DBWI: different U.S. Constitution

samcster94

Banned
The Founding Fathers decided to go with the New Jersey plan for their system of government. What would have been different had they gone with a different path and could the Civil War have been avoided(OOC:it happens in a different year under a different leader, but more or less the same outcome)??
 
The Founding Fathers decided to go with the New Jersey plan for their system of government. What would have been different had they gone with a different path and could the Civil War have been avoided(OOC:it happens in a different year under a different leader, but more or less the same outcome)??
If the New Jersey plan didn't go into effect, the Virginia plan would have replaced it. If that happened, then an earlier civil war would likely have happened, as the North would be able to dominate the South due to its higher population. I doubt the South would win, but if the war was earlier, then perhaps the South would do better because the population gap would be smaller.
 
The Virginia plan looks interesting. It seems to create a new national government, instead of just revising the Articles of Confederation. If the states just fade away, this national government looks strong enough to settle the western land claims and trade issues that led to the War Between the States.
 
The Virginia plan looks interesting. It seems to create a new national government, instead of just revising the Articles of Confederation. If the states just fade away, this national government looks strong enough to settle the western land claims and trade issues that led to the War Between the States.
I don't know, it seems to me like a stronger federal government will just stick its nose where it doesn't belong, and just create new problems for the states to fight about.
 
For the Virginia Plan to work, people here would have to think of themselves as citizens of the United States first and of their own state second. As anyone in the States can tell you, you may be able to get people to have a regional identity, but a national one is a Canadian idea, and people here can’t even agree on a demonym for ourselves. People in the Dixie region don’t like “Yank” or “Yankee” and people in the New England region complain that it’s top associated with the Capital region. I know they tried to make “American” catch on but Canadians shouted it down, and since they’re the big name in North America, people listen. I’ve been called a “Statie” by a few people, but I’m an Ohioan first and a Laker second.

Alexander Stephens said it at the signing of the Treaty of St. Louis - “we are one nation in name only.”
 
The so-called United States would’ve actually been United instead basically being seen as a collection of squabbling states that are a great power by luck of their resources.

Granted, a stronger USA probably could’ve given Mexico a whole lot of problems and might’ve succeeded in actually taking northern Mexico, since we weren’t doing much with it until the Gold Rush, the Natives from the east settling down and the Oil Boom. Mexico and Canada both probably are relived by this.
 
Top