AHC & WI: Surviving Independent Mormon State, no ACW PODs

Rush Tarquin

Gone Fishin'
Your challenge is to have an independent Mormon state survive until, well, now without a POD of the North somehow being forced to accept Deseret's independence in the ACW or an analogue. It doesn't have to be in the OTL location of Deseret and it doesn't even have to be within OTL US borders.

Secondly, what would the subsequent history of such a state be like? How would it be viewed by other Christians? How theocratic would it be and for how long? How long would polygamy last there? Does this help or hinder LDS evangelism? Will this have butterflies in the Pacific? What would relations be like with the US, Mexico, the UK, etc?
 
Your challenge is to have an independent Mormon state survive until, well, now without a POD of the North somehow being forced to accept Deseret's independence in the ACW or an analogue. It doesn't have to be in the OTL location of Deseret and it doesn't even have to be within OTL US borders.

Secondly, what would the subsequent history of such a state be like? How would it be viewed by other Christians? How theocratic would it be and for how long? How long would polygamy last there? Does this help or hinder LDS evangelism? Will this have butterflies in the Pacific? What would relations be like with the US, Mexico, the UK, etc?

The PoD is easy - Clay wins the Presidency in 1844. No Mexican War, no Mexican Cession, Utah remains outside the U.S. For how long? Indefinitely, unless the U.S. decides to conquer it. When might that happen? Idunno.

One probable knock-on, IMHO. Mexico barely held California. When the Gold Rush brings in vast numbers of foreigners, California would break from Mexico. If Utah and New Mexico were outside the U.S., there would be no U.S. link to California, and California becomes an independent state - very probably under British protection.
 

Rush Tarquin

Gone Fishin'
The PoD is easy - Clay wins the Presidency in 1844. No Mexican War, no Mexican Cession, Utah remains outside the U.S. For how long? Indefinitely, unless the U.S. decides to conquer it. When might that happen? Idunno.

One probable knock-on, IMHO. Mexico barely held California. When the Gold Rush brings in vast numbers of foreigners, California would break from Mexico. If Utah and New Mexico were outside the U.S., there would be no U.S. link to California, and California becomes an independent state - very probably under British protection.

How long can you avoid a Mexican-American War analogue indefinitely though? Once the US sees something valuable in California, won't that seal the region's fate?
 

Rush Tarquin

Gone Fishin'
Easiest way for a Mormon nation would be to locate it outside of the OTL borders of the USA.

So if they're in the territory of OTL Mexico, they would need to gain independence from Mexico. Would there then be forces within the Mormon nation wanting to be admitted as a US state as per OTL?
 
Getting around Manifest Destiny is hard. It swept aside thousands of native tribes (many of them armed and fighting to the death). It swept aside crazy geographical challenges. Its wept aside massive colonial empires.

I can't see a scenario where a few Mormons fight off the tide.

That being said, they are one of the few 'cults' that I can see building a real nation state.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
LDS weren't really ever separatists, however

Your challenge is to have an independent Mormon state survive until, well, now without a POD of the North somehow being forced to accept Deseret's independence in the ACW or an analogue. It doesn't have to be in the OTL location of Deseret and it doesn't even have to be within OTL US borders.

Secondly, what would the subsequent history of such a state be like? How would it be viewed by other Christians? How theocratic would it be and for how long? How long would polygamy last there? Does this help or hinder LDS evangelism? Will this have butterflies in the Pacific? What would relations be like with the US, Mexico, the UK, etc?

The LDS weren't ever really separatists, however, despite the trope...

They were, if anything, "more American than the Americans" as minority groups usually are, and - given the imbalance of power between the LDS and secular authority in the US (as their experiences in Illinois and Missouri made clear) - completely incapable of matching even the militia of those states, much less the federal government.

As was demonstrated during the Utah expedition, for that matter.

Best,
 
Would there then be forces within the Mormon nation wanting to be admitted as a US state as per OTL?

It seems likely.

To get them to be an independent state, in my opinion they'd have to run further - Central or South America. Which I guess would require an even more violent reaction in Illinois, maybe?
 

Rush Tarquin

Gone Fishin'
The LDS weren't ever really separatists, however, despite the trope...

They were, if anything, "more American than the Americans" as minority groups usually are, and - given the imbalance of power between the LDS and secular authority in the US (as their experiences in Illinois and Missouri made clear) - completely incapable of matching even the militia of those states, much less the federal government.

As was demonstrated during the Utah expedition, for that matter.

Best,

The challenge does not necessarily entail separatism from the US. If you have an alternative, put it out there. The challenge is to create historical circumstances that prevent the Mormons from joining the US once they've relocated (though where they relocate to can be changed).
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The problem is even if they try for, say, Texas,

The challenge does not necessarily entail separatism from the US. If you have an alternative, put it out there. The challenge is to create historical circumstances that prevent the Mormons from joining the US once they've relocated (though where they relocate to can be changed).


The problem is even if they try for say, Texas, as the location for Zion (West Texas, of course, means they're dealing with the Comanche as opposed to the Utes), they still are just going to be one segment of the population in what is otherwise a pretty "American" community.

If they try for Latin America, same deal; there just weren't enough LDS to set up a self-sustaining statelet at the time.

Best,
 
Last edited:
The problem is even if they try for say, Texas, as the location for Zion (West Texas, of course, means they're dealing with the Comanche as opposed to the Utes), they still are just going to be one segment of the population in what is otherwise a pretty "American" community.

If they try for Latin America, same deal; they're just weren't enough LDS to set up a self-sustaining statelet at the time.

Best,
In other words, the starting point would require to have far more Mormon converts and for the Religion itself to strive for the creation of it's own nationstate, thus, develop separatist traits.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Correct; total census population of the Utah Territory

In other words, the starting point would require to have far more Mormon converts and for the Religion itself to strive for the creation of it's own nationstate, thus, develop separatist traits.

Correct; total census population of the Utah Territory in the 1860 census, for example, was 40,273, of which 40,125 were "white" (the rest were "Indian" or "Negro;" ... and these were all "settled," not traditionally "native" populations.)

And not all the whites were LDS; exact figures are unclear, and LDS were probably 99 percent or more before the railroad arrived in 1868, but still: 40,000 LDS is not exactly a nation state.

http://www.business.utah.edu/sites/bebr/Documents/studies/Utah_Minorities.pdf

Best,
 
Correct; total census population of the Utah Territory in the 1860 census, for example, was 40,273, of which 40,125 were "white" (the rest were "Indian" or "Negro;" ... and these were all "settled," not traditionally "native" populations.)

And not all the whites were LDS; exact figures are unclear, and LDS were probably 99 percent or more before the railroad arrived in 1868, but still: 40,000 LDS is not exactly a nation state.

http://www.business.utah.edu/sites/bebr/Documents/studies/Utah_Minorities.pdf

Best,

We'll need at least ten times that amount... Any suggestion?
 
Correct; total census population of the Utah Territory in the 1860 census, for example, was 40,273, of which 40,125 were "white" (the rest were "Indian" or "Negro;" ... and these were all "settled," not traditionally "native" populations.)

And not all the whites were LDS; exact figures are unclear, and LDS were probably 99 percent or more before the railroad arrived in 1868, but still: 40,000 LDS is not exactly a nation state.

http://www.business.utah.edu/sites/bebr/Documents/studies/Utah_Minorities.pdf

Best,

If they find somewhere sufficiently remote, 40,000 could be enough. The question is - where is remote enough, but still accessible? My best bet would be Patagonia, but...I dunno. That's pretty far.
 

Rush Tarquin

Gone Fishin'
We'll need at least ten times that amount... Any suggestion?

I don't know about that. Mexico had a population of around 8.2 million in 1860, and most of that would be concentrated in the south. The problem is that if they settled in OTL northern Mexico adjacent to OTL US, they run the risk of still being absorbed into the US in a Califorornia/Texas-style conflict with Mexico. Are the sparsely populated areas of northern Mexico significantly less hospitable than Utah?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The LDS, although they certainly had some success with

We'll need at least ten times that amount... Any suggestion?

The LDS, although they certainly had some success with proselytization, did not have that much...

They weren't the Shakers, but they aren't Islam, either.;)

Best,
 
Top