DBWI: What if Washington's rebellion had succeded?

How would an independient former english colony work out in the 1700s? What would it be named, and how much territory would it have?
 

ninebucks

Banned
It'd be independent in name only. Trade links and a common culture would stop any Anglophonic American state from divurging too far from Britain.

In any case, the Far North would stay fiercely loyal, and so any independent state would constantly be at threat from an invasion from the North, making it a very unstable place to live.
 
Seems almost ASB to me. We're talking about a bunch of ragtag rebels defeating one of the World's great powers which had the World's largest navy, for God's sake.
 
Any Foreign power which aided in such a debacle would face serious vengeance from Britain, any country which had internal problems at the time is out of the question, so France can't, and that's the closest power with regards to colonies. And Spain, the other power which such colonies, is hardly in any condition to aid revolutionary elements in an American colony.
 

ninebucks

Banned
Well what if it got foreign support?

Any Foreign power which aided in such a debacle would face serious vengeance from Britain, any country which had internal problems at the time is out of the question, so France can't, and that's the closest power with regards to colonies. And Spain, the other power which such colonies, is hardly in any condition to aid revolutionary elements in an American colony.

Indeed. If France were to intervene it would almost certainly trigger a French Revolution about 100 years before schedule.
 
Even if this rebellion would of been successful, I just can see how these different states could of coexisted, I figure they would of broken up into a number of states over time. They did hold more loyalty to their own states after all.
 
OOC: Washington's rebellion? Hmm...

IC: Well, maybe if he hadn't declared himself King of America and all that. What you all seem to forget is that, not only did they get foreign support (from France - this was during the Seven Year's War, remember), but they actually succeeded in driving the British out for a little while.

However, Washington was declared king by his soldiers after his victory, the "Congress" that was the rebellion's civil authority decided it didn't like that, and they fought each other for a while.

It wasn't until after the end of the war that the British retook the Colonies, which by then had been reduced to smoldering ruins by the civil wars and were grateful to be taken back into the fold.

Though I wonder...

If Washington hadn't rebelled against the Congress and they had managed to establish a functioning state, they would have been far better positioned to take advantage of the Great Plains than any European power.

As a revolutionary state, it would as a matter of course welcome dissidents from other nations - such as the ringleaders of the failed French rebellions over the next few decades - and it's population would steadily expand and push west.

Of course, it would probably collapse from internal differences, but before then, who knows? They might have even reached the Mississippi!
 
If you want wanking, try reading Jamie Jamiessons history about the americas. Its a wery long series. It spans from the rebellion, over a civil war to the nation becoming the worlds leading superpower. (ooc: our real history by that tl version of Harry Harrysson)
 
Yeah, I read some of that. Pretty unlikely, though. It assumes this "United States" handily wins almost every war it participates in, all the way to turning the tables in a few major European wars. To think that possible boggles the mind.

OOC: I think I just realized how ridiculously Ameriwank OTL is. Up until the late sixties, at least.
 
Top