British victory over American Revolutionary War

Didn't Washington's army sit at Harper's ferry and basically do exactly the same thing? It's entirely possible in these circumstances for the more ruthless side to win.

I suppose in theory. Good luck for British democracy, old chap.
 

RalofTyr

Banned
You'll find the "Search" function at the top of each of the forum's pages. It's third from the right between "Quick Links" and "New Posts".

Once you find the "Search" function, you'll also find several thousand posts discussing the Done to Death[SIZE=-2]tm[/SIZE] question you've just posed.

Happy reading!


Bill

That's really a bummer because the search here fails for me. I've tried it with two different browsers and all I get is a blank page.

Could someone post links to those topics? I have to use google to find topics at Alternate History.com, and I can't find any others but this one. Granted, I haven't scrolled through the thousands of hits yet.
 
What do you mean humiliated? :confused:

He's new here, he posed a Done to Death question, and I pointed him to the Search function. What's wrong with that?


Bill

The problem with "done to death" questions is that they really aren't done because of the idea that they are "done to death", creating a paradox. Think, for example, about the whole "JFK Lives" deal which is thought of as "done to death". Then think about how many threads there are really dealing with it, to say nothing of timelines or anything of that manner.

***

The future of America really depends on how the British act post-war. If the British continue their actions (which the Americans found tyrannical, although that was mostly because they'd never really been closely governed by Britain and that ending of salutatory neglect threw them into a tizzy, even though they were really only as governed as anyone in Britain and taxed many times less than Britain, but anyway...) I think you'll see another revolution break out in a few decades. If they see the light, grant dominion status and greater self governance like they did with, say, Canada, I think they can get away without (any major) revolution, but the scar will still be there. There will always be a sense of America as independent, Britain as tyrannical, etc. at least in the subconscious. Think of our OTL American South in the modern day, and how it views the North and the rest of America, and how it views the Civil War. You'd have a similar situation between America and Britain.
 
The problem with "done to death" questions is that they really aren't done because of the idea that they are "done to death", creating a paradox. Think, for example, about the whole "JFK Lives" deal which is thought of as "done to death". Then think about how many threads there are really dealing with it, to say nothing of timelines or anything of that manner.

***

The future of America really depends on how the British act post-war. If the British continue their actions (which the Americans found tyrannical, although that was mostly because they'd never really been closely governed by Britain and that ending of salutatory neglect threw them into a tizzy, even though they were really only as governed as anyone in Britain and taxed many times less than Britain, but anyway...)

Not so. The American colonies were subject to trade restrictions that the metropole was not. In fact, the line on the lips of many revolutionaries prior to the war actually taking on its independence overtones was, "Taxes or trade restrictions, one or the other but not both". They felt they were doing the work required of them to maintain the empire through the mercantilist protections placed on colonial trade, and taxing them in addition would be a step too far.
 
Not so. The American colonies were subject to trade restrictions that the metropole was not. In fact, the line on the lips of many revolutionaries prior to the war actually taking on its independence overtones was, "Taxes or trade restrictions, one or the other but not both". They felt they were doing the work required of them to maintain the empire through the mercantilist protections placed on colonial trade, and taxing them in addition would be a step too far.

The trade restrictions weren't anything radical. Mercantilism was the reason for Empire, and both parties benefited from it, and the Americans had technically been required to trade only with Britain all the while. It is simply that Britain ended salutary neglect and enforced what had always been there to begin with.
 

Faraday Cage

Well I've seen "Britain wins" scenarios where the British back a sort of Raj of the American Indian nations in order to keep the 13 colonies bottled up in the East, rather than having their less loyal American holdings spread.
 
The trade restrictions weren't anything radical. Mercantilism was the reason for Empire, and both parties benefited from it, and the Americans had technically been required to trade only with Britain all the while. It is simply that Britain ended salutary neglect and enforced what had always been there to begin with.

How did Americans benefit from it?
 
I see two possibilities. First, the British win enough battles that the Continental Army just can't keep going, and then negotiate a settlement of some sort. THis would be tricky, as the US armies have to do well enough to get a generous settlement, but not well enough to give them hope they can win.

Secondly, a PoD before the fighting started could 'easily' (relatively speaking) keep the 13 colonies in the Empire. People like Sam Adams were (and were largely seen as) irresponsible firebrands at the beginning. Most 'americans' considered themselves 'English' and were, in part, upset because they weren't getting their 'English rights' (in their own minds, and partly in fact).

OTOH, the paternalistic view of most of the British ruling class and the growing aspirations of the colonists, together with the war debt load accumulated by Britain and the colonies free ride on taxes (they were taxed MUCH less than an equivalent Englishman at the time), means that a growing empire would have some difficult adjustments to make all around.


If the Brits CAN keep the colonies in the Empire, this bodes well for Ireland, as she can likely get the same deal as the American colonies a bit later.
 
How did Americans benefit from it?

I don't think the colonists benefited from mercantilism, but they did benefit greatly from imperial neglect. Taxes were low and often avoided. Customs were not so low, but rampant smuggling bypassed most of them. And because there was such a demand for labor and so much land available, even the poor did better than they did in England itself (the jailhouse poor who were shipped over to the colonies regularly mostly improved their lot in life). Plus, there was almost nothing of the landed aristocracy 'lord of the manor' stuff. The ARW was more about England suddenly cracking down on the taxes that were supposed to be in place already and tacking on a few more, and taking a firmer hand on things in general than anything else...
 
I'm somwhat exploring this in my TL ("The Time of Crows"); but the Americans aren't really defeated per say. I'd get into it, but my POD completely changed the entire world, and thus the circumstances leading to this would take a long time to explain. "Look to the West" also goes into this, at least in regards to a POD that prevents the ARW to begin with.
 
The trade restrictions weren't anything radical. Mercantilism was the reason for Empire, and both parties benefited from it, and the Americans had technically been required to trade only with Britain all the while. It is simply that Britain ended salutary neglect and enforced what had always been there to begin with.

Benefited?

Benefited?

You think American shippers benefited from being legally disallowed from trading with the prosperous Carib colonies? You think American industry benefited from not being allowed to found banking institutions? You think American trade benefited from being required to ship all exports to Britain before they could go any where else?

Mercantilist policies were explicitly made to benefit the metropole, at the expense of the colonies. That's why the colonists were so against paying taxes, too, because they figured they were already doing their part by allowing themselves to be exploited by Imperial Britain.
 
Faeelin

Secure markets in a highly protectionist world. Free protection by the RN for their shipping, which was expanding rapidly. Think those were the main benefits.

Steve

But as the period after independence demonstrates, American shipping and trade did just fine without the RN.
 

Skokie

Banned
and we get a mega-Canada British NA.

That's a very common idea, but I don't see how on earth that would happen.

Canadians are sensible. They were royalists and funny-talking, deferential to authority, ambivalent French peasants. Americans have always been tax dodgers and religious fanatics. From the first colonists to the present.

God knows what the analogy would be. Things would degenerate rather quickly after a British victory in the ARW. You might end up with an even more militant, tax-hating, Jesus-worshipping, anti-British US.
 
That's a very common idea, but I don't see how on earth that would happen.

Canadians are sensible. They were royalists and funny-talking, deferential to authority, ambivalent French peasants. Americans have always been tax dodgers and religious fanatics. From the first colonists to the present.

God knows what the analogy would be. Things would degenerate rather quickly after a British victory in the ARW. You might end up with an even more militant, tax-hating, Jesus-worshipping, anti-British US.

Then there is only one solution... the Canadians must outbreed them. Hop to it! :cool:
 
That's a very common idea, but I don't see how on earth that would happen.

Canadians are sensible. They were royalists and funny-talking, deferential to authority, ambivalent French peasants. Americans have always been tax dodgers and religious fanatics. From the first colonists to the present.

God knows what the analogy would be. Things would degenerate rather quickly after a British victory in the ARW. You might end up with an even more militant, tax-hating, Jesus-worshipping, anti-British US.

Are you being sarcastic or you actually believe such nonsense? Perhaps we'd all (OTL Canada & USA together) be living in a just, verdent and peaceful Kingdom of Amercana today.
 

Skokie

Banned
Are you being sarcastic or you actually believe such nonsense? Perhaps we'd all (OTL Canada & USA together) be living in a just, verdent and peaceful Kingdom of Amercana today.

Or it wouldn't be too different from today, only with an extended New England where Central Canada is.

Founder cultures are very important, even after decades of immigration from myriad countries. The US was founded by radical Protestants (New England), people in search of fortune (Virginians), and people who have a unique disregard for most forms of earthly authority (Scots-Irish Pennsylvanians/Appalachians). These American groups greatly outnumbered the United Empire Loyalists and French Canadians who would form the basis for modern Canada.
 
Top