AH Challenge: King William I of the United States

bard32

Banned
Before the Constitutional Convention was even thought of, the Founding Fathers were so desperate, they once considered the unthinkable---actually
offering the crown of the United States to the youngest son of Frederick the Great of Prussia. I think his name was William. What would the result of a Prussian kingship here in the United States be?
 
Before the Constitutional Convention was even thought of, the Founding Fathers were so desperate, they once considered the unthinkable---actually
offering the crown of the United States to the youngest son of Frederick the Great of Prussia. I think his name was William. What would the result of a Prussian kingship here in the United States be?

Frederick the Great was gay, and didn't have ANY kids at all, and was died by the time USA came to being. you mean Frederick William II of Prussia? and his son Prince Wilhelm of Prussia?
 

Susano

Banned
Frederick the Great was gay, and didn't have ANY kids at all, and was died by the time USA came to being. you mean Frederick William II of Prussia? and his son Prince Wilhelm of Prussia?

Its Frederick II's youngest brother, Prince Henry of Prussia. of course that proposal wasnt really strong, so it would be a rather improbable development...
 
Personal Union...

Assuming that such did come to pass, it would be a personal union, IMVHO. In other words, 2 completely different governments that happened to have the same king. The USA would likely be a constitutional monarchy, with limits to the sovereign's power.
Furtheremore, the English tradition allowed a female monarch, which the German one, IIRC, didn't. That means that, eventually, different heirs wold take the thrones, and the personal union would be disolved.
The bad thing is, the USA would remain involved in European politics...
 
Assuming that such did come to pass, it would be a personal union, IMVHO. In other words, 2 completely different governments that happened to have the same king. The USA would likely be a constitutional monarchy, with limits to the sovereign's power.
Furtheremore, the English tradition allowed a female monarch, which the German one, IIRC, didn't. That means that, eventually, different heirs wold take the thrones, and the personal union would be disolved.
The bad thing is, the USA would remain involved in European politics...

:confused: what? Prince Henry of Prussia wasn't the heir to the Prussian thrown :confused:
 

bard32

Banned
Thanks, all of you. So under this scenario, if the offer wasn't revoked, Congress would be even more like the British Parliament than it already is and
we'd be under the Westminster System.
 
Thanks, all of you. So under this scenario, if the offer wasn't revoked, Congress would be even more like the British Parliament than it already is and
we'd be under the Westminster System.

No, the Congress would be as it is since the new founded nation was not going to adopt the Westminster System. The Constitution is very much a continuation of the Articles of Congress and the previous forms of governance in form.
 
US congress would be like British House of Parliament and US would be a constitutional monarchy.

Why do you believe so? I don't see any precedent in colonial history of why the Houses of Parliament would be duplicated here. There wouldn't be any House of Lords. Whoever was invited to sit upon the throne of America would be asked to sit upon a throne fashioned by Americans and to accept a crown given to them by Americans - and they would know that what was given to them could be taken away.
 

Susano

Banned
Why do you believe so? I don't see any precedent in colonial history of why the Houses of Parliament would be duplicated here. There wouldn't be any House of Lords. Whoever was invited to sit upon the throne of America would be asked to sit upon a throne fashioned by Americans and to accept a crown given to them by Americans - and they would know that what was given to them could be taken away.

Theoretically, yes. Practically, any movement for constitutional monarchy would be carried by a strong conservatism and distrust against political experiments. So just as they would retain a monarchail structure they would most likely also retain a (that is, create a new American) peerage.
 
Theoretically, yes. Practically, any movement for constitutional monarchy would be carried by a strong conservatism and distrust against political experiments. So just as they would retain a monarchail structure they would most likely also retain a (that is, create a new American) peerage.

Theoretically collanders hold water also. So theoretically the argument is 50-50. They could have gone either way. I don't see it happening - the adoption of the Westminster system - since the Continental Congress format has already been demonstrated to work in regards to representation. Wasn't the hope of the revolution to adopt a system that wasn't parliamentarian?
 
Top