Earliest Plausable Communist/Socialist USA

:) Hello lads and lasses,

I have another question to post to the board: when is the earliest, with a POD no earlier than the 1830s, that the US could reasonably go either socialist or communist before 1895?
 

MAlexMatt

Banned
thats a short window you provide there, socialism didn't really catch on until the 1870s/1880s

English socialists were a big thing in the middle classes as early as the 1830's for sure.

In the US itself there was popular experimentation with communes and communal living (besides the obvious example of the Anabaptists, of course) around the same time period.

Still, it wasn't organized, political socialism. Even the labor unions of the time were craft unions whose major concern was organizing to facilitate wage negotiations.

The issue is that anarchism was the most popular leftist ideology in the US (and Britain) at the time, rather than socialism.
 
My apologies for the semi shameless bump,( )

I first wish to explain that the POD would involve no large scale Mexican American War, and no US civil war.
If that still doesn’t make a communist USA possible in the 19th century then when is the earliest one could see such a government form?
 
It is really simple.

Just find a way to have a non-anarchist version of mutualism. You will end up with a socialist USA in no time. (Considering the most popular socialists were all individualist anarchists in 19th century USA, aside from Christian socialists of course.)
 
:) Hello lads and lasses,

I have another question to post to the board: when is the earliest, with a POD no earlier than the 1830s, that the US could reasonably go either socialist or communist before 1895?

Well, TBH, it's about as plausible as slavery thriving in a speculative future DoD America circa 2000, or Nazi Germany conquering the entire continents of Europe and Asia by 1945, or an egalitarian medieval Saxon England.....which is, to say, not at all, unfortunately. :(

However, though, you could perhaps make the socialist movement more noticeable thru more activism, and a good reputation. After all, Milwaukee, Wis. had a total of 3 Socialist mayors IOTL, and that wasn't a particularly far-left town as far as I know. So it's certainly not impossible for cities like New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Detroit, or even Los Angeles, to have a notable presence of Socialists, or even a mayor or two from that party.
I think the biggest challenges could possibly be fundraising and dealing with any 'Red Scares' that might come along.
 
Well, TBH, it's about as plausible as slavery thriving in a speculative future DoD America circa 2000, or Nazi Germany conquering the entire continents of Europe and Asia by 1945, or an egalitarian medieval Saxon England.....which is, to say, not at all, unfortunately. :(

However, though, you could perhaps make the socialist movement more noticeable thru more activism, and a good reputation. After all, Milwaukee, Wis. had a total of 3 Socialist mayors IOTL, and that wasn't a particularly far-left town as far as I know. So it's certainly not impossible for cities like New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Detroit, or even Los Angeles, to have a notable presence of Socialists, or even a mayor or two from that party.
I think the biggest challenges could possibly be fundraising and dealing with any 'Red Scares' that might come along.

Say whaaaa? Just avoid the Red Scares and you're set. A socialist America is far from ASB.
 
Say whaaaa? Just avoid the Red Scares and you're set. A socialist America is far from ASB.

A Social Democrat America is definitely doable, especially with the elimination of the Red Scares. But a purely Leninist America wouldn't be feasible, as too much of the country's economy does depend on free enterprise and such.

With Social Democracy, free enterprise remains intact, but with lots of safeguards to ensure that corruption is minimized, and that consumers can remain as safe as possible....and that's just the economic benefits. :D
 
A Social Democrat America is definitely doable, especially with the elimination of the Red Scares. But a purely Leninist America wouldn't be feasible, as too much of the country's economy does depend on free enterprise and such.

Actually remove the red scares and you do get what we would consider Democratic Socialists rather than Social Democrats (big difference between the two given one was basically democratically elected marxists and the other reformist) SPUSA only really started shifting towards social democratic legislation after the first red scares. Also they wouldnt be called Leninists because in order to get rid of the red scare Lenin must lose.
 
Ok, so ignoring my origional op, when is the earlist one could possibly see a communist or socialist USA?
 
Based on the history course I took this year, the late 1880s to early 1890s would be the absolute earliest, and overall, the 1870s would be the best place to kick start a POD. Heck, a chain of events could cause it to very well happen if McKinley is never assassinated, and Teddy Roosevelt never comes to power as a result.
 
Different people mean different things when they say "socialist". What exactly is your definition?
I say we go with the real definition -- government ownership of the means of production. All other definitions are arbitrary and usually just concocted for purposes of criticism, anyway.
 
Top