AHC: World Conquest.
- Thread starter An Thuong
- Start date
Obviously any answer is hugely A.S.B. However, my money is on a surviving commonwealth slowly transforming into an American style republican federation.
They initially support Napoleonic France, but when they become yet another Monarchy they oppose them. If they win they incorporate a big swathe of Europe as states within their Federation. A European Spring then allows them to take even more states. Oppression of Christians in the Ottoman Empire then allows them to take yet more states and they pretty much snowball from there.
They initially support Napoleonic France, but when they become yet another Monarchy they oppose them. If they win they incorporate a big swathe of Europe as states within their Federation. A European Spring then allows them to take even more states. Oppression of Christians in the Ottoman Empire then allows them to take yet more states and they pretty much snowball from there.
The American Revolution is averted with some sort of standing committee which evolves into an Imperial Parliament over the years. During the Napoleonic Wars Argentina, Malta, Corsica and Hanover are formalised as part of the British Imperial Commonwealth.
The British-Mexican War fought in the 1830s sees Mexico become a number of Dominions. Britain slowly extends its influence over the Carribbean and takes the Spanish Empire in the British-Spanish War. A British sense of Manifest Destiny is fostered but for the entire world.
The Scramble for Africa sees Britain take the lion's share of the continent and Afghanistan is annexed to British India. Meanwhile Germany remains divided and China sufferes a complete breakdown, which allows Britain to expand its reach in a Dominion of Canton(?).
The Great War between the Franco-Austrian-Spanish alliance and the Russo-Prussian alliance lasts six years and ends in a draw, with the continent devastated. In the 1910s Britain intervenes during a war between the Ottomans and Italians, turning the Ottoman Empire into the Dominions of Mesopotamia, Arabia and Anatolia.
A nationalist german uprising unites Germany, and the country allies with Russia to conquer the entirety of Europe. Britain involves itself late, allying with the Iberians and Scandenavians against the Russo-German-Italian alliance. By the end the Dominions of Siberia, Sardinia, Sicily, Westphalia, Poland and Brandenburg are established. The destroyed states of France, the Low Countries and Balkan States see the same treatment.
At this point the Emperor/Empress of the British Imperial Commonwealth invites any ruler to swear fealty as Governor or Vassal-Monarch or risk being locked out of an exclusive trade zone. This sucks in all except East Asia by the late 1900s. Japan never modernised so when a British delegation is killed in a misunderstanding the island is seized and incorporated by force. After this China, never having entirely reunified after its collapse and desperate for economic aid, swallowed its pride and joined the empire. In 2007, the first Imperial Astronaut lands on Mars.
Stupid, unrealistic and far from proof-read but I had the idea in my head and thought I'd jot it down. Either that or a 14/1500s expansionist China get my vote.
The British-Mexican War fought in the 1830s sees Mexico become a number of Dominions. Britain slowly extends its influence over the Carribbean and takes the Spanish Empire in the British-Spanish War. A British sense of Manifest Destiny is fostered but for the entire world.
The Scramble for Africa sees Britain take the lion's share of the continent and Afghanistan is annexed to British India. Meanwhile Germany remains divided and China sufferes a complete breakdown, which allows Britain to expand its reach in a Dominion of Canton(?).
The Great War between the Franco-Austrian-Spanish alliance and the Russo-Prussian alliance lasts six years and ends in a draw, with the continent devastated. In the 1910s Britain intervenes during a war between the Ottomans and Italians, turning the Ottoman Empire into the Dominions of Mesopotamia, Arabia and Anatolia.
A nationalist german uprising unites Germany, and the country allies with Russia to conquer the entirety of Europe. Britain involves itself late, allying with the Iberians and Scandenavians against the Russo-German-Italian alliance. By the end the Dominions of Siberia, Sardinia, Sicily, Westphalia, Poland and Brandenburg are established. The destroyed states of France, the Low Countries and Balkan States see the same treatment.
At this point the Emperor/Empress of the British Imperial Commonwealth invites any ruler to swear fealty as Governor or Vassal-Monarch or risk being locked out of an exclusive trade zone. This sucks in all except East Asia by the late 1900s. Japan never modernised so when a British delegation is killed in a misunderstanding the island is seized and incorporated by force. After this China, never having entirely reunified after its collapse and desperate for economic aid, swallowed its pride and joined the empire. In 2007, the first Imperial Astronaut lands on Mars.
Stupid, unrealistic and far from proof-read but I had the idea in my head and thought I'd jot it down. Either that or a 14/1500s expansionist China get my vote.
basically agreed--Britain would be the power in the best position historically to do so--Alexander conquered pretty much the entire known world in his time, Rome has had enormous influence, and the Mongols had the largest contiguous empire ever, but none of them have been quite as influential as Britain as far as the modern world is concerned. it would really be stretching just about everything, though, and it would be nowhere near a total conquest in the sense you might typically think of "conquest" as and it almost certainly wouldn't be a "unified" global empire. probably lots of autonomy with everyone basically left to their devices while still ultimately answering to the Emperor of Britearth or whatever the topmost office would be.
Slan
Banned
The Brits had a shot of conquering the world if only they made a sucessful deal with the thirteen colonies regarding representation and settlement. All of Africa is very easy then, India and Oceania is also easy. The real nut to crack would be Europe. I simply can't see how they would conquer the mainland, even with the Empire's support.
The US after WW2 could conquer the world in the sense of creating some sort of real and effective international confederation of sorts, I believe this counts as conquering the world. You would need a much more bloody WW2 that left the Brits worse and the Soviets obliterated. You would also face difficulties creating the internal political environment in the US for this to happen.
The US after WW2 could conquer the world in the sense of creating some sort of real and effective international confederation of sorts, I believe this counts as conquering the world. You would need a much more bloody WW2 that left the Brits worse and the Soviets obliterated. You would also face difficulties creating the internal political environment in the US for this to happen.
Last edited:
The USSR could in an incredibly loose sense, since they're one of the few that has an ideology somewhat congruent with world conquest.
As in they evolve into the head of incredibly loose World Soviet after communism wins everywhere.
How communism takes over the entire world and how the USSR maintains primacy in such a situation is something left to the imagination. Every single pick is a very low probability event.
As in they evolve into the head of incredibly loose World Soviet after communism wins everywhere.
How communism takes over the entire world and how the USSR maintains primacy in such a situation is something left to the imagination. Every single pick is a very low probability event.
yeah, after Britain, i'd say they're the best best. i wouldn't necessarily qualify it as world conquest, more like world unification, if the whole mission statement of the Soviets is taken to its logical extreme and everywhere on Earth is an SSR. like what i suggested with Britain earlier, though, i'd imagine that it would be more like a confederation than a single unified state and everywhere would probably be only nominally subject to Moscow. i'd also put money on a worldwide Soviet Union being much more moderate than it was IOTL, softening over time and actually getting out of its authoritarian phase like it was "supposed" to
Easy my friend, have all Communist States join together. Make a 'United Socialist Order' or something. Make sure Somalia and Ethiopia don't fight each other, instead unify.
Have Communism remain the Unbreakable Monolith people thought it was, and expand. Make Communism have Nationalistic appeal and a Global Outlook.
Sino-Soviet split - Wikipedia
Any answer is quite ASB. But I think it will have to be an empire that establishes itself before the world becomes global. Any empire that rises after the 16th-17th century would face a global network of alliances trying to contain them. You’ll have to have a sufficiently strong continent-spanning empire before those networks and coalitions can form. For that reason I think the Mongols had the best chance.
Nobody had the remotest chance without at least a century or so's worth of butterflies, but if forced to choose, I'd say nobody had the entire world over a barrel economically and, thanks to nukes, militarily, quite like the US at the end of WW2. Britain may have had more territory and more subjects at its peak, but they would always be limited by the relatively small size of their metropole. Mongols were never going to last long enough to develop the transportation and communications technology needed for global governance without having long since lost the steppe nomadic society that made them so effective militarily, either.
I'd say a China that somehow solves the issues with child-emperors and becomes both more economically merchant focused and outward looking during the Qin/Han era. Strap a somewhat "European imperialist" mindset onto the population and resources of China before anyone else really gets going, flap those butterfly wings hard and early, and you have something that could potentially conquer the world.
The British or Spanish empires are probably the next best bets, though they have to solve the problem of marshalling enough resources from distant colonies to defeat European powers that are locally stronger. They'd need an unprecedented centuries long level of ideological will to conquer, brutality, internal political stability, and probably nuclear weapons to be able to conquer the entire world.
The British or Spanish empires are probably the next best bets, though they have to solve the problem of marshalling enough resources from distant colonies to defeat European powers that are locally stronger. They'd need an unprecedented centuries long level of ideological will to conquer, brutality, internal political stability, and probably nuclear weapons to be able to conquer the entire world.
xsampa
Banned
Totalitarian Americentric technocracy, with a sort of “Americans Burden” to civilize the Anti-rational backwards non-Western cultures
Modernization theory - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Agreed that a lot of these countries could more plausibly pull off "world conquest" through forming a single alliance/bloc with themselves at the top rather than assume direct control of every single inch of the planet.
I'd say USSR, possibly Britain if they were less racist and stopped running colonies as extractive enterprises, maybe the USA if a bunch of potential rivals are completely ripped apart in Great War(s).
I'd say USSR, possibly Britain if they were less racist and stopped running colonies as extractive enterprises, maybe the USA if a bunch of potential rivals are completely ripped apart in Great War(s).