Communist Confederacy Map Questions

[thekingsguard]

Working on a North America Map for my Communist Confederacy stuff and needed some help with the map, both in design and details. Here's what I need help with if you're willing to help:

a) The state borders of the Pacific Northwest. ie, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming, as I can't get the borders for them right.

b) If the CSA had won it's independence, and given my pending Presidents List, would the Dakotas or the Arizona territory have been divided in two states like OTL? I know Turtledove and a lot of others keep them whole, but is there a reason for that?

c) The Confederacy and Spain fight a brief war in the 1880s over Cuba, and the CSA gets it's ass kicked. Given having to fight off invaders, would Cuba get it's independance, or would Spain retain control til the time of the story (1943)

d) UCS. Is there a color for Haspburg Mexico, A Central American Federation, or for the British territories of Vancouver Island and Newfoundland? Or, for that matter, a Communist Confederacy?

e) The CCSA and USA are fueding over South Florida, and the Seminole are all too happy to play them against each other - should I toss in the Seminole color to the point of contension area?

f) Aside from that, how does it look?

 

[thekingsguard]

ANy feedback at all?

 

[Iserlohn]

Okay, let me attempt to answer some of the questions...

b) dividing New Mexico and creating Arizona is sensible even with a Civil War POD, though the question is: how? I am NO expert when it comes to US history, but as far as I know that division was certainly earlier than the Dakota divide, which can EASILY be butterflied away (I remember that there even was an official US flag designed in the case that Dakota would've been kept whole).

c) If Spain is lucky in the short time between the POD and the 1880s Cuba MIGHT remain with Spain, but only if it gets mayor autonomy. Otherwise it would go independent, even if Spain can "defend" it against the CSA

d) Habsburg Mexico would still be Mexico-coloured if it is the sole state claiming to be Mexico. For Central America the Guatemalan colour is used often. The CSSA seems to be the first Communist state in your project, making it a valid user of "Soviet Red". Alternativly a Communist variant colour (China, Spain) could be used. Newfoundland and Vancouver Island should remain British-coloured, when they go indepedent the most deserving one could get the Canada colour.

e) Just find a way to indicate a rebellion, since South Florida would develop VERY differently than the OTL one, resulting in the US probably just ignoring the area (yeah, the Everglades are worth THAT kind of trouble...), unless they DESPERATELY want to control the Florida Keys.

f) It can work, however it is VERY rough around the edges, metaphorically speaking.

 

[thekingsguard]

Okay, let me attempt to answer some of the questions...

b) dividing New Mexico and creating Arizona is sensible even with a Civil War POD, though the question is: how? I am NO expert when it comes to US history, but as far as I know that division was certainly earlier than the Dakota divide, which can EASILY be butterflied away (I remember that there even was an official US flag designed in the case that Dakota would've been kept whole).

c) If Spain is lucky in the short time between the POD and the 1880s Cuba MIGHT remain with Spain, but only if it gets mayor autonomy. Otherwise it would go independent, even if Spain can "defend" it against the CSA

d) Habsburg Mexico would still be Mexico-coloured if it is the sole state claiming to be Mexico. For Central America the Guatemalan colour is used often. The CSSA seems to be the first Communist state in your project, making it a valid user of "Soviet Red". Alternativly a Communist variant colour (China, Spain) could be used. Newfoundland and Vancouver Island should remain British-coloured, when they go indepedent the most deserving one could get the Canada colour.

e) Just find a way to indicate a rebellion, since South Florida would develop VERY differently than the OTL one, resulting in the US probably just ignoring the area (yeah, the Everglades are worth THAT kind of trouble...), unless they DESPERATELY want to control the Florida Keys.

f) It can work, however it is VERY rough around the edges, metaphorically speaking.

Thank you for commenting!

b) That seems to be the breaker - I for the life of me can't figure out why they divided the two territories in the first place, so i can't decide whether or not they would be divided still in a CSA victory TL.

c) Would the USA still have any interest in Cuba?

d) First, there are colors for a Communist Spain?

The color I'm using at the moment is one you use for a Communist USA, but ideally, since Germany and the CSA both use shades of Grey, maybe the color for Communist Germany - if there is one.

still, Soviet Red is a good last resort.

e) In one short story I have planned, you see the Seminole playing Middlemen between the CSSA and USA - I'm just debating to what ends.

As it stands, the CSSA controls North Florida and the USA South Florida/the Keys - I'm debating the fate of central florida.

f) It's a first draft, its to be expected. Once I'm decided on coloring and can find someone who can do the state borders for the Northwest, it will look far better I'm sure.

 

[CT23]

Is there a dispute about who controls eastern Louisiana?

 

[thekingsguard]

Is there a dispute about who controls eastern Louisiana?

The border is the Missisppi River, and a 50-mile zone around New Orleans is a joint terrirory - think Cold War Berlin meets League of Nations madate Constantinople. I just want to get the New Orleans zone right before I draw the border down the Missisippi.

 

[Iserlohn]

The Richardean Colour Scheme (RCS) has a Communist Spain colour (for situations like the Spanish Civil War in OTL, as well as to provide a tertiary communist colour). I've only seen two VERY old UCS variants with a Communist USA and Germany colour, however I've lost the file.

 

[thekingsguard]

The Richardean Colour Scheme (RCS) has a Communist Spain colour (for situations like the Spanish Civil War in OTL, as well as to provide a tertiary communist colour). I've only seen two VERY old UCS variants with a Communist USA and Germany colour, however I've lost the file.

Nice file! Yeah, a Communist USA shade will be great - the big reason I don't want to use Soviet red is that the CSSA, while the first Communist power, is not the most powerful, so I wonder if Soviet Red would be the right color for a Communist nation that is barely a great power, if not a regional power.

Who knows - maybe my stories will inspire a communist csa shade

 

[snerfuplz]

Thank you for commenting!

b) That seems to be the breaker - I for the life of me can't figure out why they divided the two territories in the first place, so i can't decide whether or not they would be divided still in a CSA victory TL.

The New Mexico territory was split because of fears that New Mexico, if admitted as a whole, would be a slave state. Arizona territory was created in 1862 as a slave free territory while the rest of New Mexico still allowed slavery.

The Dakota territory, being a very reliable Republican territory, was split in 1889 because the Republicans wanted to gain more seats in the Senate. Of course a CSA victory would create a different political structure in the Union. The surviving Democrats would not be influenced by the large Southern bloc and would probably be more populist.

Depending on the date of the CSA victory the creation of Nevada might be effected as it was separated from the Utah territory to give Lincoln additional electoral votes for his re-election.

 

[thekingsguard]

The New Mexico territory was split because of fears that New Mexico, if admitted as a whole, would be a slave state. Arizona territory was created in 1862 as a slave free territory while the rest of New Mexico still allowed slavery.

The Dakota territory, being a very reliable Republican territory, was split in 1889 because the Republicans wanted to gain more seats in the Senate. Of course a CSA victory would create a different political structure in the Union. The surviving Democrats would not be influenced by the large Southern bloc and would probably be more populist.

Depending on the date of the CSA victory the creation of Nevada might be effected as it was separated from the Utah territory to give Lincoln additional electoral votes for his re-election.

Thank you very much!

So given a Civil War that ends in 1863, we might see a single Arizona terratory, certainly given it now neighbors the CSA, so having a larger territory might make sense.

Would we still have a Nevada without the need to re-elect Lincoln?

Plus, if I'm not mistaken, the Dakota's will depend on who controls the white house, which in TTL 1889, would be the Republicans, but given the other major party would be the Populist party, I'm still not sure.

 

[snerfuplz]

Thank you very much!

My pleasure.

Would we still have a Nevada without the need to re-elect Lincoln?

I would say probably not. After all the Lincoln admistration was so desperate for the electoral votes they had the state constitution telegraphed in which holds the record for most expensive telegram. That being said the Republicans, at least at the beginning, were anti-Mormons so perhaps they want to shrink the Utah territory, and Utah was reliably Democratic for that very reason.

Plus, if I'm not mistaken, the Dakota's will depend on who controls the white house, which in TTL 1889, would be the Republicans, but given the other major party would be the Populist party, I'm still not sure.

If the Democrats merge with the Populists, which is not that surprising considered in 89 Bryan ran on a combined ticket. Given that the Democrats won't be able to utilize the South for electoral votes/Senate control, they will become more populist to win more votes in the West. The resulting competition for votes in the West will decide the shape of the states and their admission dates, for example Utah could enter the Union much earlier due to the Democrats/Populists needing more votes. In this case North and South Dakota could still come into existence though the Democrats would want their own concession.

 

[thekingsguard]

My pleasure.

I would say probably not. After all the Lincoln admistration was so desperate for the electoral votes they had the state constitution telegraphed in which holds the record for most expensive telegram. That being said the Republicans, at least at the beginning, were anti-Mormons so perhaps they want to shrink the Utah territory, and Utah was reliably Democratic for that very reason.

If the Democrats merge with the Populists, which is not that surprising considered in 89 Bryan ran on a combined ticket. Given that the Democrats won't be able to utilize the South for electoral votes/Senate control, they will become more populist to win more votes in the West. The resulting competition for votes in the West will decide the shape of the states and their admission dates, for example Utah could enter the Union much earlier due to the Democrats/Populists needing more votes. In this case North and South Dakota could still come into existence though the Democrats would want their own concession.

So based on that, what would you say the west would look like?