Canada Under American Rule

kernals12

Banned
I know Canadians shudder at the thought, but what if the US had succeeded in "liberating" its neighbor to the north in the War of 1812? How differently would Canada have developed under American rule? Would it have more people than the measly 37 million it has now (measly given its massive land area)? With no national pride in the way, would its waters be used to quench the American west?

I would guess that Toronto and Ottawa would be caught up in the Great Migration, and therefore have large AA populations. I'm also guessing that Canadians would join the move to the Sun Belt.

Edit: I've been convinced that Quebec would not join the US and that the Maritimes would remain under British rule.
 
Last edited:

NotedCoyote

The US getting all of Canada, and possibly keeping any of Canada, in the war of 1812 seems extremely unlikely. Ironically, there's much stronger possibility of the US gaining Upper Canada and the lands west of it if the war doesn't happen. Sticking to the first question, though, I'd expect that the population of the Canadian prairies would actually be lower, possibly quite a bit lower if no equivalent of the Canadian Pacific Railway is put through. As long as there's good land that's easily accessible further south, there's far less incentive for settlers to head to Saskatchewan and Alberta. Slower settlement could also mean that the region's oil isn't developed as early or as extensively.
 

Wendell

kernals12 said:
I know Canadians shudder at the thought, but what if the US had succeeded in "liberating" its neighbor to the north in the War of 1812? How differently would Canada have developed under American rule? Would it have more people than the measly 37 million it has now? With no national pride in the way, would its waters be used to quench the American west?

I would guess that Montreal and Toronto would be caught up in the Great Migration, and therefore have large AA populations. I'm also guessing that Canadians would join the move to the Sun Belt.
Click to expand...
I think that Quebec would be more like Louisiana in the sense that French would still be present and part of the character, but not dominant, and would, like Louisiana, retain distinctive legal norms.
 

kernals12

Banned
NotedCoyote said:
Ironically, there's much stronger possibility of the US gaining Upper Canada and the lands west of it if the war doesn't happen
Click to expand...
When's the next opportunity to do that? Also, if we got Upper Canada, Lower Canada would be landlocked and surrounded on all sides by one country, it seems certain it couldn't maintain its independence.
NotedCoyote said:
Sticking to the first question, though, I'd expect that the population of the Canadian prairies would actually be lower, possibly quite a bit lower if no equivalent of the Canadian Pacific Railway is put through
Click to expand...
I can say with certainty that the Canadian Pacific Railway would get built. Railroads were built in every single place it was profitable.
 
Donald Reaver

Donald Reaver

Donor
So we are liberated from a foreign power, i.e. the U.K. so those resources do not flow to Canada. Less people than the "measly 37 million people we have now". The costs to build Canada as it stands now would never be paid for by the American state. Less people immigrating there, resource extraction the main economy, no population base to compete with political influence in the congress and senate.

Sorry the "measly 37 million people it has now" it extremely insulting to me at least.
 

kernals12

Banned
Donald Reaver said:
So we are liberated from a foreign power, i.e. the U.K. so those resources do not flow to Canada. Less people than the "measly 37 million people we have now". The costs to build Canada as it stands now would never be paid for by the American state. Less people immigrating there, resource extraction the main economy, no population base to compete with political influence in the congress and senate.

Sorry the "measly 37 million people it has now" it extremely insulting to me at least.
Click to expand...
I wasn't trying to offend you, and I'm sorry that I did. But given your land area, it's pretty staggering that you have fewer people than California.
 

kernals12

Banned
Prarie farmers would benefit from unfettered access to the American market. IOTL the 1891 Canadian election was mostly fought over free trade with the US, so called reciprocity, ultimately, the protectionists won it.
 

Wendell

The settlement patterns in the U.S. change if Canada is largely or wholly U.S. ruled by 1820. With Upper and Lower Canada in the Union, for example, there's less impetus for an Erie Canal, as Congress seems likelier with full control of the St. Lawrence Seaway to fund an alternate Welland Canal.
 

kernals12

Banned
Nathan Bernacki said:
While I don't doubt that Canada has a large population, it should be noted that a large stretch of Canada, mostly to the north, but some in territories bordering the US Pacific Northwest, is uninhabited, so creating administrative divisions is going to be a pain in the neck. Maybe everything bordering New England remains the same, but I see Canada's Western Coast being divided into tiny administrative divisions to prevent the US from having to occupy large swathes of barren territory. I doubt the Americans would even touch the areas bordering the Arctic. If the Canadians couldn't make them work, I don't see how the Americans can.

One of the biggest questions is Quebec. Holy moly. Given that it's a different culture entirely from the rest of Canada, the Americans would have to handle it with a velvet glove. Maybe they turn it into a puppet state ala Southern Victory, because I don't see Quebec fitting very well as a state or territory of the United States. But, if you give the Quebecois independence, you're just going to encourage rebellion from the Anglo-descendant Canadians and you would have the First Nations asking for the same treatment.

I think even under occupation, the Canadians will find some way to preserve their monarchist roots, in spite of American occupation, which would try to assimilate the Canadians into the American lifestyle of enjoying life under a republic. There's a reason why the Anglo-Canadians rejected US attempts to 'liberate' them: they weren't being 'oppressed' as much as the Thirteen Colonies were, so I think Canada's culture under American occupation and presumed integration into the rest of the US would have a monarchist bent to it, like restaurants named after British monarchs, etc
Click to expand...
As Wendell said, Quebec could be handled like Louisiana.
 

kernals12

Banned
Wendell said:
The settlement patterns in the U.S. change if Canada is largely or wholly U.S. ruled by 1820. With Upper and Lower Canada in the Union, for example, there's less impetus for an Erie Canal, as Congress seems likelier with full control of the St. Lawrence Seaway to fund an alternate Welland Canal.
Click to expand...
The Erie Canal would still greatly shorten the distance to the large population centers on the east coast. And I doubt that it was the lack of unified control that kept the St Lawrence Seaway from being built until 130 years after the Erie Canal
 
MatthewB

MatthewB

Banned
There’s more likelihood of more British colonies in what would become Canada joining the revolution in 1776. Quebec won’t, but Upper Canada might.
 

Wendell

kernals12 said:
The Erie Canal would still greatly shorten the distance to the large population centers on the east coast. And I doubt that it was the lack of unified control that kept the St Lawrence Seaway from being built until 130 years after the Erie Canal
Click to expand...
What do you think it was then?
 

A Piece of History

kernals12 said:
Quebec has 8 million people, Texas has 29 million.
Click to expand...

I said the size, not the population.

Had Texas been annexed before the Missouri Compromise, it would've been cut up for being too big. Quebec would've been subject to that same policy, but the only problem would've been the region's Catholic majority. They're not going to tolerate their province being cut up at the whims of a majority-led Protestant government, so Quebec is going to be a hassle for the US to occupy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top