AHC: avoid the Mexican American War

The U.S. gets crushed in the War of 1812 and ends up broken up (see Hartford Convention). The strength and money for westward expansion no longer exists.
 
The U.S. gets crushed in the War of 1812 and ends up broken up (see Hartford Convention). The strength and money for westward expansion no longer exists.

Actually, that would have the opposite effect. The Panic of 1819, which was a consequence of the war and no doubt would still happen, perhaps even much more severe if they have an actual loss, was what drove Americans westward in the first place. Or at least, that fast. For example, it was the Panic bringing down Moses Austin's bank that made him try again at getting a land grant in Texas (before 1816, he had failed many times, which is why he opted instead to open up a bank in Missouri). It's quite telling when the first Americans didn't arrived into Texas until 1820, after the Panic began.
 
Actually, that would have the opposite effect. The Panic of 1819, which was a consequence of the war and no doubt would still happen, perhaps even much more severe if they have an actual loss, was what drove Americans westward in the first place. Or at least, that fast. For example, it was the Panic bringing down Moses Austin's bank that made him try again at getting a land grant in Texas (before 1816, he had failed many times, which is why he opted instead to open up a bank in Missouri). It's quite telling when the first Americans didn't arrived into Texas until 1820, after the Panic began.

If the American nation is split up and the British create a confederal Indian buffer state like they wanted, westward expansion isn’t happening.
 
The U.S. gets crushed in the War of 1812 and ends up broken up (see Hartford Convention). The strength and money for westward expansion no longer exists.

I still think there would have been a war at some point. Only way to unify both free states and slave states was the idea of westward of expansion (the realization of the manifest destiny and the end of the second party system are quite close to each other, and not a coincidence).

It depends on how badly the U.S. gets crushed. Too far and I think we are heading into ASB territory. The frontier was too valuable and sparsely populated not to get America's eye, and Santa Anna messed up Mexico more than any non-ASB situation for the U.S. would have been. It makes sense that America captured what had only one percent of Mexico's population.
 
Perhaps, but it can be controlled. As I mentioned, have Richard Fields succeed in getting the land grants. The Cherokee had a deal with Governor Trespalacios that they would guard the Sabine River in exchange for the grants. Avoid Stephen Austin in renewing the deal his father made to move settlers into Texas. Avoid the 1824 Colonization Act that attracted many Americans in the first place. Avoid the ceasement of the tribute paid to the Comanche so they won't start raiding the Hispanic settlements and make deals with Americans to sell what they stole, leaving the chance to move more Mexicans north and not loose the loyalty of the northern Hispanics.

During the Texan revolt, the Americans received support from many Hispanics because the latter thought it was a revolt against Centralism, and the Cherokee and other tribes remained neutral as they had to obtain their land grants. Avoid that and even if Americans still come and the revolt happens, it will be crushed. Heck, OTL, Texas could've still lost. They only got lucky they captured Santa Anna during the chaos that was San Jacinto. Anything else, and there would be no Treaty of Velasco, which validated their claims to the entire River as the border.

And it applies the same for California. Get Mexico less tangled with itself, it can focus more on the north so they're more loyal and avoid an American takeover.

As I said, it's possible. It's doable. It's not really that hard. Mexico was simply unlucky OTL. Doesn't have to the case always.

I'm not sure how much was lack of luck for Mexico and how much was just deep structural problems.
 
I still think there would have been a war at some point. Only way to unify both free states and slave states was the idea of westward of expansion (the realization of the manifest destiny and the end of the second party system are quite close to each other, and not a coincidence).

It depends on how badly the U.S. gets crushed. Too far and I think we are heading into ASB territory. The frontier was too valuable and sparsely populated not to get America's eye, and Santa Anna messed up Mexico more than any non-ASB situation for the U.S. would have been. It makes sense that America captured what had only one percent of Mexico's population.

I don’t think you get how crushed the U.S. would be. The North was seriously looking to secede from the South. There wouldn’t be a United States IATL if the British won big, and there would be a British-backed Indian buffer state.

The U.S. wouldn’t be able to go West.
 
Top