French Revolution First, American Second

[Darkest]

How about we switch the years of the two revolutions? Armed conflict in France begins in 1775, while a parallel disturbance occurs in English America in 1789.

How can we gaurantee such a switch, with a POD no earlier than 1750? And what might happen because of this?

 

[Max Sinister]

I wondered about the possibility of N America staying French, some nobles go there after the revolution, so the American revolution has tp happen later... but you want english North America...

 

[Steffen]

hm. If the jacobite terror isn´t butterflied away, maybe the landowners like Washington lose their interest in revolution?

 

[Hendryk]

I don't know whether that's feasible. One of the factors of the French Revolution was the government's inability to balance budgets following the costly intervention alongside the American independentists. Perhaps if the POD was in the mid-18th century, with the defeat in the Seven Years War somehow precipitating a political crisis. Now an interesting side-effect would be that the French revolution take place during the lifetime of such Enlightenment philosophers as Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, etc. (just a bit too late for Montesquieu unfortunately). And since the mid-18th century was the high-water mark of French cultural and intellectual influence in Europe, the ideas of the revolution, whatever they turn out to be, would likely catch on even faster than in OTL.

 

[Homer]

I don't know whether that's feasible. One of the factors of the French Revolution was the government's inability to balance budgets following the costly intervention alongside the American independentists. Perhaps if the POD was in the mid-18th century, with the defeat in the Seven Years War somehow precipitating a political crisis.

Yeah, there are plenty of wars within the 18th century that could go awfully bad for the French and thus lead to financial distress and repeated state bancruptcy.
The kings living in Versailles were always vulnerable to riots because of the the luxury they lived in, but success held them on the throne. Louis XVI lacked this successes and the money.

 

[Mike Stearns]

Maybe the French try revolt and try to set up and American-style democracy, but fail. Also the revolt has the added side effect of causing the British to pay closer attention to the Americans and give them alittle bit of internal autonomy, thus forestalling the American Revolution for a decade or so.

 

[Darkling]

The likely results would be the Rebels finding far less support amongst the colonial elites, which would in turn lead to the rebellion being more radical (a self fulfilling prophecy if you will) my guess would be the rebels find far less support in the colonial legislatures as well, meaning a few colonial legislatures will have clear loyalist majorities (until the rebels capture them and give them height adjustments).

The American rebels will also find far less international support for their cause because of the link between revolution and the French regime and it’s excesses (for similar reasons republicanism was frowned upon as a political system for most of the 19th century).

On the plush side for the rebels the population ratios would have moved in their favour (discounting the increase in loyalists).

 

[fhaessig]

The American rebels will also find far less international support for their cause because of the link between revolution and the French regime and it’s excesses (for similar reasons republicanism was frowned upon as a political system for most of the 19th century).
.

Ubless, of course, the french *revolution takes a course different from OTL and Terror is an invention of the American one.