DBWI: "United States of North America"

It certainly strains belief that it would be so consistently successful. A nation sprawling across most of the American continent like that would have to have serious regional tensions - the sort that tend to break the backs of nations and empires.

I can understand it being able to do some of this stuff, but it gets increasingly more powerful. Without stopping - even their civil war isn't enough to slow things down for long.

Really a bit over the top there.
Yes, Featherston has promised that he will write an last one that will address those issues, it is called "The Death of Columbia" the year it will start is 2012.
 
And, I guess Luisiana gets handed to Napoleon when he invades Spain.

Then, since the separatists have already gotten their hands on Luisiana, why not go for broke and take New Mexico and Alta California, eh? And whatever that area in the northeast of Mexico was called.

I don't know, it seems like a Eliza Rose (OOC: Mary Sue) nation to me.

But, along the lines of the What kind of government does Mexico have, what kind of government does this "United" States have? Some sort of Trading League gone overboard, HRE type pseudo-nation, or did they get a hold of some remote branch of a royal family to take a crown?

Both Mexico and the USNA are republics in a broad definition. Mexico goes through terrible amounts of instability up until the late 1800s, there are a few dictatorships, they flirt for a while with monarchy by importing a Hapsburg prince but it is unsuccessful. After one last dictatorship that ends in a chaotic revolution it becomes a quasi-communist pseudo-democratic one-party republic until the end of the 1900s. In short its a mess for the most part.

The USNA starts of as a type of trade union that operates as republic between the colonies (each one adapting a republican type of government), but as more territory is gained the power becomes increasingly centralized and highly bureaucratic. Its own size makes it a kind of accidental Empire. A lot of people begging questioning if it works but no one really takes any initiative to bring change. I'm not sure if Featherston, was suggesting that such an Empire would naturally end up following the course Rome took. From Republic to Empire to Collapsing on its own might.
 
Last edited:
Mexico goes through terrible amounts of instability up until the late 1800s, there are a few dictatorships, they flirt for a while with monarchy by importing a Hapsburg prince but it is unsuccessful. After one last dictatorship that ends in a chaotic revolution it becomes a quasi-communist pseudo-democratic one-party republic until the end of the 1900s.

That sounds very ASB.

And if you thought all of the 1800s in "The United States of North America" were methish, you should read "Bastion of Liberty" in which the country ends up with the entire western hemisphere (including all of Europe) in it's sphere of influence. This is after a conflict similar to OTL's Great War, in which the USA ends up saving Europe's ass from a psycho Germany.
 
Oh dear, an Ameri-meth. Never thought I'd encounter one - considering that the historical consensus is that if Washington's Rebellion succeeded it would have destroyed itself.

OOC: :p
 
Oh dear, an Ameri-meth. Never thought I'd encounter one - considering that the historical consensus is that if Washington's Rebellion succeeded it would have destroyed itself.

OOC: Has anyone ever thought about the fact that DBWI's which make it seem like the US had no chance of getting where it is, seem to feed a sort of patriotic myth of invincibility: "See? Against all odds, we became the greatest power in the world! We can do anything!"
 
The books aren't the greatest examples of Alternate history fiction ever, but I enjoyed them and the premise isn't too implausible. As far as I remember, the reason that it doesn't have serious internal issue due to differing peoples is because the entire area was colonized by people moving west from the east coast. Thus, they all retain a strong sense of national identity. There was also something about the idea of the 'American Dream' - that America is a land of opportunity, where anyone, regardless of social class, can make prosperity for themselves. It isn't true, but it does offer lots of people hope.

And one thing we know from history is that whether something is truth or fiction, if enough people believe in it it gains a power of it's own.

The USNA in the books doesn't sound to implausible to me, simply because considering the massive population and amount of natural resources available from the North American continent, it would easily be a superpower. If it was started by liberal revolutionaries who were more inclined than, say, the Imperial Chinese government, to educate the people, and if these people settled most of north America, you would have a large, well educated population. Combine this with massive resources, and a hint of ideological fervor, and you have a superpower.

I agree, the nation seems lucky. But luck isn't always evenly distributed. And some nations in OTL seem to have been quite lucky since the 1600's, despite having serious disadvantages (Sweden is a good example).

And we must remember that when he says people from their TL would think ours implausible, he is right. Our view of alternate history is constrained by our own comprehension of historical trends, and we only have one data value to work from.

If we could tweak the parameters of the experiment called 'history', and see what resulted, we would get a better picture of how historic trends worked. If we could tweak it a dozen times, our comprehension of history, particularly of certain areas, would be leagues beyond our current comprehension. A graph with just one data value doesn't tell you much about anything
 
The books aren't the greatest examples of Alternate history fiction ever, but I enjoyed them and the premise isn't too implausible. As far as I remember, the reason that it doesn't have serious internal issue due to differing peoples is because the entire area was colonized by people moving west from the east coast. Thus, they all retain a strong sense of national identity. There was also something about the idea of the 'American Dream' - that America is a land of opportunity, where anyone, regardless of social class, can make prosperity for themselves. It isn't true, but it does offer lots of people hope.

And one thing we know from history is that whether something is truth or fiction, if enough people believe in it it gains a power of it's own.

You make it sound like it was some sort of religious movement, no one said anything about that. That does make a difference, assuming you can convert enough people to the belief. Was there some sort of prophet that shows up during the rebellion? Or, did the author build up the religion as sort of a "worship of the state" over the early decades?

You know, that's the only way I can think of for this to work, considering how many cultural differences there already were in the colonies at the time this rebellion occurred -- especially between the north and the south. A common religion would definitely tie everyone together, although I can't see how you'd get many immigrants if they'd have to convert.

And you're right, if they can keep everyone unified, and have the know-how, there were certainly are plenty of resources to work with.
 
Last edited:
Top