DBWI: America buys Alaska, not England

It would have been a great disater if the USA had aquired Alaska for any amount. I would be considered a waste until Gold and later Oil was discovered and those would be decades later. Also the United Kingdom bought Alaska to get Russia to stop the Great Game and that they had a lot of money. But I still do not understand how all the Oil in Alaska belongs to the L'Impériale and not any Canadien or English company.
 
I doubt much would change. Alaska would probably be more developed as it would be simply a frontier as opposed to the frontier of the frontier it was under the British
 
It would be interesting to see how differently the Native Alaskans would be treated. Maybe they would put in reservations, or maybe they would become part of public policy experiments, like the Native Hawaiian Corporations which were tried in lieu of reservations.

Certainly that's a mixed bag. These potential Native Alaskan corporations could end up becoming successful money-makers for the shareholders like the Ohau Corporation, or corrupt and ineffectual like the Big Island Corporation.

Either way, I really don't think that an American Alaska would follow the "all are subjects of the Queen" policy, which would probably mean Inuits who are at once less well employed and at the same time less likely to be shoved aside and culturally and environmentally degraded in the name of "Canada needs Pacific access!"
 
It would be interesting to see how differently the Native Alaskans would be treated. Maybe they would put in reservations, or maybe they would become part of public policy experiments, like the Native Hawaiian Corporations which were tried in lieu of reservations.

Certainly that's a mixed bag. These potential Native Alaskan corporations could end up becoming successful money-makers for the shareholders like the Ohau Corporation, or corrupt and ineffectual like the Big Island Corporation.

Either way, I really don't think that an American Alaska would follow the "all are subjects of the Queen" policy, which would probably mean Inuits who are at once less well employed and at the same time less likely to be shoved aside and culturally and environmentally degraded in the name of "Canada needs Pacific access!"

Maybe so, but remember, Canada did become an independent republic in 1947 but that didn't cause any problems for the native Inuit, so maybe there wouldn't be any major problems in American Alaska either.

Also, I wonder what would become of Canadian Liberal Party Premier Albert Backstrom? He was born in Cascadia originally but had lived in Alaska since 1966 and when elected as Premier in 1978 he'd been governor for 4 years. Would he have a chance in U.S. politics?
 
Top