Teleology
Banned
"How to get Technocracy into power in America and to have it partially reshape the American political spectrum?"
I have a strange idea on that subject: Zangara gets FDR after all in 1933 and the butterflies go from there.
1936 becomes a toss-up between incumbent Garner, Huey Long (who has more support from liberal/progressive elements within the Dem Party itself due to running against Garner rather than the progressive FDR), a Hooverite Republican, and Alf Landon (with the Liberal faction of the Republican splitting from the Hoover faction in the same way the Garner Democrats and Long Democrats would be split).
Note that Alf Landon, a liberal Republican who was a non-entity in the OTL 1936 election and supported much of the New Deal but decried the creation of an inhospitable climate for business and perceived waste and inefficiency of many of the programs, thanks to butterflies has a different set of advisers around him. As a non-entity, looking at his attitudes they seem close enough to Technocratic positions to adapt/adopt them or the name/image of Technocracy at least. I thought of this after seeing the War of the Classes TL where the Pittsburgh's commune government intervenes in the economy based on input from businessmen and labor in a pursuit of efficiency was described as being technocratic.
With the empty suit Landon being attached to the Fascist-esque vitality and vigor of the Technocrats (the thinktank had been defunct by 33 but certainly could be revived by support from half of the Republican party), couldn't a candidate essentially be "created" out of Landon? Competent campaign planners and speechwriters essentially making him a vehicle for the ever-increasing number of Republicans and Democrats who see Garner as a dead fish and think that it is going to take something more progressive than Hoover to prevent the unthinkable of Long getting elected?
Essentially, during the campaign you'd have more and more of Garner and Hooverite Republican Candidate X's supporters defecting to Landon as Huey Long's popularity and chances of winning are played up and create great fear and trepidation in the establishment, making conservative Dems and Reps more willing to compromise towards progressivism or any new idea that could catch the desire of the desperate populace for a change and prevent the charismatic populist Long from being elected and enacting his radically redistributionary Spread Our Wealth program.
So before the end of the race the Hooverite Republican has no real choice but to back out and even though he refuses to drop out despite entreaties Garner is essentially abandoned, as the Anti-Long forces solidly congeal around Landon.
In this situation, is Landon thus winning the election between himself Garner and Long implausible? Keeping in mind that the Republican vote doesn't get split in the end because the Hooverite candidate drops out.
I have a strange idea on that subject: Zangara gets FDR after all in 1933 and the butterflies go from there.
1936 becomes a toss-up between incumbent Garner, Huey Long (who has more support from liberal/progressive elements within the Dem Party itself due to running against Garner rather than the progressive FDR), a Hooverite Republican, and Alf Landon (with the Liberal faction of the Republican splitting from the Hoover faction in the same way the Garner Democrats and Long Democrats would be split).
Note that Alf Landon, a liberal Republican who was a non-entity in the OTL 1936 election and supported much of the New Deal but decried the creation of an inhospitable climate for business and perceived waste and inefficiency of many of the programs, thanks to butterflies has a different set of advisers around him. As a non-entity, looking at his attitudes they seem close enough to Technocratic positions to adapt/adopt them or the name/image of Technocracy at least. I thought of this after seeing the War of the Classes TL where the Pittsburgh's commune government intervenes in the economy based on input from businessmen and labor in a pursuit of efficiency was described as being technocratic.
With the empty suit Landon being attached to the Fascist-esque vitality and vigor of the Technocrats (the thinktank had been defunct by 33 but certainly could be revived by support from half of the Republican party), couldn't a candidate essentially be "created" out of Landon? Competent campaign planners and speechwriters essentially making him a vehicle for the ever-increasing number of Republicans and Democrats who see Garner as a dead fish and think that it is going to take something more progressive than Hoover to prevent the unthinkable of Long getting elected?
Essentially, during the campaign you'd have more and more of Garner and Hooverite Republican Candidate X's supporters defecting to Landon as Huey Long's popularity and chances of winning are played up and create great fear and trepidation in the establishment, making conservative Dems and Reps more willing to compromise towards progressivism or any new idea that could catch the desire of the desperate populace for a change and prevent the charismatic populist Long from being elected and enacting his radically redistributionary Spread Our Wealth program.
So before the end of the race the Hooverite Republican has no real choice but to back out and even though he refuses to drop out despite entreaties Garner is essentially abandoned, as the Anti-Long forces solidly congeal around Landon.
In this situation, is Landon thus winning the election between himself Garner and Long implausible? Keeping in mind that the Republican vote doesn't get split in the end because the Hooverite candidate drops out.