Challenge: Successful Sioux Nation Survives to Modern Day

[Foushoo]

I'd like to set a challenge:
A self-governing Sioux/Lakota Nation(or other equivalent concept) with modern day borders of atleast the the western half of South Dakota(extra brownie points for larger nation).
I'll set the POD at no earlier than 1775.

 

[Byzantion]

I'd like to set a challenge:
A self-governing Sioux/Lakota Nation(or other equivalent concept) with modern day borders of atleast the the western half of South Dakota(extra brownie points for larger nation).
I'll set the POD at no earlier than 1775.

Maybe pulling ,Meiji' ? Maybe they start hiring foreign merchenaries and advisors who become honorary Siox. Eventually establish regular troops and administration.

 

[Roger II]

I mean, the easy answer is nerf the US and Mexico because A) that slows Canadian colonization of its west and B) generally speaking IIRC the best bet for the Sioux to survive like this and thrive is to have no one power able to exert too much force.

 

[Arcavia]

I mean, the easy answer is nerf the US and Mexico because A) that slows Canadian colonization of its west and B) generally speaking IIRC the best bet for the Sioux to survive like this and thrive is to have no one power able to exert too much force.

Mexico is already unstable enough that I wouldn't consider no northerly expansion to be ASB.

As for the US, the easiest simple nerf to me seems to be no Louisiana Purchase. Perhaps the Peace of Amiens holds for longer and Napoleon sets in plan a series of events to properly retake Haiti?

From here, it seems most likely to me that the Sioux territories are able to develop as a buffer between British, French, and possibly even Russian interests, eventually forming a formal government. For an...interesting source of arms and diplomatic support, they convert to Eastern Orthodoxy and Russia starts smuggling arms, especially possible if they colonize more than IOTL, during the 1800s once Britain starts pushing West. Throughout TTL, they function and develop much like an Ethiopia of the American Plains.

 

[Arkenfolm]

In no world resembling ours are the Russians getting past the
Continental Divide in any sizable numbers. The Sioux aren't even the first tribe you meet on the other side, and the Russians would in fact have a good reason to aid this tribe (IIRC it would be the Shoshone or Blackfoot) against the Sioux.

I mean, the easy answer is nerf the US and Mexico because A) that slows Canadian colonization of its west and B) generally speaking IIRC the best bet for the Sioux to survive like this and thrive is to have no one power able to exert too much force.

Probably this. It helps they don't have too many resources either, and their land is poor for agriculture. The main value it has is that it's there, so good for ranching and transportation across it.

In the end I think it's inevitable they'd be made a protectorate of some larger power. They don't have enough people, and there would be too many foreign influences there which would cause strife in the ruling classes. At that point, given a "westernized" Sioux, their leaders would have no reason not to go for protectorate status to solidify their power. The autonomous status the Sioux will have will be a good motivator for other indigenous nations who won't be afforded nearly the same treaty rights the Sioux might be able to grab.

Later they might be able to remove the protectorate status, but they'll be pretty poor since unlike the Comanche (who are also cited as a potential surviving Indian state) they don't have a lot of natural resources. I think the Comanche have a better chance of success later on, but not as good of chances at survival in the 19th century due to better land.

 

[Foushoo]

Probably this. It helps they don't have too many resources either, and their land is poor for agriculture. The main value it has is that it's there, so good for ranching and transportation across it.

In the end I think it's inevitable they'd be made a protectorate of some larger power. They don't have enough people, and there would be too many foreign influences there which would cause strife in the ruling classes. At that point, given a "westernized" Sioux, their leaders would have no reason not to go for protectorate status to solidify their power. The autonomous status the Sioux will have will be a good motivator for other indigenous nations who won't be afforded nearly the same treaty rights the Sioux might be able to grab.

Later they might be able to remove the protectorate status, but they'll be pretty poor since unlike the Comanche (who are also cited as a potential surviving Indian state) they don't have a lot of natural resources. I think the Comanche have a better chance of success later on, but not as good of chances at survival in the 19th century due to better land.

In a Nerfed US/Canada TL, I feel, the Treaties of Mendota & Traverse des Sioux are likely butterflied so such Sioux group would likely still control most of Southern Minnesota, and small sections of Northern Iowa and West-central Wisconsin. This land was quite agriculturally rich IOTL though wheither the Sioux would want to utilize this region for agriculture is another question.

 

[Roger II]

One other thought: the ethnic map of the americas will look very, very different generally without a strong US; groups won't migrate and move around quite as much and some people will stay places. Oddly I could see other native groups take bites out of Sioux territory if they're settled and agricultural(projecting very dumbly from the general bad luck of nomadic pastoralists in the early modern period).