Another America: A Map and Graphic Setting

[Keperry]

What are the Peasant's republics like? When did they come about?

The Peasants' Republics follow ideologies of agrarianism or agrarian socialism, emphasizing corporatist organization of society with peasants and farmers as the most important corporate group, land reform, cooperatives, and populism. The agrarian movements originated after the First Great War, in OTL they tended to be center-to-center-right and anti-communist but ITTL with the themselves agrarian-leaning SRs in charge of Russia instead of the industrialist Bolsheviks the agrarian movements in Central Europe instead drifted left and under Russian influence and largely merged with local socialist and communist movements in relatively unindustrialized countries. After the Second Great War the agrarian movements took power and established one-party states with Russian backing in several countries that had been defeated in the war (Hungary, Bulgaria, Croatia) as well as the newly independent Serbia, and Romania which while a victor was also directly adjacent to Russia.

Today they're socialist republics, in the Russian sphere of influence while not being full Russian satellites like the Baltic states for example, divided between enforcing nationalist policies internally while also espousing a foreign policy of support for some kind of Balkan federalism, organized together in the International Agrarian Bureau or "Green International" while also being members of the larger Socialist "Red" International.

Good flags, cool beans as always.
Anatolia and the Caucasus are cursed, as always.
The Basques being a monarchy confuses me, though
How are Russo-Alaskan relations, by the way?

Historically speaking Basque nationalism actually tended to be quite monarchist and conservative until after the Spanish Civil War at least (having its origins in Carlism); ITTL after the Second Great War when the Basques gained their independence and the rest of Spain became a republic they chose to retain a monarchy, albeit now under the Bourbons rather than the disgraced Carlists, which mostly styles itself as the successor of the old Kingdom of Navarre.

Russo-Alaskan relations are not good, though they have thawed recently; they do not recognize each other and continue to claim to be the legitimate government of each other's territory, but at least there seems to be little risk of military confrontation in the near future. The Tsars have had to tacitly recognize if not admit that they're now a separate country and won't be reclaiming Russia itself any time soon and so Alaska has pivoted to parliamentary democracy and North American integration, while Russia for its part has conceded in treaties with the North Americans that Alaska may have the right to declare "independence" in the future pending a final settlement of the issue, which does not seem forthcoming.

 

[Višeslav]

The Peasants' Republics follow ideologies of agrarianism or agrarian socialism, emphasizing corporatist organization of society with peasants and farmers as the most important corporate group, land reform, cooperatives, and populism. The agrarian movements originated after the First Great War, in OTL they tended to be center-to-center-right and anti-communist but ITTL with the themselves agrarian-leaning SRs in charge of Russia instead of the industrialist Bolsheviks the agrarian movements in Central Europe instead drifted left and under Russian influence and largely merged with local socialist and communist movements in relatively unindustrialized countries. After the Second Great War the agrarian movements took power and established one-party states with Russian backing in several countries that had been defeated in the war (Hungary, Bulgaria, Croatia) as well as the newly independent Serbia, and Romania which while a victor was also directly adjacent to Russia.

Today they're socialist republics, in the Russian sphere of influence while not being full Russian satellites like the Baltic states for example, divided between enforcing nationalist policies internally while also espousing a foreign policy of support for some kind of Balkan federalism, organized together in the International Agrarian Bureau or "Green International" while also being members of the larger Socialist "Red" International.

Very interesting. I like the twist on existing agrarian movements in Serbia and Croatia and just generally think the idea of non-Maoist agrarian-leaning socialism is very interesting. I think a more agrarian/rural focus makes sense for the Eastern Europe, but particularly for the Balkans which were so relatively underindustrialized, and, since my family is from the region, I like to see ATLs do interesting things with it. As always, TTL does not disappoint!

How democratic are they in the modern day? One party one candidate? One party but many candidates? Or have they become a little freer, maybe allowing multiple brands of socialism? Does the agrarian focus result in some environmentalist leanings or is that not as big of a thing? (basically how "good" or "sympathetic" are they by modern western standards? I'd imagine corruption and political repression are at least somewhat present problems.)

 

[Da Ghost]

How is Albania doing in this timeline, btw? What are their allies and enemies?
How liberal are Turkey and Hashemite Arabia in TTL?
Are the Turkic states (Fergana, Turan, Khorezm, North Turkestan & South Turkestan) and Khorasan under Russian (socialist) influence, just like Ukraine, Kuban, Crimea, North Caucasus, the Baltic States, Finland and Georgia?
Is English still the "world language" like in OTL, or is it another language, perhaps Esperanto?
How many countries do have Sharia law in TTL, compared to OTL?
Is Korea a democracy or a socialist state in TTL?

Again, many questions, but this timeline interests me a lot!

 

[jooj]

As a sugestion for South America, could you make an independent São Paulo? In 1641, in the middle of the Portuguese Restoration War, the citzens of the city of São Paulo were divided over whether or not they should recognize John the IV as their king as they believed this would disrupt their main source of money, the native slave trade(most of their overtures were into technically Spanish territory according to the Tordesillas line) and the city also had a very sizeable Castillian community that owned lands in other Spanish Viceroyalties and feared losing them. All of this eventually lead to the acclamation of Amador Bueno, a very rich and respected citzen of the city who was hailed as King of São Paulo by its inhabitants, but he actually refused it and sought refuge in the Jesuit monastery, leading to the attempted rebellion failing. While the Paulistas themselves had very few chances of gaining independence on their own at that point in time, they definitely could have gathered Spanish logistical and military support to defeat the Portuguese and the cities of the captaincy loyal to Portugal, resulting in either a Spanish puppet kingdom of São Paulo, or the captaincy of São Vicente being more directly incorporated into Spanish control. Thus the captaincy would eventually gain their own independence later together with the other Spanish colonies.

This would be the captaincy's size right after gaining independence.

And this would be their most likely territory upon gaining independence from Spain, taking into account Paulista expansionism and border conflicts with other Brazilian colonies that also happened IRL.

Another few things I'd like to add, are the language, since as a sort of "frontier" culture, both Spanish and Portuguese could get official language status, and the Lingua Geral Paulista (a creole language that was a mix of Spanish, Portuguese and the native Tupi language) would likely have survived, getting a status similar to that of Guarani in Paraguay, and maybe even becoming the official government language in detriment of Spanish and Portuguese. Also the country's name upon gaining independence could very well have changed as was the case with many other colonies, and if this was to happen with São Paulo, my best guesses are that they would be named after a river(the best candidates IMO being the Tiete and Paraná rivers) or be named Piratininga after how the natives called the area where the city of São Paulo was founded.

 

[Deleted member 107125]

I've updated the world map with further border changes mostly based on punishing the losers of *WW2 (Integralist France, Integralist Brazil, Volkisch Prussia, Futurist Italy, Hungary) and rewarding the winners (like Narodnik Russia)*, along with getting rid of a few countries and dividing them between their neighbors (Jabal Shammar, Mysore, Oromia, Tailand, Kawthoolei, Tuva) for consolidation and decluttering purposes.

Here's Europe, as you can see Romania has been expanded into Transylvania and swallowed Bukovina, Sicily and MegaMonaco have been expanded at Italy's expense and gotten Sardinia and Corsica, Malta is Sicilian and Cyprus is Greek, Greece has expanded north at Bulgaria's expense (sorry, Salonika), Russia now has the Donbass and reaches to the Black Sea, and the former French exclave in Oran is now the bigger and independent Pied-Noir country of Orania:
View attachment 541346

*Yes, I have finally solved my Russian conundrum and decided that the Russian Revolution was won by the Socialist Revolutionary Party (or an SR-Menshevik coalition), running Russia under the Narodnik ("populist") ideology, more agrarian-focused and less centralized and authoritarian than the Bolsheviks. Russia's sphere of socialist republics definitely includes Finland, the Baltics, Prussia, Ukraine, Crimea, Kuban, North Caucasia, Georgia, Central Asia, Romania, and Bulgaria, and probably several more eastern and central European countries though I'm still working out which ones exactly (probably not Poland and Czechoslovakia, for one). '

Russia's sphere of influence forms a broadly socialist bloc together with left-wing-KMT China's sphere in Asia and the sphere of Bolivaria (formerly New Granada) in South America, including Quisqueya (united Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico), Grao Para (formerly part of Brazil, split off after WW2), and Santa Cruz; Florida was formerly a Bolivarian ally before switching to the liberal-capitalist North American bloc. The Socialist Americas face a number of trouble spots, with Santa Cruz occupied by neighboring Yucatan except for the Chetumal Strip, western Panama occupied by Central America with the canal itself placed under international administration against Bolivaria's vehement protests, and former member Acre having become a rogue state.

I don’t think futurists would get along really well with Integralists tbh.

 

[Keperry]

The post-war Canadian mandate over France expired in 1970, giving France control over its own constitution again. This allowed challenges to the federal system that had been imposed at the end of the Second Great War: in one direction, the "One France" campaign to abrogate federalism entirely and return to a centralized unitary government, especially popular in the Langue d'Oil speaking northern half of the country, and in the other direction movements for further autonomy or full independence in regions speaking other languages such as the six Occitan provinces and Brittany. The centralist effort soon coalesced around attempting to unify all of the Oil-speaking provinces into one, with the hopes that this would create a province large and powerful enough to provide critical mass for dominating the others and ending the federal system. This movement was often nationalist in tone and had echoes of the Maurras regime, alarming many and further inflaming separatist sentiment. In the south in particular this sparked a movement to join all the Occitan provinces into one as a counterweight to the northern megaregion - and, it was widely understood, to create a province with the critical mass to declare independence.

Neither referendum lived up to the greatest hopes of its supporters or the greatest fears of its opponents, with the new northern region failing to gain enough territory to be politically or demographically dominant over the rest of the country (supporters allege that this was due to the federal government controversially barring the Federal District of Paris from taking part in the referendum, although most argue that it would have voted against it anyway) and the new southern region failing to gain enough territory to have an economically or geographically viable base for independence. Outlying provinces with large populations and stronger regional identities narrowly chose to maintain their autonomy over joining in broader nationalist projects.

In the long run the new northern province, dubbed the "Pays Francien", has remained a heavy hitter in national politics, but ironically contrary to the intentions of its initial proponents has done a great deal to further the idea that the identity centered around Standard French, Paris and the Loire, and royal and revolutionary history is not the defining identity of the whole of France but merely one among many in a "nation of nations". Meanwhile, Occitan unification and separatism have remained on-and-off hot-button issues in Occitania proper, Provence, and Gascony alike, and Occitan nationalist parties regularly compete with the nation-wide parties in these provinces.

The federal government refused to allow or recognize outright referendums on secession, but several provinces were motivated to hold these anyway in the swelter of nationalism and regionalism that sprang up around the official referendums. A majority of those who voted in the Breton referendum in 1979, a year before Occitania's, voted for independence, but the anti-independence side boycotted the vote, causing it to fall below the required turnout threshold set by the provincial government and a great deal of contention about the legitimate outcome. An immediate secession crisis was avoided but violence ensued, becoming a long-running separatist insurgency. Arpitania and Picardy held referendums at about the same time as Occitania's on the possibility of joining their linguistically similar neighbors Romandy and Wallonia respectively, but perhaps scared by the chaos in Brittany the voters in these regions rejected both referendums (Romandy indicated that it would not recognize a "yes" result anyway, while Wallonia was tactfully ambiguous).

 

[Keperry]

 

[Keperry]

Hi all, the update is that I have not abandoned this and am still working on it; specifically I'm working on a full overhaul of the setup and history of Europe, Asia, and Africa so that it all fits together more consistently than the grab-bag that it is now. I'm also debating whether or not to do a similar overhaul of the Americas themselves--in which case I may just start a new thread altogether since by that it'll have Ship of Theseus'd its way into being a separate and new timeline altogether.

 

[Fluffr_Nuttr]

Excited to see what you do with this!

 

[Twiggierjet]

I'd be really interested in a political party post for the other parts of North America like you did with the north-east.

 

[Keperry]

Rebooted at A Few Acres of Snow.