Dominion of Southern America - Updated July 1, 2018

[thekingsguard]

Like where the war is going! Care to tell if the US is getting any more involved?

 

[Tsao]

Like where the war is going! Care to tell if the US is getting any more involved?

I hope not. I quite like the neutral US as it is.

 

[thekingsguard]

Glen, while it may not be the Turtledove, you won best TL of 2011 on the ALternate History Weekly Update. Congrats!

 

[Darth_Kiryan]

Glen, while it may not be the Turtledove, you won best TL of 2011 on the ALternate History Weekly Update. Congrats!

Wow. Congrats Glen.

 

[Glen]

The impression I'm getting — please correct me if I'm wrong — is that the key difference between Korsgaardism and fascism is that in Korsgaardism, the state is an end in itself.

Don't know if that is the 'key' difference, but it certainly is a fact that the state is the main focus on Korsgaardism, though Korsgaardism claims that by serving the state, the people do better over time, so it is both a means and an ends.

Whereas in fascism, the state is only a means to an end, and if it fails to serve that purpose it should be scrapped and a new one built in its place. So a fascist can call for revolution (as in the March on Rome and the Beer Hall Putsch) but a Korsgaardist can't, or not without being a bigger hypocrite than one normally sees even in politics.

Um, not precisely - a Korsgaardian could call for a replacement of a state that is not Korsgaardian enough!

It seems to me the biggest danger from a Korsgaardist party in, say, the United States is not that it would try to overthrow democracy all at once, but that it would work within the system while constantly suggesting little ways to make the government more powerful and less accountable.

That would be a danger from them if they weren't discredited, yes.

 

[Glen]

May the USC never fall to those Imperial devils!

Save the USC, indeed!

 

[Glen]

Who are the current leaders of the USC?

Why do you ask?

 

[Tsao]

Why do you ask?

Just curious.

 

[Glen]

Just how stable is Chuen China? Are it's institution deep with near universal support or shallow, also how stable is the U.S.C.

Both are actually surprisingly stable by the late 1880s, for a variety of reasons. Chuen China really has done a lot to clean up corruption and restore the imperial civil service. They were able to secure the loyalty of most of the new leadership in Chuen China as they owe their positions to the Emperor (many elevated to them after the purging of the Manchus). Basically the populace of Imperial China believe the Chuen have the Mandate of Heaven, and are getting better care and consideration from the government then they have in generations. At the same time, they have gone about a sensible technological modernization plan while at the same time holding the foreign devils at arms length.

The United States of China has done even better economically and in making opportunities for the common man (and woman!). Many of the most reactionary migrated to Chuen China and thus there isn't as much discontent with this as might be thought, though it is not absolute. The USC has also modernized and managed to abrogate the worst of the unequal treaties by promoting free trade (so no one power can control them). You might imagine the USC as a bigger, better, brighter, independent Hong Kong....

 

[Glen]

Just curious.

The leaders at this point are not OTL - did you have some cameos in mind?

 

[Tsao]

The leaders at this point are not OTL - did you have some cameos in mind?

Oh. No cameos in mind, just wondered. I think most of them would be young, reformist types, right? Not many members of the old regime. In any case, the situation in the USC seems stable enough, more so than in Chuen China at any rate.

 

[Beedok]

I really have to get back into this.

 

[Glen]

Glen

So we have a big rumble in China as well. One good thing about this is that given its relations with the USC it will hopefully keep the USA neutral or friendly to the allies. Was worried about the DSA ending up in a potentially hostile sandwich.

USA is on pretty good terms with the Western European Powers.

I get the feeling this will end badly for Chuen China, especially if they end up having to accept direct Russian military support.

Could be - time will tell....

Aren't Manchuria and Korea to the NE and east of Chuen China rather than the west?

Yes they are. Fixed in the official timeline.

 

[Glen]

Will an 1880's great war see the early demise of the colonial empires? Given that OTL's WWI set that into motion, and by the sounds of wasn't nearly as widespread.

Not as widespread. Out of curiosity why do you think it might, other than by comparison to WWI?

 

[Glen]

There are far too many factors that existed in OTL that don't exist here.

True, but which in particular were you thinking of?

Besides, WW1's main commitment to decolonialism was to make the European empires so hard on cash that they couldn't afford to keep their empires running. It was WW2 that really caused decolonialism, unless you count WW1's causing WW2 as a reason to attribute everything from the one on the other.

I would agree somewhat with that.

 

[Glen]

Well, my thinking was that there's no reason this war won't be just as costly, if not more costly.

Ah - Time will tell in that regard....

 

[Glen]

oh no how much of the DSA troops where sent over to Europe?

A fair amount of regular British Army, less so colonials. They are there, but there are plenty of Southerners to answer their nation's call to arms.

what is the USA's views on DSA? would they consider join in on ether side? or will they stay neutral?

USA is on fairly good terms with the Dominion - they were also on pretty good terms with the Mexicans before the Korsgaardist takeover, but there is a lot of consternation in the USA about the invasion, and the disruption of use of the Mexican canals. So far, they are staying neutral, but a neutral pretty friendly to the West.

by the time this is answered i want to already know also is DSA mostly Anglican/Episcopal? or did the deist win out?

Sorry this took so long, then!

The DSA is predominantly Anglican, and in fact very few Deists.

 

[Falastur]

True, but which in particular were you thinking of?

Europe and the world have not yet passed through the phase of acquiring all of Africa and then regarding their states there as vanity colonies - colonies are still largely based around the idea of profit margins, and I'm not sure whether the concept of White Man's Burden has come into vogue in order for it to go out of vogue too.

There doesn't seem to be any real impetus - or rather, any reason for any impetus - to the idea of abolishing monarchies at the end of this war, which I regard as a fairly important step behind making the countries wanting to jettison their colonies - connected to democracy, that is to say.

On the same lines, I regard the rise of the British welfare state as an important step, seeing as it does that it promotes the idea that the colonial natives might have a need for care too - among Europeans, and among the colonials themselves.

Again connected, all this hasn't (or at least, I don't remember seeing it) contributed to any calls for a European nation to allow a colony to be self-determining, in the way that India OTL was starting to call for self-determination. Hostility, or at least a conscious and unified effort by colonials to refuse to cooperate with the colonial governments is a fairly important step in making decolonialism attractive.

Then there's also the stuff I already talked about, re: colonies becoming a major financial burden on their owners.

I could list a few more, but those are the major ones, off the top of my head.

 

[Glen]

Does this USA even have any real military traditions?

It has quite a few, though they harken back to the early 1800s with the noteable exception of the Indian Wars.

It's managed to avoid the major wars that shaped the early US,

Well, the Mexican-American War and US Civil War at least...

though up until WWII the US had to basically relearn how to fight after each war, so that possibly isn't as big as it seems. It would be facinating to see a USA that never fights any real wars in it's entire history.

I suppose it might....

 

[Glen]

Glen

I don't know. Presuming the central powers [or would eastern powers be more accurate?]

Eastern, definitely Eastern.

win that will be on the continent but is unlikely to be at sea. As such even if the continent is lost they can't aid Mexico and even if Mexico made progress against the DSA Britain can support the latter.

A very good point - Mexico is perhaps placing too much faith in their Korsgaardian brethren for support at the peace table.

Even if the eastern powers win decisively enough that they are able and willing to commit to Mexico making gains at the peace it means prolonged enmity between Mexico and the DSA/Britain and I wouldn't like to be trying to organise Mexico's defences in the following generation.

Steve

A fair point.