Could the United States have annexed Mexico in it's entirety after the Mexican-American War?
- Thread starter Purrangzeb
- Start date
Let us assume by some miracle that the Americans succeed. Would any of these lands south of the Rio Grande, with their own regional governments for decades, with historic Spanish governments for centuries, be forced to accept slavery? Would some states be allowed to stay Free Soil? How would the Homestead Acts work here? Which groups would be be classified as Indians and force do not reservations? Heck, would the Five Civilized Tribes be forced to march south? While it may make an interesting timeline, I cannot see Americans of the time desiring an increased federal government spending itself into bankruptcy by keeping a large army over such a massive area of land that was so crowded. I kind of doubt Americans would want to go live there anyways, given the climate. If only because those not in plantation houses eternally staying in the shade while their ‘Lazy *****’ are forced to work without break from dawn to dusk. Though maybe they have it here where slaves will work during the night instead of the day. It would fit with their own racist views of non-whites sleeping all day if given the chance. Where was I? Ahhh yes, pale skinned Americans might be fearful if they got tanned and were seen as inferior because of it. Not just on a racial level but as Europeans nobility for centuries saw having pale skin as a sign of high class. Think it was the same in parts of India, as it showed you didn’t have to work for a living. Think the Americans embrace the Casta system the Spanish had in place, as it accepted people with a degree of Native blood, but having one drop of African blood disqualified you from any government position? They even called those who looked completely ‘white’ but who had some African ancestry Albinos,
How about Mexico as a territory? After the Civil War, Mexicans would probably receive full entrance into government office, albeit with some Stigma.
I can see later European immigrants greatly changing the character of Mexico, but probably not erasing the entire identity of the nation in Southern Mexico.
I do think that fewer Americans would move to Mexico than those who moved to the West Coast, but maybe impoverished Immigrants from say, Poland or Russia would eagerly move there for work.
Given how many resources there are in Mexico, plus the vast reserves of Oil, I think it's entirely possibly that states like Sonora, Chihuahua, New Leon etc. would be Anglo American, perhaps resembling Texas or Arizona today,
Evidential
Banned
But yeah, I agree, this story does just a little too much about a lot of things to just be a one off. It does add more context to the discussion of these stories of a ‘darker’ history of the United States. I also had been wondering if a ‘Black President’ would be a good thing for America. Because no one really asked if a Latino could be President because no one can imagine them being president or no matter the race of the person being President, a light skinned person of a different color would be bad. Yet having an African American President would be so great that they would have to accept. So I just thought if the same was true for Hispanics as well. There are few Latinos in America. But this article made me look a little closer at the population numbers of the US. We have more Hispanics here in America than the total population of Cuba and Puerto Rico combined. As I was also aware, Cuba and Puerto Rico are not in the Americas.
We are just a little off-center. We are Americas but we are really from Central and South America. So maybe if the United States was in more of a state of Europe it wouldn’t be so odd. We don’t have that big a North America border and no border in the Americas. I think if we did as well maybe there wouldn’t be so much racism either. For the most part, I am very supportive of Barack Obama. He seems like a good person. He seems very intelligent. And he has no doubt accomplished a lot for his own race. His own story does not support his detractors. They do not want to see him do as well as he is doing. They cannot tolerate him or someone like him in the most powerful office. He and other leaders of his race are a threat to the status quo.
The idea that the system and all that is has been given to this one race for centuries and has always given them advantage in all other things just does not sit well with them. This does not mean that he has had all things handed to him and given to him by God. He has had to fight to get the things he has gotten.
We are just a little off-center. We are Americas but we are really from Central and South America. So maybe if the United States was in more of a state of Europe it wouldn’t be so odd. We don’t have that big a North America border and no border in the Americas. I think if we did as well maybe there wouldn’t be so much racism either. For the most part, I am very supportive of Barack Obama. He seems like a good person. He seems very intelligent. And he has no doubt accomplished a lot for his own race. His own story does not support his detractors. They do not want to see him do as well as he is doing. They cannot tolerate him or someone like him in the most powerful office. He and other leaders of his race are a threat to the status quo.
The idea that the system and all that is has been given to this one race for centuries and has always given them advantage in all other things just does not sit well with them. This does not mean that he has had all things handed to him and given to him by God. He has had to fight to get the things he has gotten.
I think even one state in that is more populated than Nuevo Mexico, California and Tejas Combined because of the silver mines,
Not necessarily. They would have been the ones who wanted the Mexican land and who would have been all for expanding slavery south of the Missouri Compromise line. Part of the issue some Northerners had with that deal, besides how the South kept breaking agreements, was they saw the South as wanting to conquer everything in the Americas south of that line to keep up their political dominance. An yah, some anachronisms in my post.
Roland Rmoutil
Banned
All of Mexico would be made into a territory, remember Congress would put English requirements on the Mexicans, which delays the admission of slave states partially.
Roland Rmoutil
Banned
I'd argue that Congress would ignore what the Mexicans wanted, especially if they supported the annexation of Mexico, and would just establish slave states. I also imagine that the Presidents of the United States would appoint Anglo-American territorial governors (most of them until Lincoln would be pro-slavery) and would establish slave states, especially in Northern Mexico.
If they try and annex it, it rebels as soon as the Secession War kicks around, and bringing it back under their thumb would take more men and treasure than the North will be willing to spend at this juncture.
well Northern Mexico ends up like OTL Southwest. The Gulf coast of Northern Mexico and Rio Grande Valley and the Yucatan will most likely see an expansion of slavery but everywhere else is too hostile to Antebellum slavery Agriculture by either climate, distance, or population. Also the people that lived in Northern Mexico were not necessarily attached to the Mexican State as they were often underfunded and held in contempt. What happens to Mexico entirely depends in how successful the US or it factions on gaining local support or controlling local power structures in Central Mexico
Not sure if serious, given the requirements to be president of the US (OTL, at least).
If the US had started with Quebec, anti catholic sentiment could be alot less, allowing serious thought of keeping more or all of Mexico.
