Dominion of Southern America - Updated July 1, 2018

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900' started by Glen, Feb 22, 2010.

Tags:
  1. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Fascism arose in the post World War I world, whereas democracy started in the modern era over a century before. It is entirely possible that as has been suggested by some that fascism is a by-product of democracy, but it also could be a reaction to the demoralization and direction after a devastating Global War.
     
  2. Falastur Fighting Swiss-wank since 1291

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Location:
    Hitchin, Herts
    I didn't mean to suggest anything about your motivations. If you want to see far-left movements then that's cool with me. I just wasn't sure that they would make this world less depressing - rather, it would likely only contribute to the grittiness, as you said.
     
  3. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Fascism does, yes. Korsgaardism is being adopted by those who want to have centralized control of society with more traditional values being espoused as a secondary goal. It advocates keeping everything that can serve the state, and discarding or changing that which does not serve the state. Really, if you had to strip Korsgaardism down to its essence, it is the belief that society is best served by serving the state, and is a reaction to the individualistic and liberal trends of the past century. Sometimes this movement comes from the top, sometimes it comes from people who want to be on top. It is embraced by those members of the masses who have become, either culturally or economically, fearful of a world with too much independence and not enough guidance.
     
  4. Nugax talks in diagrams

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Location:
    London's sludgy aorta
    If you only have far rightists and centrists, then the middle ground of political discourse happens far to the right (see the current OTL US to an extent). You need crazy-leftists to make the centrists actually look centrist, and to introduce important ideas that get taken up later when people release how important they are (You'd be surprised how many of points of the Communist Manifesto are embraced by all modern capitalist states).
     
  5. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I hear you - the faster advance of women's rights is multifactorial compared to OTL. First of course is the establishment of a more liberal United States of America. Second is the maintenance of a more liberal France (not the roll back seen after 1815). The third is the earlier ending of slavery in North America, which sees much of the energy that was expended on abolition redirected towards women's rights. The fourth is the establishment of a liberal Germany. The fifth is the Pope staying more liberal than OTL. The sixth is the establishment of a more politically active and liberal Queen of England than the somewhat conservative and less politically active Victoria. The seventh is the establishment of a radically liberal nation in South China. The eighth is general over-enthusiasm over the centennial in the USA. The nineth is needing some political victories that don't cost anything in the UK after the global economy takes a nosedive.

    Does that make you feel better?:)

    It's natural but perhaps a bit myopic. Don't worry, adulthood hardly hurts.:)
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2011
  6. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    [​IMG]

    The turmoil caused in the Balkans by the Hellenic Revolution was not quick to be brought to heel, but eventually the Ottomans were able to reassert authority and order over the Balkan region. In 1830, Mohammad Ali hand selected Mihail Studrza of a proud Moldavian line to act as prince of Moldavia. It was a bold move on his part, installing a 35 year old in the region, but the Sturdza were a well respected family and Mihail was a young man of exceptional talents. His vision of a gradually liberalizing Moldavia went well as the decades progressed with the reforms being enacted within the Ottoman Empire as a whole. He modernized education, provided patronage for the arts and sciences, promoted infrastructure, and began to erode the power of the boyars in favor of the people. The Romani (Gypsies) referred to him as Mihail the Liberator for his abolition of their slavery (along with others in the region). When the revolutions of the late 1840s broke out, they also touched Moldavia and neighboring Wallachia. However, these rebellions were fractionated between true radicals who wanted to establish an independent liberal nation and the boyars and their supporters who wanted their ancient priviledges restored and conspired to come under the influence of Russia. Prince Sturdza rapidly crushed the rebellions in Moldavia and then aided in their suppression in Wallachia, forestalling the ability of the Russians to use the rebellions as an excuse to intervene; an action that became increasingly less appealing as they became further committed maintaining order in Austria-Hungary and intervening in Prussia's war against the nascent Germany, and then the Liberal War, especially given the surprising resurgence of Ottoman strength in the 1830s and 1840s. In recognition of Mihail Sturdza's actions he was given dual rule of Wallachia and Moldavia by the Sublime Porte, in which role he fostered the same sorts of changes in Wallachia that he had already initiated in Moldavia. He also worked to strengthen ties socially and economically between the two principalities of the Ottoman Empire, though he was denied his fondest desire, their formal unification. While he used the uprisings to finally crush the great boyars, he eventually rehabilitated many of the liberal revolutionaries and brought them into leadership roles. Prince Sturdza outlived and outlasted Grand Vizier Ali and several Sultans, ruling with a strong hand and a clear vision until his death in 1885. The Ottomans, unable to find a man who could match both his abilities and his proven record of reliability, split the leadership of the principalities once more, a move that was less than popular among the Moldavians and Wallachians, who wished closer ties.
     
  7. Arkhangelsk Gay Mexamerican

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Location:
    Alta California
    How on earth did I miss this update! I'm so angry at myself :mad::p

    Wonderful as always Glen, such a great update to a great timeline, thanks for the plug...and I must say that Mexican flag is several magnitudes of awesome! :D
     
  8. Emperor-of-New-Zealand It's a figure of speech

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Location:
    Christchurch, NZ
    Glen, Austria-Hungary wasn't formed until 1866 wasn't it?
     
  9. stevep Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Glen

    Good argument, covering a lot of points. Hope you don't mind a small nitpick over the arithmetic. ;)

    Steve

     
  10. stevep Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Glen

    A lot will depend on what's happening in the other Balkan states but sounds like a good period for Romania. The Ottomans could have shot themselves in the foot by dividing the principalities again but have to see how things develop. Good update on the period.

    Steve
     
  11. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Fairly well until the global economic crisis hit. Now they're suffering about average as is the rest of the world.

    A very good question. My first stab glib response is that they haven't. There's still a fair amount of rivalry between regions within these states.

    Another very good question - we've some posted in the timeline (particularly look at the Fall Line post). Will have to get back to you later on particulars.
     
  12. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Huh? Wah? I don't get the comments/reference. Please explain.:confused:
     
  13. Falastur Fighting Swiss-wank since 1291

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Location:
    Hitchin, Herts
  14. Falastur Fighting Swiss-wank since 1291

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Location:
    Hitchin, Herts
    You are assuming that there needs to be a middle ground of political discourse. While yes, a token left-wing political affiliation needs to exist for centrism to be recognised as centrism, it need only be token - enough for the centrists to say "look at us! we don't want to bring down the wealthy!". But yeah, if the world polarises then there doesn't necessarily have to be a new dominant political theory that counterbalances the two sides. Heck, there doesn't even need to be a unified centrist front. You can have oligarchal republics, constitutional monarchies etc all existing as alternatives to Korsgaardian proto-fascism (sorry Glen, used the term more as illustrative language than because I meant it) while not necessarily associating with each other. In fact, the various centrist "factions" may feel as much in common with Korsgaardists as with each other, and the concept of a "centrist" political philosophy may simply be not how people describe politics, looking instead to government set-up and interaction with the unenfranchised etc, so long as the centrist "factions" avoid being right-wing, along with all the entrapments of the inherent militarism and nationalism it implies (or, usually implies, and probably will imply).

    I'm not sure how much sense that made to other people (hopefully at least one other person understood me) but that's my line of thought. The development of politics is still an open book here. There's no reason why politics must devolve into the same categories as OTL, or even be examinable in the same way as we can examine OTL philosophies.
     
  15. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    What, a bit of turmoil and everything is depressing?;)

    Time will tell if a far-leftish movement develops.
     
  16. thekingsguard Founder of Korsgaardianism

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Location:
    Virginia - near the USA-CSSA Border
    Just wanted to pop in and say keep up the good work Glen!
     
  17. iddt3 Herald of the New Board Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    People here are using Centrism to indicate varieties of Classical liberalism correct? Because in the absence of an explicitly left wing ideology like Communism, I suspect the classical liberals will start assuming left wing positions outside of any ideological framework. Unless Working conditions have improved dramatically from OTL, there is going to be a ready made base for any politician who supports popular working class causes, and some politicians will take that to it's logical conclusion. So instead of communism you get a sort of Left Liberalism, which sooner or later someone will codify into an ideology.
    Moreover by the early 20th century OTL, and it sounds like even earlier in TTL, Classical Liberalism has more or less been played out, because it's various goals have mostly been either established and become a part of the social fabric or become irrelevant in the context of the Modern World. In order to Maintain a "center" in these sort of conditions, you really need some sort of left wing thought for them to rob ideas from and repackage as acceptable to the ruling elite while placating the masses. Otherwise Centrism just becomes a decrepit ideology of the status quo, waiting to be blown away by the first strong breeze of crisis that stirs it. To a certain extent it sounds like this is what the US might be falling victim to, i.e. a totally complacent and stagnant liberal ideology that ceases to offer solutions and thus is threatened by something that normally wouldn't be able to find purchase in the political landscape of the US; a radical foreign political ideology.
     
  18. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I didn't.:rolleyes:

    Thank you for your support and encouragement!
     
  19. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Thank you.

    We've been commenting on it for a bit now - do you still need more information?
     
  20. Glen ASB & Left Hand of IAN Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    [​IMG]

    The last half of the 1880s saw increasing unrest in Moldavia and Wallachia, as several secret societies seeking independence from the Sublime Porte, unity of the Danubian Principalities, and closer ties to Russia. The Ottoman Empire tried to placate some of the more moderate factions on their frontier with Eastern Europe, while at the same time suppressing the more aggressive and separatist elements, but in the end were unsuccessful. In April 1889, the Danubian Uprisings began. This short lived Spring Revolt served one essential purpose, however. It provided Russia a cause for declaring war against the Ottomans 'in support of liberty'. Austria-Hungary quickly followed suit, and a rapid invasion of the Balkans began. The Western Powers had warned Eastern Europe not to invade the Ottoman Empire, their close and important partner in the region, but to no avail. Still, few in the West were anxious to go to war under these circumstances. The Crimea and most of the Northern Balkans fell to the Eastern European nations within a matter of months. With fear mounting that the Russians would take Istambul if the Ottomans fought alone, the British Empire and then the rest of their allies, France and Germany, declared war against the Russians and Austria-Hungary. This in turn would lead to Prussia-Poland's official entry in the war (Prussian-Polish officers had been 'technical advisers' in much of the initial fighting).

    WAR!