Bookmark1995
Banned
I'm simply giving an example of why GDP and the production of primary resources is not a useful metric for "quality of life".
A person from Equatorial Guinea, for example, would find Mississippi to be paradise.
Dixieland: The Country of Tomorrow, Everyday (yet another Confederate TL)
- Thread starter TastySpam
- Start date
I'm simply giving an example of why GDP and the production of primary resources is not a useful metric for "quality of life".
A person from Equatorial Guinea, for example, would find Mississippi to be paradise.
It's a two way street. The Americans have become far more aggressive than most people could have imagined. First there was the intervention in the Atacama, which was a very significant place at the time, then there was the intervention in the Spanish War, then there was the beef with Canada, then the meddling in Brazil and return of the obnoxious (to Europeans) Monroe doctrine and the naval buildup and the whackjob political party and now they're triggering a war against China from accross the entire Pacific. Britain must be getting real damn sick of the USA's shenanigans by now.
On the other hand, what can they do? Victorian Britain was typically rather risk averse and the country really needs to find a way to avoid getting into any war with the Americans that could devastate the entire world economy, threaten Canada (I'm not saying they're actually prepared to attempt to invade, since that would go way beyond the scope of the punitive expedition against China) while simultaneously trying to avoid completely abandoning China and everything they've worked so hard for there. I have a feeling Britain will have to make a compromise. I mean, as with Japan OTL, their support for the Qing, while important, is surely not without limits, especially with the boxers around and against a country with which they have pretty strong ties, even if relations are poor.
BTW, we've still got that the brewing war in South America.
Last edited:
Well, also keep in mind "British" is a wide category of people. There's the British government in London...and then there are random dudes on the ground. The famous Robinson-Gallagher argument about British imperialism was that it basically wasn't something the British government itself largely wanted, but rather an outcome of "free trade" (ie, British merchants come in - and the government only unhappily acts to protect them later when things go South). When it was presented with clear choices, Britain tended to avoid war (it really gave Germany every chance to prevent British entry into WWI). British imperialistic intervention tended to be Britain coming to the rescue of non-central government actors or non-state actors. OTL, the Zulu War wasn't really something London itself wanted (they actually wanted peace) - it was local British colonial officials (who London loathed).
Similarly in this, the ITL British government really doesn't want a confrontation with anyone. ITL, the American (and North German and Italian) privileges are largely because Britain intentionally cut them all a slice of the pie to keep them happy. It's local British merchants who go "I'm looking out for #1 - me myself - and if that means throwing the Americans to the Boxers and stealing their stuff, so be it."
I wonder if the British will get directly involved in the approaching Qing-American War?
Wow! Thanks. In all honesty, I doubt that would happen because this TL strikes me as one that has a smaller number of more devoted followers. Which is fine for me, I'd take quality over quantity any day.
As well it ought to - you've captured two highly probable things that most CSA victory scenarios leave out - inevitable and crushing US soft power dominance and greater US military adventurism.
Chapter 68 - The Crispi Era and the Birth of Fascism
This doesn't specifically retcon THAT much in previous updates (a little, but I've made those edits already), but it definitely fleshes out some stuff that I've honestly totally neglected to make things more plausible. For example, the Roman Union is now founded in 1878 instead of 1877 (it makes much more sense that way). And pretty much an entire European great power that deserves a lot more updates than I've actually given it.
The Crispi Era and the Birth of Fascism
The man who would dominate Italian affairs would never actually serve as its leader, but would live as the Damocles Sword hanging above the political class. Garibaldi was always the father of Italian unification, but the manner in which he would complete it would shock many. In 1867, just after Napoleon III triumphed in the Luxembourg crisis with the support of Italy and Austria, Garibaldi launched his long-planned invasion of the Papal States. On November 3rd, 1867, Garibaldi's troops smashed Papal troops at the Battle of Mentano. The Papal States had called for French support, but Napoleon III realized that he had no ability to intervene in Rome just after the Italians had backed him in Luxembourg.
In many ways, this would change Italian and global history forever, as Pope Pius IX was forced to cancel the planned First Vatican Council. Garibaldi's troops stopped just short of the Vatican City, but the global ramifications were obvious: the Papal States had been crushed by Italian liberal revolutionaries. In 1867, Garibaldi announced the completion of the Risorgimento. He quickly became an even larger than life hero than he had previously been.
This shook Italian politics. King Victor Emmanuel II of Italy had so staunchly opposed Garibaldi's attack on the Papal States, he fired Prime Minister Urbano Rattazzi, a moderate member of the Historical Left who tried to compromise with the Historical Right, for failing to stop the invasion. The Historical Left had won the 1867 elections, but Rattazzi was replaced by Luigi Federico Menabrea, who was then later replaced by the even more conservative Giovanni Lanza. The Historical Left flared with outrage and after Garibaldi officially favored Crispi, the radical Crispi seized control of the Historical Left, placing his supporters in important positions. In the November 1870 elections, with Garibaldi's endorsement, Crispi's Historical Left sailed to a triumphant victory. He campaigned not only for Garibaldi, but against France and against the Italian alliance with France and Austria.
The Spanish succession crisis was still unresolved in November 1870, largely because the Prussians tried not to push Napoleon III until Crispi's expected victory in Italy. Just as the Prussians expected, Crispi immediately pulled Italy out of its alliance with France and Austria. The shock of Italian withdrawal shocked Napoleon III more than he expected, as he always saw France as a friend of Italy, especially because Napoleon III had personally helped bring about Italian unification. He was so shocked, that he failed to take the bait of the Ems Dispatch, simply folding and allowing the Hohenzollerns to ascend to power in Spain.
Crispi would again change history when in 1871, he flat out rejected the proposed Law of Guarantee. The anticlerical Crispi believed that the Pope should hold absolutely no sovereign prerogatives. This outraged Pius IX, who famously fled to Avignon, further inciting Garibaldi's men to invade the Vatican directly this time, burning much of it to the ground and permanently alienating Catholics from the Italian government. For all intents and purposes, this guaranteed Crispi would rule perpetually. As a result of the Pope's non-expedit banning Catholics from voting in Italian elections, the Italian elections would have extremely low turnout. The only people voting in Italian elections were essentially elite oligarchs and non-Catholics. And non-Catholics tended to be anticlerical liberal nationalists who revered Garibaldi and Crispi. This guaranteed perpetual majorities for Crispi in low turnout elections (barely 2% of Italy voted). In each of these elections, Crispi would fluctuate around 60% of the popular vote.
Garibaldi of course, could not resist the urge to enter politics himself. As a radical leftist, Garibaldi professed socialistic, left-wing ideals. Ironically, this only strengthened Crispi's power, as Italian oligarchs and capitalists, fearing the radical Garibaldi, flocked to Crispi. Ironically, Crispi, who was once on the radical left of Italian politics, was viewed as the bulwark against socialism. Garibaldi led would what become the "Historical Far Left", which consistently garnered around 15% of the vote, compared to Crispi's 60% and the Historical Right's 25%. Garibaldi never seized power himself, but he doomed the cause of the Historical Right by causing so many Italian business elites to rally behind Crispi.
Crispi's struggle with Victor Emmanuel II was brutal. In his struggle with the King, he could often count on the support of Garibaldi. As a result, Victor Emmanuel II was never able to dismiss the radical Prime Minister he loathed. Ironically, Crispi's greatest "triumph" was thanks to Victor Emmanuel II. The King, while begging, essentially traveled to Avignon in early January, 1878, asking Pope Pius IX to reverse his excommunication and give him last rites. The problem was that Pope Pius IX literally died hours before he was supposed to meet with the Italian King. The excommunication stood and Victor Emmanuel II died, spurned by the Papacy. This incident outraged moderate liberals in Italy, many of whom were monarchists, and mobilized them against the Papacy.
Crispi's dream of establishing a "National Catholic Church" came closer to fruition. Crispi had also garnered the support of both British Prime Minister William Gladstone and (former) North German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. Crispi was both an Anglophile and a Germanophile and this delighted him. Finally, the 1878 Papal Conclave to replace Pius IX outraged many in Italy. Under extreme pressure from Emperor Napoleon IV, the papal conclave, much to the shock of the world, chose a non-Italian for the first time since Adrian IV in the 1500's. The frontrunner, Cardinal Pecci, was viewed as too "liberal" for the outraged cardinals of Italy. To prevent his nomination, more conservative cardinals rallied behind whoever the French wanted. And the French chose someone who...was actually pretty politically similar to Pecci, someone who was French, but not too French: the Archbishop of Belgium, Victor-Auguste-Isidor Deschamps. This had actually quite a little impact on the church, as the new Pope Pius X died in 1883, shortly after endorsing Cardinal Pecci, who then became Pope Leo XIII. However, it did give Crispi the final impetus to lambast the Avignon Papacy as a "puppet of Ultramontane France" and push ahead with his idea of the Roman Union.
The 1878 creation of the Roman Union marked an era of total war between the Italian government and the Catholic Church. Catholic church property was openly confiscated and given to those who sided with the Roman Union. Although many priests genuinely supported a more liberal Catholicism, the fact of the matter was that there weren't many of those priests. Most of the Roman Union churches in Italy became staffed with opportunistic, corrupt converts, who quickly made a mockery of the Roman Union, further alienating the peasantry. However, Crispi found an ally in the new King Umberto I. Umberto was outraged at the manner the Catholic Church abandoned his dying father, and completely supported Crispi's anticlerical agenda. Similarly, both men were strong Germanophile militarists who believed in Italian irredentism. Starting in 1878, Crispi no longer fought with the monarchy and instead found a total political ally who handed him a blank check. Monarchists had no choice to support Crispi or be viewed as anti-monarchical.
Crispi was a rare South Italian in the Italian political class, which was dominated by North Italy. Outraged by emigration from South Italy to America, Crispi lathered Southern Italy with infrastructure spending. This was unpopular with the Northern Italian political class, which caused Crispi to behave in more authoritarian ways to make sure that his agenda got passed. However, it was largely a success in stopping emigration. A network of railroads connected South Italy to the North, and Naples in particular became known for its massive, sprawling factories where migrants from rural Italy would choose to move to instead. American anti-Catholicism also helped support this. Crispi was also a liberal progressive, who banned the death penalty, reformed the justice system, instituted universal male suffrage (which nobody voted in because of the non-expedit), created public health laws, and instituted central banking laws. Crispi was also a protectionist and although Southern Italy prospered, Northern Italy suffered the brunt of trade wars with both France and Austria. Crispi, as an irredentist, wanted to push claims both on Austrian Dalmatia/Trent, as well as the now-French Savoy.
Ultimately however, Crispi's rule would face a tremendous backlash. Ironically, although Crispi was a Sicilian (Arbereshe) by birth, Sicily would see the greatest resistance to Crispi's liberal policies. Outraged by both Crispi's intense anticlericalism as well as his concordant with Italian landlords and industrialists, Sicilian peasants, often seeing their traditional lands expropriated to make room for Crispi's railroads, exploded in revolt. The Fasci Siciliani dei Lavoratori, often rendered in English as the Sicilian Worker's League, became one of the leading opponents of Crispi, launching strikes and fighting with industrialists and landlords. They garnered support from some Mafia members, but also opposition from others, leading to the conflict being more and more bloody.
Crispi responded with both the carrot and stick. He passed bills creating pensions and workmen's compensation as the carrot. As for the stick, he ordered the Worker's Leagues outlawed and sent in the army to arrest all of their leaders, claiming that the socialism of the Worker's Leagues was a Trojan Horse for "papal tyranny." The Worker's Leagues were largely secular, but Catholic peasants flocked to them in mass numbers, as one of their demands was to abolish state support for corrupt Roman Union priests. In more urban parts of Italy, Roman Union priests were progressive and energetic, but in traditionalist parts of Italy, they typically were just corrupt opportunists simply because all the normal priests were conservative and refused to participate. Pope Leo in Avignon explicitly refused to condemn the Worker's League, arguing that although Marxism was anti-Christian, socialism was not and in fact was actually more Christian than laissez-faire capitalism, as he expounded in his 1891 tract, Rerum Novarum, which was explicitly viewed by the Italians, both pro and anti-government, as an endorsement of the Sicilian "Fascists." Crispi's bid to violent crush the Fasci backfired, as rural Sicilian peasants flocked to rally to the Fascist banner, supporting the Sicilian workers in the industrial cities and making the movement a true, full-fledged "national" revolution.
The Sicilian Revolution would quickly distract Italy from the other great European crisis of the age, the Russo-Turkish confrontation of 1894 onwards, as well as the "Great Celestial War." In fact, the whole world would largely focus on that crisis. However, the political and historical impact of the Fascists would be long-lasting. The Sicilian Revolution, although not explicitly Marxist, would be widely considered the first left-wing Socialist revolution in Europe, causing generations of leftists, Marxists, and socialists, especially in Italy and nations with large Italian immigrant populations, to proudly identify as "fascists", in honor of the Fasci Siciliani.
The Crispi Era and the Birth of Fascism
In many ways, this would change Italian and global history forever, as Pope Pius IX was forced to cancel the planned First Vatican Council. Garibaldi's troops stopped just short of the Vatican City, but the global ramifications were obvious: the Papal States had been crushed by Italian liberal revolutionaries. In 1867, Garibaldi announced the completion of the Risorgimento. He quickly became an even larger than life hero than he had previously been.
The Italian revolutionary Francesco Crispi in many ways laid the foundation for his own rule long before he actually took power. Crispi was a young leftist revolutionary, almost Republican-adjacent, who had worked closely with Garibaldi towards Italian unification. When he entered civilian politics, he was on the far left-end of Italian politics, as part of the "Intransigents", the most left-wing faction of the Historical Left. Crispi was viewed as a radical crank when he was first elected in 1861. He had actually opposed Garibaldi's invasion of the Papal States in 1867 based on the fear that France would intervene, but changed sides when it was obvious that France was in no diplomatic position to intervene without jeopardizing its newfound gains in Luxembourg. After Garibaldi's triumph, the Italian government loathed his success, but he made it clear who he favored in Italian politics: Crispi.This shook Italian politics. King Victor Emmanuel II of Italy had so staunchly opposed Garibaldi's attack on the Papal States, he fired Prime Minister Urbano Rattazzi, a moderate member of the Historical Left who tried to compromise with the Historical Right, for failing to stop the invasion. The Historical Left had won the 1867 elections, but Rattazzi was replaced by Luigi Federico Menabrea, who was then later replaced by the even more conservative Giovanni Lanza. The Historical Left flared with outrage and after Garibaldi officially favored Crispi, the radical Crispi seized control of the Historical Left, placing his supporters in important positions. In the November 1870 elections, with Garibaldi's endorsement, Crispi's Historical Left sailed to a triumphant victory. He campaigned not only for Garibaldi, but against France and against the Italian alliance with France and Austria.
The Spanish succession crisis was still unresolved in November 1870, largely because the Prussians tried not to push Napoleon III until Crispi's expected victory in Italy. Just as the Prussians expected, Crispi immediately pulled Italy out of its alliance with France and Austria. The shock of Italian withdrawal shocked Napoleon III more than he expected, as he always saw France as a friend of Italy, especially because Napoleon III had personally helped bring about Italian unification. He was so shocked, that he failed to take the bait of the Ems Dispatch, simply folding and allowing the Hohenzollerns to ascend to power in Spain.
Crispi would again change history when in 1871, he flat out rejected the proposed Law of Guarantee. The anticlerical Crispi believed that the Pope should hold absolutely no sovereign prerogatives. This outraged Pius IX, who famously fled to Avignon, further inciting Garibaldi's men to invade the Vatican directly this time, burning much of it to the ground and permanently alienating Catholics from the Italian government. For all intents and purposes, this guaranteed Crispi would rule perpetually. As a result of the Pope's non-expedit banning Catholics from voting in Italian elections, the Italian elections would have extremely low turnout. The only people voting in Italian elections were essentially elite oligarchs and non-Catholics. And non-Catholics tended to be anticlerical liberal nationalists who revered Garibaldi and Crispi. This guaranteed perpetual majorities for Crispi in low turnout elections (barely 2% of Italy voted). In each of these elections, Crispi would fluctuate around 60% of the popular vote.
Garibaldi of course, could not resist the urge to enter politics himself. As a radical leftist, Garibaldi professed socialistic, left-wing ideals. Ironically, this only strengthened Crispi's power, as Italian oligarchs and capitalists, fearing the radical Garibaldi, flocked to Crispi. Ironically, Crispi, who was once on the radical left of Italian politics, was viewed as the bulwark against socialism. Garibaldi led would what become the "Historical Far Left", which consistently garnered around 15% of the vote, compared to Crispi's 60% and the Historical Right's 25%. Garibaldi never seized power himself, but he doomed the cause of the Historical Right by causing so many Italian business elites to rally behind Crispi.
Crispi's struggle with Victor Emmanuel II was brutal. In his struggle with the King, he could often count on the support of Garibaldi. As a result, Victor Emmanuel II was never able to dismiss the radical Prime Minister he loathed. Ironically, Crispi's greatest "triumph" was thanks to Victor Emmanuel II. The King, while begging, essentially traveled to Avignon in early January, 1878, asking Pope Pius IX to reverse his excommunication and give him last rites. The problem was that Pope Pius IX literally died hours before he was supposed to meet with the Italian King. The excommunication stood and Victor Emmanuel II died, spurned by the Papacy. This incident outraged moderate liberals in Italy, many of whom were monarchists, and mobilized them against the Papacy.
Crispi's dream of establishing a "National Catholic Church" came closer to fruition. Crispi had also garnered the support of both British Prime Minister William Gladstone and (former) North German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. Crispi was both an Anglophile and a Germanophile and this delighted him. Finally, the 1878 Papal Conclave to replace Pius IX outraged many in Italy. Under extreme pressure from Emperor Napoleon IV, the papal conclave, much to the shock of the world, chose a non-Italian for the first time since Adrian IV in the 1500's. The frontrunner, Cardinal Pecci, was viewed as too "liberal" for the outraged cardinals of Italy. To prevent his nomination, more conservative cardinals rallied behind whoever the French wanted. And the French chose someone who...was actually pretty politically similar to Pecci, someone who was French, but not too French: the Archbishop of Belgium, Victor-Auguste-Isidor Deschamps. This had actually quite a little impact on the church, as the new Pope Pius X died in 1883, shortly after endorsing Cardinal Pecci, who then became Pope Leo XIII. However, it did give Crispi the final impetus to lambast the Avignon Papacy as a "puppet of Ultramontane France" and push ahead with his idea of the Roman Union.
The 1878 creation of the Roman Union marked an era of total war between the Italian government and the Catholic Church. Catholic church property was openly confiscated and given to those who sided with the Roman Union. Although many priests genuinely supported a more liberal Catholicism, the fact of the matter was that there weren't many of those priests. Most of the Roman Union churches in Italy became staffed with opportunistic, corrupt converts, who quickly made a mockery of the Roman Union, further alienating the peasantry. However, Crispi found an ally in the new King Umberto I. Umberto was outraged at the manner the Catholic Church abandoned his dying father, and completely supported Crispi's anticlerical agenda. Similarly, both men were strong Germanophile militarists who believed in Italian irredentism. Starting in 1878, Crispi no longer fought with the monarchy and instead found a total political ally who handed him a blank check. Monarchists had no choice to support Crispi or be viewed as anti-monarchical.
Crispi was a rare South Italian in the Italian political class, which was dominated by North Italy. Outraged by emigration from South Italy to America, Crispi lathered Southern Italy with infrastructure spending. This was unpopular with the Northern Italian political class, which caused Crispi to behave in more authoritarian ways to make sure that his agenda got passed. However, it was largely a success in stopping emigration. A network of railroads connected South Italy to the North, and Naples in particular became known for its massive, sprawling factories where migrants from rural Italy would choose to move to instead. American anti-Catholicism also helped support this. Crispi was also a liberal progressive, who banned the death penalty, reformed the justice system, instituted universal male suffrage (which nobody voted in because of the non-expedit), created public health laws, and instituted central banking laws. Crispi was also a protectionist and although Southern Italy prospered, Northern Italy suffered the brunt of trade wars with both France and Austria. Crispi, as an irredentist, wanted to push claims both on Austrian Dalmatia/Trent, as well as the now-French Savoy.
Ultimately however, Crispi's rule would face a tremendous backlash. Ironically, although Crispi was a Sicilian (Arbereshe) by birth, Sicily would see the greatest resistance to Crispi's liberal policies. Outraged by both Crispi's intense anticlericalism as well as his concordant with Italian landlords and industrialists, Sicilian peasants, often seeing their traditional lands expropriated to make room for Crispi's railroads, exploded in revolt. The Fasci Siciliani dei Lavoratori, often rendered in English as the Sicilian Worker's League, became one of the leading opponents of Crispi, launching strikes and fighting with industrialists and landlords. They garnered support from some Mafia members, but also opposition from others, leading to the conflict being more and more bloody.
Crispi responded with both the carrot and stick. He passed bills creating pensions and workmen's compensation as the carrot. As for the stick, he ordered the Worker's Leagues outlawed and sent in the army to arrest all of their leaders, claiming that the socialism of the Worker's Leagues was a Trojan Horse for "papal tyranny." The Worker's Leagues were largely secular, but Catholic peasants flocked to them in mass numbers, as one of their demands was to abolish state support for corrupt Roman Union priests. In more urban parts of Italy, Roman Union priests were progressive and energetic, but in traditionalist parts of Italy, they typically were just corrupt opportunists simply because all the normal priests were conservative and refused to participate. Pope Leo in Avignon explicitly refused to condemn the Worker's League, arguing that although Marxism was anti-Christian, socialism was not and in fact was actually more Christian than laissez-faire capitalism, as he expounded in his 1891 tract, Rerum Novarum, which was explicitly viewed by the Italians, both pro and anti-government, as an endorsement of the Sicilian "Fascists." Crispi's bid to violent crush the Fasci backfired, as rural Sicilian peasants flocked to rally to the Fascist banner, supporting the Sicilian workers in the industrial cities and making the movement a true, full-fledged "national" revolution.
The Sicilian Revolution would quickly distract Italy from the other great European crisis of the age, the Russo-Turkish confrontation of 1894 onwards, as well as the "Great Celestial War." In fact, the whole world would largely focus on that crisis. However, the political and historical impact of the Fascists would be long-lasting. The Sicilian Revolution, although not explicitly Marxist, would be widely considered the first left-wing Socialist revolution in Europe, causing generations of leftists, Marxists, and socialists, especially in Italy and nations with large Italian immigrant populations, to proudly identify as "fascists", in honor of the Fasci Siciliani.
Last edited:
If fascism ITTL is a socialist ideology than what would be the ITTL equivalent of OTL fascism (if it even develops)?
Possibly something tied to monarchism? TTL’s equivalent to OTL Fascism could be a weak figurehead monarchy but with a strong executive in the form of some Leader.
Many Fascist/Fascist-esque countries got rid of monarchies in OTL but here they could embrace them for popular/cultural support.
Maybe OTL Fascism develops in France somehow. Really depends on how the Great War goes.
Can someone say O R G A N I C M O N A R C H Y with something akin to Portuguese Integralism becoming TTL's equivalent to OTL Fascism?
Ahhh, that could work.
@TastySpam Have there been any official military alliances established yet akin to the Entente and Central Powers?
GDP isn't supposed to measure quality of life. However the two are highly correlated. Also remember that government spending on healthcare is added to GDP. It's usually things like shorter work weeks that mess with GDP per capita numbers. You can parse these effects out but it's quite tricky. I read a paper that tried to do that and it found that the USA and Western Europe are very comparable even when accounting for inequality. Plus it's important to remember that "the south" has a very peculiar meaning to some people that sometimes doesn't include the area's major successful regions. States like Texas, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia are all quite successful states economically. Mississippi is also much poorer due to not having a major city in the state. Rural areas tend to less productive but due to cheaper real estate might not be so impoverished. Still places like Mississippi do seem to be pretty poor for a developed country. Even using HDI, which has it's problems, we see that Mississippi is a bit of an outlier but isn't that far behind other poorer regions like Wales or Northern England. Plus if America had higher welfare comparable Europe Mississippi would very likely shoot up the HDI tables.
Yeah, I'm honestly not sure. I don't really plan ahead that much lol.
I think you could argue that Imperial France is espousing something akin to a right-wing socialism, a fairly soft form of integralism (it's not particularly authoritarian, at least not more authoritarian than Napoleon III is). As for the actual Portugal, they've more or less avoided the British Ultimatum, so their politics are probably more stable than OTL.
The closest thing to an official military alliance is probably the Anglo-Qing Alliance and the Franco-Austrian Alliance.
Bookmark1995
Banned
It could be something that springs up in the Confederacy, with its precepts of white supremacy.
It's hard to imagine Britain signing an alliance with a country as recently unstable as Qing China (the anti-Manchu unrest didn't go unnoticed) without a few escape clauses; this was the norm OTL. After all, if China thinks it had a blank check, it could try to coax Russia into a war, which was clearly the opposite of Britain's intentions when signing the alliance. It's a deterrent first and a weapon second, but never a tool of expansion. What I would expect to see would be a very specific document which defines the kind of actions by a third party that will envoke the treaty and the actual way in which the signatories are compelled to respond to said action. For example, the OTL Anglo - Japanese alliance made exceptions for a conflict arising in Korea because it was known that this was a flash point.
Last edited:
The goal of the alliance is largely to stymie Russia, so I assume it would largely carve out an exception for anything dealing with France in Indochina or Taiwan.
Yeah, I get the feeling that it closely fills the role the Anglo-Japanese alliance did so my post is basically arguing that the document is probably mostly going to be drafted in the same way as that. Excluding Taiwan and Indochina seems like a reasonable limitation. In turn, China probably shouldn't have to help Britain if it gets into trouble in South Africa (as a preexisting colonial conflict that didn't involve China).
The USA steaming over the Pacific throws a wrench in this though. I don't think anybody planned for that.
Last edited:
Yeah, similarly, the Franco-Austrian Alliance is aimed squarely at North Germany, it didn't apply to the Franco-Qing War.
And yeah, really nobody expected this confrontation with America. Certainly not London, which is going "????"