Confederate states of america:allies or axis

which side would the confederacy choose in world war 2?

  • Allies.

    Votes: 42 29.2%
  • Axis.

    Votes: 47 32.6%
  • neutral.

    Votes: 55 38.2%

  • Total voters
    144
Why would it change the genes?-No seriously, why would some far away event with very little impact on lives in Italy and Russia change which sperm reaches the egg? Again no evidence for such a theory. That would be a POD itself, but it would be totally unrelated to a confederate appearance.
Because Meiosis and Brownian Motion are either random processes or are so extremely sensitive to conditions that they are effectively indistinguishable from being random

I will quote here, he says it better than I do

Alternate History Geek said:
The CSA winning the war will result in, for one thing, very slightly different air currents moving across the Atlantic. This means slightly different motion in the air in Alessandro Mussolini's bedroom, meaning different Brownian motion in his semen, meaning that a different sperm wins the race to the egg.

Because the armies of the CSA will be in different places, for one, as will their civilians. They will be breathing in different places than OTL. All that will create air currents different from OTL.
 
We are in Alien-Space-Bats territory,i have fear.
A breath in North America affect the sperm of Mussolini's father in Italy...
interesting scientific theory.
 
Also go to take in account the albedo effect on people massing in different areas. May throw off world temperatures from OTL.
 
I think that deserves some considerations

1. CSA "wins" and renmains independent (Assume the OTLS CSA + KEntucky + Oklahoma=Indian territory)

2. The US has ANOTHER potential enemy at its doorstep, so the US will maintain a larger army than OTL

3. early CSA allied with both UK and France for some time. But US will eventually ome to better terms.

4. Juarez still wins (still backed by US weapons and money + dip pressure - US does not want another enemy (french puppet). Though maximilian will be spared and forgotten by history and this thread.

5. Europe: War of 1866 will happen as OTL, War of 1870/71 will happen as OTL = basic constellation of WWI is here.

6. US Expansionism - The continent will be settled eventually - no differente to OTL, Hawaii - probably as OTL - Alaska - not enough money/no will = stays Russian (see later)

7. No US Spanish war - US less present in the Pacific.

8. Russo Japanese war goes differently as Russia maintains an Alaskan squadron which forces a Japanese covering force for this area - Tushima does not happen (Russian fleet uses bases in Alaska to recover/recoal). War ends in an compromise. Japan Russian relations remain unfriendly.

9. US does not build a fleet as large as OTL

10. WWI starts as OTL - US (and CSA ? ) money flow to Entente - but not as much as OTL. JApan wants a rematch with Russia and joins central power - Royal Navy has to fight in Pacific/AUS and NZ not sending troops to Europe (no Gallipoli) Italy remains neutral/ - French and Uk lose advantage in men when Russia falls (earlier than OTL as Japan is enemy)

11. CPs win = no WWII as we know it...
 
please tell me you're joking? you do get if you change something in the past the rest of history doesn't stay the same, there would be no WWII if the CSA won the American Civil War.

Agree completely, but to play along with the speculation, I suspect the CSA would join the allies in this butterflyless world for the following reasons:

1. CSA independence almost certainly would have been secured with British and/or French diplomatic support, making a later alliance with these nations more likely

2. The CSA would be a relatively weak power, heavily dependent on US trade and needing to avoid conflict with the USA

3. Even if the CSA retained black slavery in 1940 (probably fairly unlikely), it would be a vaguely democratic republic having much more in common with Britain and the US. Also, if one assumes the southern power structure remained fairly aristocratic, Nazism as a totalitarian mass movement would not be popular among CS leaders

4. As an English-speaking nation with cultural and historical links to both the USA and Britain, it would be much more influenced by US and British propaganda.
 
3. early CSA allied with both UK and France for some time. But US will eventually ome to better terms.
Quite possibly, they could very well see the need for allies but the CSA inherits the tradition of isolationism. Would a democratic France and the UK ally with a nation designed to protect slavery?


7. No US Spanish war - US less present in
I disagree, Yankees are still interested in Cuba. mMore so than the CSA, which does not import much sugar.

s Unrestricted submarine warfare and the Zimmerman Telegram drive both the USA and the CSA to join the Entente, helping them win the war.
10. WWI starts as OTL - US (and CSA ? ) money flow to Entente - but not as much as OTL. JApan wants a rematch with Russia and joins central power - Royal Navy has to fight in Pacific/AUS and NZ not sending troops to Europe (no Gallipoli) Italy remains neutral/ - French and Uk lose advantage in men when Russia falls (earlier than OTL as Japan is enemy)

11. CPs win = no WWII as we know it...[/QUOTE]
 
I think that deserves some considerations

1. CSA "wins" and renmains independent (Assume the OTLS CSA + KEntucky + Oklahoma=Indian territory)

2. The US has ANOTHER potential enemy at its doorstep, so the US will maintain a larger army than OTL

3. early CSA allied with both UK and France for some time. But US will eventually ome to better terms.

4. Juarez still wins (still backed by US weapons and money + dip pressure - US does not want another enemy (french puppet). Though maximilian will be spared and forgotten by history and this thread.

5. Europe: War of 1866 will happen as OTL, War of 1870/71 will happen as OTL = basic constellation of WWI is here.

6. US Expansionism - The continent will be settled eventually - no differente to OTL, Hawaii - probably as OTL - Alaska - not enough money/no will = stays Russian (see later)

7. No US Spanish war - US less present in the Pacific.

8. Russo Japanese war goes differently as Russia maintains an Alaskan squadron which forces a Japanese covering force for this area - Tushima does not happen (Russian fleet uses bases in Alaska to recover/recoal). War ends in an compromise. Japan Russian relations remain unfriendly.

9. US does not build a fleet as large as OTL

10. WWI starts as OTL - US (and CSA ? ) money flow to Entente - but not as much as OTL. JApan wants a rematch with Russia and joins central power - Royal Navy has to fight in Pacific/AUS and NZ not sending troops to Europe (no Gallipoli) Italy remains neutral/ - French and Uk lose advantage in men when Russia falls (earlier than OTL as Japan is enemy)

11. CPs win = no WWII as we know it...

This is very convincing.
But why Italy remains neutral?
 
This is very convincing.
But why Italy remains neutral?


Italy joined OTL mostly because it

1 was dependent on imports (coal from UK)
2 got a better offer from the Entente

TTL - I assume
1 Italy is still dependent on UK imports
2 Entente is weaker from the start (Japan on CPs side, no ANZAC troops, less RN ship in the Atlantic,... So Italy decides to "sit it out" (and being a window for CPs imports)

Ironically the possibility of imports throughh (and from) Italy will lead to greater foreign debts of Germany /A-H - this might lead to problems after the war...
 
We are in Alien-Space-Bats territory,i have fear.
A breath in North America affect the sperm of Mussolini's father in Italy...
interesting scientific theory.

It is pretty funny I have to admit yet it has very little scientific credibility. when's the last time you demonstrated firing even a large gun and it causing a tornado somewhere? I mean the shockwave for Tsar Bomba travelled round the world 3 times, yet weather patterns had little if any change as a result. I'm not saying at all that everyone would be exactly the same obviously, and its even less likely they would have similar personalities, but taking it too far can make the theory itself seem ASB in its own right.
 
It is pretty funny I have to admit yet it has very little scientific credibility. when's the last time you demonstrated firing even a large gun and it causing a tornado somewhere? I mean the shockwave for Tsar Bomba travelled round the world 3 times, yet weather patterns had little if any change as a result. I'm not saying at all that everyone would be exactly the same obviously, and its even less likely they would have similar personalities, but taking it too far can make the theory itself seem ASB in its own right.

Its obvious that the effects will be culmitive, in my opinion, as you get farther out there will be less and less commonalities with OTL.

Just because something changes doesn't mean suddenly DINOSAURRIDINGNAZIS rampaging around, and flying laser eyed squirrels...

It takes time for changes to propagate, so likely the events leading up to the Confederation of Canada might happen as OTL, and will likely be close... the Alaska purchase might not be so likely... and BC might go out on its own...
 
It is pretty funny I have to admit yet it has very little scientific credibility. when's the last time you demonstrated firing even a large gun and it causing a tornado somewhere? I mean the shockwave for Tsar Bomba travelled round the world 3 times, yet weather patterns had little if any change as a result. I'm not saying at all that everyone would be exactly the same obviously, and its even less likely they would have similar personalities, but taking it too far can make the theory itself seem ASB in its own right.
False equivalence

You are talking about macro effects (as in effects you can see) rather than micro effects you can't see, at a large scale these all even out according to the law of large numbers

However at a microscale the effects are different and the changes, while not observable due to the sheer numbers of variables to track (to use your analogy a disturbance in a water droplet could be due to the Tsar Bomb, or it could be do to a car next door backfiring or the lab intern farting, no way to tell), those changes are present

This effects small things like say Gamete Meiosis, thus the odds are exceedingly against anyone OTL
 
Last edited:
False equivalence

You are talking about macro effects (as in effects you can see) rather than micro effects you can't see, at a large scale these all even out according to the law of large numbers

However at a microscale the effects are different and the changes, while not observable due to the sheer numbers of variables to track (to use your analogy a disturbance in a water droplet could be due to the Tsar Bomb, or it could be do to a car next door backfiring or the lab intern farting, no way to tell), those changes are present

This effects small things like say Gamete Meiosis, thus the odds are exceedingly against anyone OTL[/QUOTE]

Aah, but a macro effect like a shockwave should according to the theory produce lots of different micro effects, such as altering the trajectory or chemical composistion of rain drops, causing lots of trees to be killed of and causing winds and a force that could be felt even hundreds of miles away in Finland etc, which according to it would all lead to increasingly large and eventually massive changes according to the butterfly effect. However, a water droplet causing some little ripples is only going to affect the pond for a very short time, it won't change the chemical composition of a pond or lake or ocean in any major way, and even if it did, te change would be so infintismal that it would probably have no effect on the organisms that live in that miniature ecosystem. Again, certain air currents and different temperatures can sometimes effect the offspring of creatures, but only if they are signficantly different, and it only seems to happen in cold blooded animals like crocodiles. Noone has demonstrated that even an outside temp change of 10 degrees C can change which sperm reaches the egg during intercourse. based on the site you showed, all the little changes could well cancel each other out and leave no long term differences, just like the raindrop analogy-the shockwave would result in changing the raindrop's trajectory, but the heat could vaporise the pool, nullifying any miniscule changes it made. tiny changes like air currents caused by breathing or blowing things up would most likely be cancelled out by that very law. How to they effect the gamete? Again, there has been no known experiments that demonstrate even significant (relatively, but far more so than a single gunshot would have on the entire planet's atmosphere) air changes can effect the gamete, even over the course of years. The 'Fundamentalist' chaos theory that everything will change as soon as the POD occurs is flawed-as said above, changes must spread over periods of time-the smaller the changes, the slower it would typically occur. a Confederate victory would definately change diplomatic scales and lead to some individuals not being born, but saying that miniscule changes which under normal circumstances would seem to be filtered out by the overwhelming majority (its like on molecule changing the flow of trillions-any change would almost certainly be cancelled out by the others and it would be as if that change never happened) leads to every single individual being different from that point onwards is beyond OTT, especially in regions where a confederate victory would have little or no effect on life for many years like in a small tribe in Tibet or Timbuktu. It doesn't mean that you'd suddenly butterfly away every single event and create a confederate utopia or something like shown on one TL (where it butteflies away all the wars and communism and fascism leading to a world peace scenario). Many events were probably inevitable, and at least some indivduals will probably be in both timelines, though of course the further in the future you go, the less this will happen.
 
Aah, but a macro effect like a shockwave should according to the theory produce lots of different micro effects, such as altering the trajectory or chemical composistion of rain drops, causing lots of trees to be killed of and causing winds and a force that could be felt even hundreds of miles away in Finland etc, which according to it would all lead to increasingly large and eventually massive changes according to the butterfly effect. However, a water droplet causing some little ripples is only going to affect the pond for a very short time, it won't change the chemical composition of a pond or lake or ocean in any major way, and even if it did, te change would be so infintismal that it would probably have no effect on the organisms that live in that miniature ecosystem. Again, certain air currents and different temperatures can sometimes effect the offspring of creatures, but only if they are signficantly different, and it only seems to happen in cold blooded animals like crocodiles. Noone has demonstrated that even an outside temp change of 10 degrees C can change which sperm reaches the egg during intercourse. based on the site you showed, all the little changes could well cancel each other out and leave no long term differences, just like the raindrop analogy-the shockwave would result in changing the raindrop's trajectory, but the heat could vaporise the pool, nullifying any miniscule changes it made. tiny changes like air currents caused by breathing or blowing things up would most likely be cancelled out by that very law. How to they effect the gamete? Again, there has been no known experiments that demonstrate even significant (relatively, but far more so than a single gunshot would have on the entire planet's atmosphere) air changes can effect the gamete, even over the course of years. The 'Fundamentalist' chaos theory that everything will change as soon as the POD occurs is flawed-as said above, changes must spread over periods of time-the smaller the changes, the slower it would typically occur. a Confederate victory would definately change diplomatic scales and lead to some individuals not being born, but saying that miniscule changes which under normal circumstances would seem to be filtered out by the overwhelming majority (its like on molecule changing the flow of trillions-any change would almost certainly be cancelled out by the others and it would be as if that change never happened) leads to every single individual being different from that point onwards is beyond OTT, especially in regions where a confederate victory would have little or no effect on life for many years like in a small tribe in Tibet or Timbuktu. It doesn't mean that you'd suddenly butterfly away every single event and create a confederate utopia or something like shown on one TL (where it butteflies away all the wars and communism and fascism leading to a world peace scenario). Many events were probably inevitable, and at least some indivduals will probably be in both timelines, though of course the further in the future you go, the less this will happen.
Some things won't be butterflied away, everyone already conceived will still be born the same people, the general trends of the day still mean Europe is set for a big war sometime around 1914, the technological evolution will still stay relatively the same, that sort of thing

The not having an affect on gametes is statistical and macro scale, as in change something and out of a sample size of X, Y boys and Z girls will still be born, so the proportion of boys and girls will still be the same, now which women have boys and which have girls out of that sample size will change but the proportion will stay the same (in cold blooded animals the proportion changes based on temperature)

You can't really have an experiment on this, doing that would require time travel or looking at alternate universes, seeing if Jane Doe has a boy or girl whether John Smith remembers to take out the garbage the night before the act or not, we cannot do this, we can look at statistics, but those are large numbers and the effects cancels out

The scale where molecular motion effectively cancels out is about 100 micrometers or so, sperm are smaller than that, so a change in molecular motion will effect them
 
Top