - a flotilla to California in 1837 and a rebuilt army to Yucatan in 1838 - and by the time of the Mexican-American war ITTL, the US Army faces stiffer resistance, and is unable to essentially walk over the Southwest. As Mexico continues to hold American troops near the border, the UK eventually gets involved by unsubtly sailing a frigate into Veracruz to make an American naval invasion potentially riskier than the US intended, and the 1844 election goes to the Whigs instead of a pro-Annexation Democrat.

In the wake of this divergence, the issue of expansion through war with Mexico becomes entangled with wider debates about slavery, blunting US aggression towards the Mexican northwest. In my original notes I believe I had California declaring independence in 1848, as a liberal-counter revolution to a new conservative shift in the central Mexico, and remains independent as an admixture of Mexican, American, Mormon, Native and East Asian immigrants. The US would still reach the Pacific, but would do so primarily through the Oregon.
I wonder what La Plata is going to get from the Great War. I thought about some German colonies in the Pacific and Africa (Namibia) but I don't think the other Great Powers (British) will let them have it.
I don't see the United Provinces being keen on getting them, they don't have the same interest in refueling stations for a navy capable of circumnavigation, it's just not something they really need. Chile may get involved in the race to occupy some of the German colonies in the Pacific, but otherwise none of the New World nations gets any land.
Who owns Hawaii?
Hadn't come up by the POD, haven't decided yet. Independent may be an option, colonial republic could still happen, but admittedly it is less likely to be American ITTL.
Also has any degree of arms industry developed in the UP during the war? I could see it happening due to the demand from the Europeans, added to the sudden stop to their exportations. Also how possible would it be to create a somewhat passable naval industry that would allow to build battleships by themselves?
There is a domestic gun and artillery industry that allows the UP to be self-sufficient in small arms and smaller-caliber artillery, but it has some challenges with higher scale artillery. It also has a domestic shipbuilding industry that can adequately supply the navy up to light cruisers, but anything bigger is still generally imported. Battleships are probably still beyond the capabilities of the United Provinces, and it just hasn't had a need to invest when it could buy from the British.
 
1920 UP Election Infobox.png

Teaser for the next update! Turnout (and thus vote totals) subject to change.
 
There is a domestic gun and artillery industry that allows the UP to be self-sufficient in small arms and smaller-caliber artillery, but it has some challenges with higher scale artillery. It also has a domestic shipbuilding industry that can adequately supply the navy up to light cruisers, but anything bigger is still generally imported. Battleships are probably still beyond the capabilities of the United Provinces, and it just hasn't had a need to invest when it could buy from the British.
The bolded bit is actually a pretty big deal, not many people outside of Europe (actually I think only the US?) could build shit as far as warships or big vessels in general were concerned. So it would probably become relevant during the Great War, nevermind after.
 
The bolded bit is actually a pretty big deal, not many people outside of Europe (actually I think only the US?) could build shit as far as warships or big vessels in general were concerned. So it would probably become relevant during the Great War, nevermind after.
You may actually know better than I on this subject, would there be much carryover capacity from pre-Dreadnaught light cruisers (that became obsolete with the advent of the Dreadnaught and the subsequent innovations in heavy ships)? I'm thinking that what would become known as heavy cruisers - and would develop into pocket battleships - are beyond the industrial capacity of the United Provinces. Ironically, I can see the country taking to aircraft carriers pretty keenly, as the biggest impediment the country has in building bigger warships is the inability to produce the heavy armament for them.

To put it more succinctly: the UP can produce ships up to the lower bound of the "cruiser" classification, essentially covering all of its brown-water needs domestically. The keystones of its blue-water fleet are imported, but much (but not all) of its escort craft are also sourced locally.
 
You may actually know better than I on this subject, would there be much carryover capacity from pre-Dreadnaught light cruisers (that became obsolete with the advent of the Dreadnaught and the subsequent innovations in heavy ships)? I'm thinking that what would become known as heavy cruisers - and would develop into pocket battleships - are beyond the industrial capacity of the United Provinces. Ironically, I can see the country taking to aircraft carriers pretty keenly, as the biggest impediment the country has in building bigger warships is the inability to produce the heavy armament for them.

To put it more succinctly: the UP can produce ships up to the lower bound of the "cruiser" classification, essentially covering all of its brown-water needs domestically. The keystones of its blue-water fleet are imported, but much (but not all) of its escort craft are also sourced locally.
So you say that when the carriers win traction they would be able to build them? That might lead to the UP having some carriers by WW2, especially if aircraft can be produced locally, which should be easier than ships
 
You may actually know better than I on this subject, would there be much carryover capacity from pre-Dreadnaught light cruisers (that became obsolete with the advent of the Dreadnaught and the subsequent innovations in heavy ships)? I'm thinking that what would become known as heavy cruisers - and would develop into pocket battleships - are beyond the industrial capacity of the United Provinces. Ironically, I can see the country taking to aircraft carriers pretty keenly, as the biggest impediment the country has in building bigger warships is the inability to produce the heavy armament for them.

To put it more succinctly: the UP can produce ships up to the lower bound of the "cruiser" classification, essentially covering all of its brown-water needs domestically. The keystones of its blue-water fleet are imported, but much (but not all) of its escort craft are also sourced locally.
I mean, I'm no shipbuilding expert but from what I understand the available infraestructure and expertise alone would give them an edge on everyone else who wasn't already into the shipbuilding game, so catching up to the new advances and paradigms wouldn't be that hard, especially with the apocalyptic issues that the Great War would bring.

Regarding carriers, I'm not sure. Part of the reason to build them was to sidestep issues regarding naval treaties and even then they are a power projection tool. It makes sense for the Great Powers to have them but the UP isn't exactly big on long-range power projection to my knowledge. I could see them building at least one as a testbed if everyone else did, if only due to the fact that it's better to have them than not.
 
Top