Lands of Red and Gold #40: The Christmas Spirit
Lands of Red and Gold #40: The Christmas Spirit
Given the festive season, I thought it was time for a slightly more light-hearted look at the future of the LRG-verse.
Edit: The sections in blue have been added based on reader feedback from here and elsewhere. I think that they add a little to the piece. If you've already read this post, then you can just check out the blue sections to see what's been added.
* * *
Taken from a discussion thread posted on the allohistory.com message board.
Note: all dates are in the Gregorian calendar. All message times are listed in what would be the equivalent of North American Eastern Standard Time.
Thread Title: AH Challange: Dual state North America
*
Original Post
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 24 December, 9:35 PM
Got a new challenge for you folks. This is a challange inspired buy a novella I’m working on.
The basic sceanrio is that North America must be wholly divided into two great powers: an Anglophone power in the north and east, and a Hispanophone power in the south and west.
These too great states must be the recognised sovereign states for the entirety of North America. There can be small autonomous regions and formal dependencies if you like, but de jure sovereignty has two reside with the two great powers. No protectorates, satellite states, or corporate states allowed.
More, the two states must be predominately English and Spanish speaking, respectively. The sole official language for the nations as a whole must be English or Spanish. It is acceptable to have relatively small minorities who speak other languages – Dutch, French, Swedish, Nahuatl, Congxie, whatever – and those languages can even be official languages of subnational regions. But no single linguistic minority can from more than 10% of the population of either nation. At least 80% of the people in each nation much speak the majority language as their sole native language.
The border between the dual states can be flexible depending on your chosen divergence, but it must includ the Rockies for much of their length. The north-south portion of the border should be somewhere around the southern extremities of the Rockies, or a bit further south than that. Maybe a river border, say the Red River [1], maybe the Rio Neuces, or at a pinch the Rio Bravo [Rio Grande]. Or you can use a border determined by settlement or military division, but it shouldn’t be any further south than the Rio Bravo.
In tems of population, industrial capacity, political structure or other demographics, you can pick pretty much whatever you want. But thw two great powers need to be both stable enough and wealthy enough to be effective geopolitical rivals – one can’t dominate the other.
The divergence date must be no earlier than 23 April 1529, ie after the Treaty of Saragossa ratified the division of the globe into Spanish and Portuguese zones. Ideally the diveregence should be after 1753 – the later the better, as far as I’m concerned.
Have at it, folks!
*
From: Hasta la Vista
Time: 24 December, 9:42 PM
What are the borders of North America?
*
From: Patrician
Time: 24 December, 9:44 PM
What about Greenland?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 24 December, 9:54 PM
@ Hasta La Vista and Patrician
Good call, folks!
For these purposes, North America includes all of the mainland of the continent from the Arctic to as far south as, well, I’d prefer it to stretch as far as the Isthmus of Panama. I suppose a lesser challenge would be to have North America defined as ending somewhere no further north than the Isthmus of Tehuantepec.
I don’t care what happens to Greenland or the Caribbean islands. They can be part of either of the dual states, still colonies or dependencies of European powers, or even independent micro-nations. It doesn’t matter. (Althgouh I’d love to hear how Greenland could be part of the Spanish great power!)
*
From: Christo Columbo
Time: 24 December, 10:12 PM
@ TLG
Is this novella going to be part of a series? It'd be great to see this setting as part of a broader literary universe like R.R. Floyd's "Hammer of Gold" novels - both series, and the follow-ons. I loooove those books. Favourite moment: when the Atjuntja armies bring Shah Jahan himself for appeasement at the House of Pain. Allohistory needs more writers like him!
*
From: Patrician
Time: 24 December, 10:17 PM
Erm, Floyd is a woman. Ruth Roxanne, I believe her initials stand for.
*
From: Christo Columbo
Time: 24 December, 10:22 PM
Patrician, are you serious? That doesn't get mentioned in the "about the author" section.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 24 December, 10:24 PM
@Columbine
Have to get the novella finished and sold first before I can think about a whole series.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 24 December, 10:27 PM
Deadly serious. She just uses her initials since male readers are less likely to buy from authors with female first names.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 7:06 AM
Come on, doesn’t anyone have any ideas?
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 7:21AM
In two words: im-possible.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 7:26 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> The basic sceanrio is that North America must be wholly divided into two great
> powers: an Anglophone power in the north and east, and a Hispanophone power in
> the south and west.
Partner, not going to happen. Even as few as four sovereign nations in North America is major-implausible territory. Three is space-cuckoo land or wish-fulfillment, take your pick. Two is who rolled the dream grass [cannabis] into your klinsigar?
*
From: Hasta la Vista
Time: 25 December, 7:28 AM
Whether North America is defined as ending in Tehuantepec or Panama won't really change things much. Holding that part together is reasonably straightforward. Its the western coast further north which you need to worry about.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 7:41 PM
@ Hasta La Vista
So hwo woudl you keep that part of the Hispanophone great power?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 7:46 AM
@ Hats and Boldie
Try to be more constructive, folks! This is a challange. It’s not meant to be easy, but help me find a way.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 7:53AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Try to be more constructive, folks! This is a challange. It’s not meant to
> be easy, but help me find a way.
Partner, threads on two- or three- or even one-nation North America come up a lot. They get shot down just as quickly as they deserve. Look them up in the search engine; that’s what it’s there for.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 8:01 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Try to be more constructive, folks! This is a challange. It’s not meant to
> be easy, but help me find a way.
Not my job to make the impossible happen, partner. You want to make it work, you find a way. Just don’t be surprised if you’re shot down in flames when you try.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 8:09 AM
@ Hats and Boldie
If you cant say something helpful, just stay out of this thread, hey?
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 8:18 AM
TLG, since you’re clearly too illiterate to work out how to use the search engine, let me give you a quick-and-dirty summary of why it wouldn’t happen.
During colonial times, everyone wanted a piece of North America. No single European power could defeat all of the others without provoking a general European war. Everyone was too concerned with the balance of power to allow one nation to come out on top in Europe. That always applied to divisions of colonial territory after European wars, too. Colonial borders could get adjusted, and even the odd colony fully handed over, but not on the scale required to divide all North America in half.
And by the time independence came, separate identities were too well-established in North America for the nations to unite.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 8:28 AM
Originally written by Hats:
> And by the time independence came, separate identities were too
> well-established in North America for the nations to unite.
Truth, Hats.
Just to add to that, even colonies by the one power would find it quite difficult to unite when they had been administered separately for so long. To pick the most obvious example, England had lots of colonies in North America, but they didn’t all join together.
Some did unite, of course, both before and after independence, and maybe a few more could in an allohistory. But only if they weren’t too far apart or too disparate in their culture and governance. For instance, can you imagine Alleghania and New England uniting even if Tigeria wasn’t in the way?
Of course, The Last Goober can’t seem to figure that out.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 8:29 AM
@ Hats
Just because your lingo is Hats doesn’t mean that you should talk through it!
This is allohistory, not fixed history. Just because something turned out one way in our history doesnt mean that ith as to work out the same way if the wheel of time was given another spin.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 8:36 AM
@ Boldie
Stop thinking so fixed-historically! Given who you picked your lingo from, I’d have thought you would be more courageous about thinking in new ways.
Don’t you think that if, say, Tigeria fell to the English early enough, that there would be more commonality among the northern and southern English colonies?
*
From: Guido the Guide
Time: 25 December, 8:48 AM
Be nice, everyone. This is Christmas. Save your fights for your family, not fellow AH.commers.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 8:59 AM
Originally written by Guido the Guide:
> Be nice, everyone. This is Christmas.
I’m a Plirite, partner. I don’t care about Christmas.
If Goober is going to make stupid pronouncements or ask for space-cuckoo scenarios, I’m going to call him on it, regardless of which day it is.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 9:04 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Just because your lingo is Hats doesn’t mean that you should talk through it!
In the spirit of the season, and given that a guide has already warned you about it, I’ll ignore this comment for now.
> This is allohistory, not fixed history. Just because something turned out
> one way in our history doesnt mean that ith as to work out the same way
> if the wheel of time was given another spin.
Allohistory does not mean anything goes. It means picking an event which might have gone differently, and then extrapolating what might plausibly have happened from there. Some things may have changed if history had gone differently, but you can’t just ignore the causes of why particular historical events or trends happened.
There’s nothing wrong with the principle of picking an outcome you want and see if there’s a plausible way for it to happen. But you’re ignoring that there are reasons why North America ended up as we know it today. Flapping your arms won’t change that.
Go back far enough, and you might be able to create a two-power NA scenario, but 1753 is far too late. 1529 is too late. Even 1492 is probably too late, although you might be able to make a case for a post-Columbus scenario where things change. (Maybe, just maybe, if John Cabot survives for longer and is much more successful.)
*
From: Guido the Guide
Time: 25 December, 9:05 AM
Kumgatu, just cool it. Speak civilly of other members. Take the argument to individual messages, if you really must, but even then, remember that good conduct is still in effect. I don’t want the Admin to come back tomorrow and have to start evicting people for things they wrote on Christmas day, of all days.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 9:17 AM
Originally written by Guido the Guide:
> I don’t want the Admin to come back tomorrow and have to
> start evicting people for things they wrote on Christmas day,
> of all days.
Partner, how many times? I’m a Plirite. I’m not a Christian. I DON’T CARE ABOUT CHRISTMAS.
You worshippers of a dead god can believe what you want, but don’t try to impose it on me or the world.
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Stop thinking so fixed-historically! Given who you picked your
> lingo from, I’d have thought you would be more courageous about
> thinking in new ways.
Stop being such a patronising piece of donkey’s vomit.
> Don’t you think that if, say, Tigeria fell to the English early enough,
> that there would be more commonality among the northern and
> southern English colonies?
A few more things in common, maybe, but not enough to matter. It was hard enough getting Virginia and Cavendia to unite. Wine, hemp and tobacco growing free farmers didn’t get on that well with rice and tea growing, slave-owning planters. How well do you think it’s going to work if you throw in whatever mercantilists you have in ex-Tigeria and puritans in New England?
*
From: Emerald
Time: 25 December, 9:26 AM
Originally written by Kumgatu the Bold:
> You worshippers of a dead god can believe what you want, but
> don’t try to impose it on me or the world.
So you want balance instead of Christmas peace? Just don’t give us the harmony which comes through self-detonation.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 9:32 AM
Fuck you, Emerald. Fuck you with a 200-metre redwood up the arse.
The worst part of it is, you can’t even be creative with your baiting. You could at least have come up with something smarter like “partner, you have a really explosive personality”.
Instead, it was just a boring insult. The only thing you left out was calling me a black-heart or nigger or something equally puerile. It’s as bad as if I called you a ritual cannibal, which I won’t, because it would be predictable.
*
From: Guido the Guide
Time: 25 December, 9:47 AM
@ Emerald, that was disgraceful. I’ve deleted your second message, since it was even worse. Consider yourself locked for a week. It would be longer, but that’s the maximum I have the authority for. Whenever the Admin checks back in, I’m sure he’ll evict you permanently.
@ Kumgatu, what Emerald wrote was reprehensible, but you were steaming even before that. You’re locked for seventy-two hours to give you a chance to calm down.
@ TLG, you’re still pretty new around here, so I’ll settle for a warning in your case: be more civil to people. This isn’t a playground, and you’re not Mighty Mouse.
As for the rest of you, anyone who tries to keep any baiting going will get the same punishment as Emerald. Anyone else who tries to derail the thread some other way will be summarily locked for twenty-four hours.
*
From: Jason Markham
Time: 25 December, 10:51 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> The basic sceanrio is that North America must be wholly divided into two great
> powers: an Anglophone power in the north and east, and a Hispanophone power in
> the south and west.
Very difficult one, TLG. Maybe not space-cuckoo difficult as some have suggested upthread, but still a very hard thing to pull off.
You’d certainly need an early divergence. 1753 is right out. I think that you’d need to have New Amsterdam fall to the English before it gets properly established. I’m not up on the military and naval history enough to work out the latest date when that would be possible, but once the whole New Netherlands are in place, it’s too late. Even if they fall to the English later, there’s still too much of a sense of separation among England’s disparate colonies.
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 11:11 AM
Maybe have New Amsterdam fall to someone else first. Sweden maybe, or France? Having one set of foreign overlords might mean that the people there have a weakened sense of identity, then if the English take over later, its less of an issue.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 11:21 AM
@ PWanda
Yeah, that mihgt work. Doesn’t help that much with the Spanish half, though. Can you think of a divergence which would help with that?
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 11:24 AM
Keeping California part of the Spanish great power is going to be a bitch!
*
From: Cuchulainn
Time: 25 December, 11:32 AM
You've set yourself quite a task here, TLG. I'm afraid I do not see any way to help with the scenario as a whole, but I recommend that you read everything that Stayman has written on the history of Virginia and Alleghania to give yourself some idea of the requirements for unification.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 11:39 AM
Keeping the French out of North America entirely is going to be hard. New France is easy enough to have them lose pretty much any time, even Canada, but Louisiana is a ’hole other story.
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 11:55 AM
Originally written by Patrician:
> Keeping the French out of North America entirely is going to be hard.
> New France is easy enough to have them lose pretty much any time, even
> Canada, but Louisiana is a ’hole other story.
There can still be significant numbers of French speakers, remember. Just a 10% minority of the whole population. If you can hold the rest of North America east of the Rockies into one nation – I know, I know, but finding a divergence for that is the challenge – then Louisiana won’t be that big a proportion of the people.
It would have to fall to the English eventually, or even the new sovereign nation after it wins independence.
*
From: Alex 1001
Time: 25 December, 12:03 PM
Originally written by The Profound Wanderer:
> It would have to fall to the English eventually, or even the new
> independent nation after it wins independence.
Or after the English grant them independence.
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 12:09 PM
Originally written by Alex 1001:
> Or after they win independence.
Yeah, I suppose. Given what’s already happened in this thread, though, I don’t want to derail things by getting into the ever-contentious arguments about whether independence was better granted by the pen or the gun barrel.
From a macro-level it’s pretty much irrelevant anyway. You have go figure out how to make the English colonies the only ones north of the Spanish great power. Once you’ve worked that out, the details of how independence is achieved will be relatively minor.
*
From: Lopidya
Time: 25 December, 12:14 PM
Everyone’s forgetting about the Spanish half of the challenge. How to create a super-Mexico or preserved New Spain which stretches from Alaska to Panama? That’s a major undertaking in itself, never mind combining the anglophone half of the continent too!
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 12:21 PM
Originally written by Lopidya:
> Everyone’s forgetting about the Spanish half of the challenge. How to
> create a super-Mexico or preserved New Spain which stretches from
> Alaska to Panama?
Personally, I’d see the English-speaking half as the greater challenge. Find a divergence which can accomplish that, and the Spanish unification might follow from that – if only as a response to the threat posed by this English great power.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 12:28 PM
No-one’s answered how any Super-Mexico is going to hold onto California as a single country!
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 12:41 PM
Originally written by Neville Maximum:
> No-one’s answered how any Super-Mexico is going to hold onto
> California as a single country!
Oh, please. No Californian Migration scenarios are commonplace around here. Learn how to use the search engine.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 12:45 PM
@ Hats
California is a problem coming and going, partner. If there’s no migration, then there’s not enough people to make it worth Spain’s trouble to hold onto it, either!
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 12:52 PM
@ Hats and Maxxie
Actually, for the scenario I have in mnd, I’d prefer it if California does have a large population.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 12:59 PM
Then you’re stuck, partner. If California has the migration, then it won’t be part of any super-Mexico. If California doesn’t have the migration, then how can it have so many people?
*
From: AlyssaBabe
Time: 25 December, 1:01 PM
Originally written by Neville Maximum:
> If California doesn’t have the migration, then how can it have so
> many people?
Cali-fornication...
*
From: Tin Man
Time: 25 December, 1:06 PM
Gunfighter, do you have a map of the borders you have in mind?
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:10 PM
So, would a fall of Tigeria – when still the New Netherlands – to Sweden or France be possible?
*
From: Special Jimmy
Time: 25 December, 1:14 PM
@ Patrician
Not bloody likely. Sweden had too much else to worry about in Europe during the seventeenth century to pick a fight over Tigeria. France didn’t have the navy to hold it until it was too well-established to be conquered and bargained away at the diplomatic table.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:19 PM
So it’s down to England conquering it directly, if anyone does?
*
From: Special Jimmy
Time: 25 December, 1:21 PM
@ Patrician
Hard to see who else could do it. Spain couldn’t even beat the Dutch in the Netherlands, not like they’re going to bother taking New Amsterdam.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 1:26 PM
Originally written by Neville Maximum:
> California is a problem coming and going, partner. If there’s
> no migration, then there’s not enough people to make it worth
> Spain’s trouble to hold onto it, either!
That’s oversimplifying to the point of absurdity. It would be worth less, not worthless. A near-empty California give less motivation to keep it, but it’s easier to hold with fewer rebellious locals around, too.
This has come up before. Many times. Check out Red Dawn’s excellent “When We Were Young” timeline, which is based on a variant of the No California Migration premise, or Orb’s seminal “Night and Steel” timeline, which has a near-empty California as a flow-on.
Or, failing that, use the search engine to find the dozens of discussion threads on this topic. You’re not discussing anything new here.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:28 PM
So basically we need a specific divergence which gives the English early control of Tigeria.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:36 PM
Everyone, this thread is drifting. Does anyon have any ideas for how to solve both halfs of the challenge?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:38 PM
@Tin Man
No, don't have a map. Would you mind drawing one based on what I've described?
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 1:41 PM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Everyone, this thread is drifting. Does anyon have any ideas for
> how to solve both halfs of the challenge?
No, because it can’t be done, as you’ve already been told. We’ve moved on to discussing whether one half or the other of your challenge can be accomplished. That might be possible, and more interesting to boot.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:47 PM
@ Hats
Stop being a spoilsport. If you can’t think of a way to make it work, don’t disencourage everyone else from trying.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:49 PM
TLG, stop being a jackanape. If you’re so precious about your scenario, tell us exactly what you have in mind and we’ll see if we can help.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 1:54 PM
Wow, TLG, you are a piece of work. Since Guido has already had to drop a warning over conduct in this thread, I won’t say anything else except welcome to my eyes shut list. Population: you.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:56 PM
@ Patrician
Dont want to give too much away, but it’s mostly set in Africa.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:59 PM
If that’s the best you can do, goodbye. I have better things to do on Christmas than help someone who refuses to be helped.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 2:16 PM
Those timelines are much too long. You can’t expect me to read all of them!
*
From: Pierre Dubois
Time: 25 December, 2:53 PM
Much as it pains me to agree with Hats about anything, he’s right in this case. TLG, you might as well be farting into the wind.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 3:48 PM
Is there anyone left who actually feels up to meeting an AH challange?
*
From: Tuar'e'mont Tua'ru'il
Time: 25 December, 4:02 PM
Love to read a scenario based on this, but don't know enough about it to suggest how you could achieve it.
*
From: Lopidya
Time: 25 December, 4:14 PM
Does it matter for your scenario if there’s still Plirites in North America?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 4:33 PM
@ Lopidya
It would be fine if there’s still religious Plirite influence. Mkes no difference for my scenario. The only things I nede are that there are only two states, and that linguistically they must be Anglophone and Hispanophone. But the later the divergence the better, since it could flow-on to what I have in mind elsewhere in the world.
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 6:11 PM
You’re all going about this challenge wrong. A later divergence date is perfectly plausible, if you think about the essential requirements.
The original poster wants a dual state North America where English and Spanish are the dominant languages today. Not in 1900. Not in 1800. Today.
That’s plenty of time for linguistic change, and for military conquest, too.
Why couldn’t two military great powers emerge in North America, even after independence? Wars are complex things. Given the right circumstances, I could easily see a post-independence state conquering most of its neighbours. And holding them, too. Sure, they might be unhappy subjects, but subjects they could remain.
New England has the potential on the eastern seaboard, I think, and Mexico in the south. Not easy, of course, but not impossible either. (Not even im-possible.)
If conquest can be achieved in the right timeframe, then linguistic change would follow. Consider: languages, even well-established languages, can decline over time. Particularly in the era of modern communications.
If New England launches a successful program of military expansion, say sometime after 1870 when its industrial advantage will really be at its height, then it might take over much of North America.
If New England can hold its conquests, then English will be a clear majority language over the whole eastern half of the continent. Of course, there will be significant linguistic minorities, but they will be as islands in an English sea. Most official communications will be in English; so will most education, especially higher education.
Given that sort of linguistic pressure, I’d expect substantial declines in the proportion of minority language speakers. Sure, French or Dutch will never disappear entirely, but they will gradually attrite speakers, particularly in smaller communities. Before too long, the majority of their speakers will be bilingual; in a few generations, many of them will speak English as their first language.
*
From: Broken Drum
Time: 25 December, 6:38 PM
Originally written by HistoryMinor:
> If New England launches a successful program of military
> expansion, say sometime after 1870 when its industrial advantage
> will really be at its height, then it might take over much of North
> America.
That’s some impressive space-cuckoos you have singing there, partner. New England launching a continent-wide military expansion program after 1870? Using what, genetically enhanced super dolphins?
Sure, they’ve got more population and manufacturing capacity than any other individual nation in North America, but not all of them together. New England might get away with conquest once, maybe even twice. But don’t you think that after that, the rest of the continent would form a defensive alliance to stop them? Especially if New England is annexing whole nations.
And don’t even get me started on the possibility of foreign intervention from Europe, Argentina, or Brazil.
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 6:48 PM
@ Broken Drum
Guess it’s easier to bitch than to create, hey?
I didn’t say it was likely. Just that it was possible. Mistrust can stop nations allying together; foreign wars can keep the European and South American powers busy elsewhere. Don’t write off a whole scenario as impossible just because there’s circumstances where it might not happen.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 6:54 PM
@ HistoryMinor
Lov you’re style, man! Can you develop that scenario a bit more?
*
From: Broken Drum
Time: 25 December, 7:14 PM
Originally written by HistoryMinor:
> I didn’t say it was likely. Just that it was possible. Mistrust can stop
> nations allying together; foreign wars can keep the European and South
> American powers busy elsewhere. Don’t write off a whole scenario as
> impossible just because there’s circumstances where it might not happen.
There’s mistrust, and there’s bloody insanity.
Mistrust is: Alleghania and Louisiana stand aside while New England invades Tigeria over some trumped-up pretext.
Bloody insanity is: Alleghania, Louisiana, California, Mexico, and everyone else in North America don’t notice when New England cunningly invades and annexes them one by one, and they just stand around smoking kunduri and do nothing about it, because, well, they think that New England’s armies have flashy uniforms or something.
Spot the difference?
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 7:16 PM
@ The Last Gunfighter:
Glad you like my suggestions, but I can’t help noticing that this is about the fifth thread you’ve started where you ask other people to come up with ideas for you, but you’re never willing to put any time or thought into developing them yourself. I think that this time you should flesh things out on your own.
*
From: Sword of Allah
Time: 25 December, 7:21 PM
Originally written by Broken Drum:
> Bloody insanity is: Alleghania, Louisiana, California, Mexico, and everyone
> else in North America don’t notice when New England cunningly invades and
> annexes them one by one, and they just stand around smoking kunduri and
> do nothing about it, because, well, they think that New England’s armies
> have flashy uniforms or something.
If Alleghania, Louisiana, and the rest are involved in a lengthy war; they might not be able to do something about it when New England starts the attack. And they probably won't be a very good shape to do much after they stop fighting each other. After all, there is historical precedence for that (multiple occasions, for that matter). War-weary Persia and Byzantium getting largely swallowed by the Caliphate, for one.
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 7:23 PM
@ Broken Drum
There’s constructive criticism, and there’s unhelpful pedantic nitpicking.
Constructive criticism is: pointing out the problems with someone else’s allohistorical scenario and suggesting alternatives to make it work.
Unhelpful pedantic nitpicking is: carping and quibbling and refusing to change your position or keep an open mind, and never actually coming up with any scenarios or ideas of your own.
Spot the difference?
*
From: Dozy
Time: 25 December, 7:31 PM
I think that the best time to create an English-speaking great power in North America is in later colonial times. Maybe do something to muck about with the Nine Years War. You’d have to change the alliance structure or diplomatic priorities a fair bit – maybe have Sweden intervene, for instance – but it might be possible for England to make some major colonial acquisitions as a result of that war (or a close allohistorical analogue).
That wouldn’t be enough in itself to create a single English nation in North America, but it would be a good start.
*
From: Mark Antony the Guide
Time: 25 December, 7:39 PM
Right. There’s far too much hostility in this thread. I’m closing it now before things get even worse. The Admin can sort out any necessary punishments in the morning.
Compliments of the season to everyone who celebrates it, and good luck to everyone else.
* * *
[1] This refers to the Red River which forms the OTL Texas-Oklahoma state border, not one of the at least six other Red Rivers in OTL USA or Canada.
* * *
Thoughts?
Given the festive season, I thought it was time for a slightly more light-hearted look at the future of the LRG-verse.
Edit: The sections in blue have been added based on reader feedback from here and elsewhere. I think that they add a little to the piece. If you've already read this post, then you can just check out the blue sections to see what's been added.
* * *
Taken from a discussion thread posted on the allohistory.com message board.
Note: all dates are in the Gregorian calendar. All message times are listed in what would be the equivalent of North American Eastern Standard Time.
Thread Title: AH Challange: Dual state North America
*
Original Post
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 24 December, 9:35 PM
Got a new challenge for you folks. This is a challange inspired buy a novella I’m working on.
The basic sceanrio is that North America must be wholly divided into two great powers: an Anglophone power in the north and east, and a Hispanophone power in the south and west.
These too great states must be the recognised sovereign states for the entirety of North America. There can be small autonomous regions and formal dependencies if you like, but de jure sovereignty has two reside with the two great powers. No protectorates, satellite states, or corporate states allowed.
More, the two states must be predominately English and Spanish speaking, respectively. The sole official language for the nations as a whole must be English or Spanish. It is acceptable to have relatively small minorities who speak other languages – Dutch, French, Swedish, Nahuatl, Congxie, whatever – and those languages can even be official languages of subnational regions. But no single linguistic minority can from more than 10% of the population of either nation. At least 80% of the people in each nation much speak the majority language as their sole native language.
The border between the dual states can be flexible depending on your chosen divergence, but it must includ the Rockies for much of their length. The north-south portion of the border should be somewhere around the southern extremities of the Rockies, or a bit further south than that. Maybe a river border, say the Red River [1], maybe the Rio Neuces, or at a pinch the Rio Bravo [Rio Grande]. Or you can use a border determined by settlement or military division, but it shouldn’t be any further south than the Rio Bravo.
In tems of population, industrial capacity, political structure or other demographics, you can pick pretty much whatever you want. But thw two great powers need to be both stable enough and wealthy enough to be effective geopolitical rivals – one can’t dominate the other.
The divergence date must be no earlier than 23 April 1529, ie after the Treaty of Saragossa ratified the division of the globe into Spanish and Portuguese zones. Ideally the diveregence should be after 1753 – the later the better, as far as I’m concerned.
Have at it, folks!
*
From: Hasta la Vista
Time: 24 December, 9:42 PM
What are the borders of North America?
*
From: Patrician
Time: 24 December, 9:44 PM
What about Greenland?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 24 December, 9:54 PM
@ Hasta La Vista and Patrician
Good call, folks!
For these purposes, North America includes all of the mainland of the continent from the Arctic to as far south as, well, I’d prefer it to stretch as far as the Isthmus of Panama. I suppose a lesser challenge would be to have North America defined as ending somewhere no further north than the Isthmus of Tehuantepec.
I don’t care what happens to Greenland or the Caribbean islands. They can be part of either of the dual states, still colonies or dependencies of European powers, or even independent micro-nations. It doesn’t matter. (Althgouh I’d love to hear how Greenland could be part of the Spanish great power!)
*
From: Christo Columbo
Time: 24 December, 10:12 PM
@ TLG
Is this novella going to be part of a series? It'd be great to see this setting as part of a broader literary universe like R.R. Floyd's "Hammer of Gold" novels - both series, and the follow-ons. I loooove those books. Favourite moment: when the Atjuntja armies bring Shah Jahan himself for appeasement at the House of Pain. Allohistory needs more writers like him!
*
From: Patrician
Time: 24 December, 10:17 PM
Erm, Floyd is a woman. Ruth Roxanne, I believe her initials stand for.
*
From: Christo Columbo
Time: 24 December, 10:22 PM
Patrician, are you serious? That doesn't get mentioned in the "about the author" section.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 24 December, 10:24 PM
@Columbine
Have to get the novella finished and sold first before I can think about a whole series.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 24 December, 10:27 PM
Deadly serious. She just uses her initials since male readers are less likely to buy from authors with female first names.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 7:06 AM
Come on, doesn’t anyone have any ideas?
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 7:21AM
In two words: im-possible.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 7:26 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> The basic sceanrio is that North America must be wholly divided into two great
> powers: an Anglophone power in the north and east, and a Hispanophone power in
> the south and west.
Partner, not going to happen. Even as few as four sovereign nations in North America is major-implausible territory. Three is space-cuckoo land or wish-fulfillment, take your pick. Two is who rolled the dream grass [cannabis] into your klinsigar?
*
From: Hasta la Vista
Time: 25 December, 7:28 AM
Whether North America is defined as ending in Tehuantepec or Panama won't really change things much. Holding that part together is reasonably straightforward. Its the western coast further north which you need to worry about.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 7:41 PM
@ Hasta La Vista
So hwo woudl you keep that part of the Hispanophone great power?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 7:46 AM
@ Hats and Boldie
Try to be more constructive, folks! This is a challange. It’s not meant to be easy, but help me find a way.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 7:53AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Try to be more constructive, folks! This is a challange. It’s not meant to
> be easy, but help me find a way.
Partner, threads on two- or three- or even one-nation North America come up a lot. They get shot down just as quickly as they deserve. Look them up in the search engine; that’s what it’s there for.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 8:01 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Try to be more constructive, folks! This is a challange. It’s not meant to
> be easy, but help me find a way.
Not my job to make the impossible happen, partner. You want to make it work, you find a way. Just don’t be surprised if you’re shot down in flames when you try.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 8:09 AM
@ Hats and Boldie
If you cant say something helpful, just stay out of this thread, hey?
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 8:18 AM
TLG, since you’re clearly too illiterate to work out how to use the search engine, let me give you a quick-and-dirty summary of why it wouldn’t happen.
During colonial times, everyone wanted a piece of North America. No single European power could defeat all of the others without provoking a general European war. Everyone was too concerned with the balance of power to allow one nation to come out on top in Europe. That always applied to divisions of colonial territory after European wars, too. Colonial borders could get adjusted, and even the odd colony fully handed over, but not on the scale required to divide all North America in half.
And by the time independence came, separate identities were too well-established in North America for the nations to unite.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 8:28 AM
Originally written by Hats:
> And by the time independence came, separate identities were too
> well-established in North America for the nations to unite.
Truth, Hats.
Just to add to that, even colonies by the one power would find it quite difficult to unite when they had been administered separately for so long. To pick the most obvious example, England had lots of colonies in North America, but they didn’t all join together.
Some did unite, of course, both before and after independence, and maybe a few more could in an allohistory. But only if they weren’t too far apart or too disparate in their culture and governance. For instance, can you imagine Alleghania and New England uniting even if Tigeria wasn’t in the way?
Of course, The Last Goober can’t seem to figure that out.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 8:29 AM
@ Hats
Just because your lingo is Hats doesn’t mean that you should talk through it!
This is allohistory, not fixed history. Just because something turned out one way in our history doesnt mean that ith as to work out the same way if the wheel of time was given another spin.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 8:36 AM
@ Boldie
Stop thinking so fixed-historically! Given who you picked your lingo from, I’d have thought you would be more courageous about thinking in new ways.
Don’t you think that if, say, Tigeria fell to the English early enough, that there would be more commonality among the northern and southern English colonies?
*
From: Guido the Guide
Time: 25 December, 8:48 AM
Be nice, everyone. This is Christmas. Save your fights for your family, not fellow AH.commers.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 8:59 AM
Originally written by Guido the Guide:
> Be nice, everyone. This is Christmas.
I’m a Plirite, partner. I don’t care about Christmas.
If Goober is going to make stupid pronouncements or ask for space-cuckoo scenarios, I’m going to call him on it, regardless of which day it is.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 9:04 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Just because your lingo is Hats doesn’t mean that you should talk through it!
In the spirit of the season, and given that a guide has already warned you about it, I’ll ignore this comment for now.
> This is allohistory, not fixed history. Just because something turned out
> one way in our history doesnt mean that ith as to work out the same way
> if the wheel of time was given another spin.
Allohistory does not mean anything goes. It means picking an event which might have gone differently, and then extrapolating what might plausibly have happened from there. Some things may have changed if history had gone differently, but you can’t just ignore the causes of why particular historical events or trends happened.
There’s nothing wrong with the principle of picking an outcome you want and see if there’s a plausible way for it to happen. But you’re ignoring that there are reasons why North America ended up as we know it today. Flapping your arms won’t change that.
Go back far enough, and you might be able to create a two-power NA scenario, but 1753 is far too late. 1529 is too late. Even 1492 is probably too late, although you might be able to make a case for a post-Columbus scenario where things change. (Maybe, just maybe, if John Cabot survives for longer and is much more successful.)
*
From: Guido the Guide
Time: 25 December, 9:05 AM
Kumgatu, just cool it. Speak civilly of other members. Take the argument to individual messages, if you really must, but even then, remember that good conduct is still in effect. I don’t want the Admin to come back tomorrow and have to start evicting people for things they wrote on Christmas day, of all days.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 9:17 AM
Originally written by Guido the Guide:
> I don’t want the Admin to come back tomorrow and have to
> start evicting people for things they wrote on Christmas day,
> of all days.
Partner, how many times? I’m a Plirite. I’m not a Christian. I DON’T CARE ABOUT CHRISTMAS.
You worshippers of a dead god can believe what you want, but don’t try to impose it on me or the world.
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Stop thinking so fixed-historically! Given who you picked your
> lingo from, I’d have thought you would be more courageous about
> thinking in new ways.
Stop being such a patronising piece of donkey’s vomit.
> Don’t you think that if, say, Tigeria fell to the English early enough,
> that there would be more commonality among the northern and
> southern English colonies?
A few more things in common, maybe, but not enough to matter. It was hard enough getting Virginia and Cavendia to unite. Wine, hemp and tobacco growing free farmers didn’t get on that well with rice and tea growing, slave-owning planters. How well do you think it’s going to work if you throw in whatever mercantilists you have in ex-Tigeria and puritans in New England?
*
From: Emerald
Time: 25 December, 9:26 AM
Originally written by Kumgatu the Bold:
> You worshippers of a dead god can believe what you want, but
> don’t try to impose it on me or the world.
So you want balance instead of Christmas peace? Just don’t give us the harmony which comes through self-detonation.
*
From: Kumgatu the Bold
Time: 25 December, 9:32 AM
Fuck you, Emerald. Fuck you with a 200-metre redwood up the arse.
The worst part of it is, you can’t even be creative with your baiting. You could at least have come up with something smarter like “partner, you have a really explosive personality”.
Instead, it was just a boring insult. The only thing you left out was calling me a black-heart or nigger or something equally puerile. It’s as bad as if I called you a ritual cannibal, which I won’t, because it would be predictable.
*
From: Guido the Guide
Time: 25 December, 9:47 AM
@ Emerald, that was disgraceful. I’ve deleted your second message, since it was even worse. Consider yourself locked for a week. It would be longer, but that’s the maximum I have the authority for. Whenever the Admin checks back in, I’m sure he’ll evict you permanently.
@ Kumgatu, what Emerald wrote was reprehensible, but you were steaming even before that. You’re locked for seventy-two hours to give you a chance to calm down.
@ TLG, you’re still pretty new around here, so I’ll settle for a warning in your case: be more civil to people. This isn’t a playground, and you’re not Mighty Mouse.
As for the rest of you, anyone who tries to keep any baiting going will get the same punishment as Emerald. Anyone else who tries to derail the thread some other way will be summarily locked for twenty-four hours.
*
From: Jason Markham
Time: 25 December, 10:51 AM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> The basic sceanrio is that North America must be wholly divided into two great
> powers: an Anglophone power in the north and east, and a Hispanophone power in
> the south and west.
Very difficult one, TLG. Maybe not space-cuckoo difficult as some have suggested upthread, but still a very hard thing to pull off.
You’d certainly need an early divergence. 1753 is right out. I think that you’d need to have New Amsterdam fall to the English before it gets properly established. I’m not up on the military and naval history enough to work out the latest date when that would be possible, but once the whole New Netherlands are in place, it’s too late. Even if they fall to the English later, there’s still too much of a sense of separation among England’s disparate colonies.
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 11:11 AM
Maybe have New Amsterdam fall to someone else first. Sweden maybe, or France? Having one set of foreign overlords might mean that the people there have a weakened sense of identity, then if the English take over later, its less of an issue.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 11:21 AM
@ PWanda
Yeah, that mihgt work. Doesn’t help that much with the Spanish half, though. Can you think of a divergence which would help with that?
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 11:24 AM
Keeping California part of the Spanish great power is going to be a bitch!
*
From: Cuchulainn
Time: 25 December, 11:32 AM
You've set yourself quite a task here, TLG. I'm afraid I do not see any way to help with the scenario as a whole, but I recommend that you read everything that Stayman has written on the history of Virginia and Alleghania to give yourself some idea of the requirements for unification.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 11:39 AM
Keeping the French out of North America entirely is going to be hard. New France is easy enough to have them lose pretty much any time, even Canada, but Louisiana is a ’hole other story.
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 11:55 AM
Originally written by Patrician:
> Keeping the French out of North America entirely is going to be hard.
> New France is easy enough to have them lose pretty much any time, even
> Canada, but Louisiana is a ’hole other story.
There can still be significant numbers of French speakers, remember. Just a 10% minority of the whole population. If you can hold the rest of North America east of the Rockies into one nation – I know, I know, but finding a divergence for that is the challenge – then Louisiana won’t be that big a proportion of the people.
It would have to fall to the English eventually, or even the new sovereign nation after it wins independence.
*
From: Alex 1001
Time: 25 December, 12:03 PM
Originally written by The Profound Wanderer:
> It would have to fall to the English eventually, or even the new
> independent nation after it wins independence.
Or after the English grant them independence.
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 12:09 PM
Originally written by Alex 1001:
> Or after they win independence.
Yeah, I suppose. Given what’s already happened in this thread, though, I don’t want to derail things by getting into the ever-contentious arguments about whether independence was better granted by the pen or the gun barrel.
From a macro-level it’s pretty much irrelevant anyway. You have go figure out how to make the English colonies the only ones north of the Spanish great power. Once you’ve worked that out, the details of how independence is achieved will be relatively minor.
*
From: Lopidya
Time: 25 December, 12:14 PM
Everyone’s forgetting about the Spanish half of the challenge. How to create a super-Mexico or preserved New Spain which stretches from Alaska to Panama? That’s a major undertaking in itself, never mind combining the anglophone half of the continent too!
*
From: The Profound Wanderer
Time: 25 December, 12:21 PM
Originally written by Lopidya:
> Everyone’s forgetting about the Spanish half of the challenge. How to
> create a super-Mexico or preserved New Spain which stretches from
> Alaska to Panama?
Personally, I’d see the English-speaking half as the greater challenge. Find a divergence which can accomplish that, and the Spanish unification might follow from that – if only as a response to the threat posed by this English great power.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 12:28 PM
No-one’s answered how any Super-Mexico is going to hold onto California as a single country!
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 12:41 PM
Originally written by Neville Maximum:
> No-one’s answered how any Super-Mexico is going to hold onto
> California as a single country!
Oh, please. No Californian Migration scenarios are commonplace around here. Learn how to use the search engine.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 12:45 PM
@ Hats
California is a problem coming and going, partner. If there’s no migration, then there’s not enough people to make it worth Spain’s trouble to hold onto it, either!
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 12:52 PM
@ Hats and Maxxie
Actually, for the scenario I have in mnd, I’d prefer it if California does have a large population.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 12:59 PM
Then you’re stuck, partner. If California has the migration, then it won’t be part of any super-Mexico. If California doesn’t have the migration, then how can it have so many people?
*
From: AlyssaBabe
Time: 25 December, 1:01 PM
Originally written by Neville Maximum:
> If California doesn’t have the migration, then how can it have so
> many people?
Cali-fornication...
*
From: Tin Man
Time: 25 December, 1:06 PM
Gunfighter, do you have a map of the borders you have in mind?
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:10 PM
So, would a fall of Tigeria – when still the New Netherlands – to Sweden or France be possible?
*
From: Special Jimmy
Time: 25 December, 1:14 PM
@ Patrician
Not bloody likely. Sweden had too much else to worry about in Europe during the seventeenth century to pick a fight over Tigeria. France didn’t have the navy to hold it until it was too well-established to be conquered and bargained away at the diplomatic table.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:19 PM
So it’s down to England conquering it directly, if anyone does?
*
From: Special Jimmy
Time: 25 December, 1:21 PM
@ Patrician
Hard to see who else could do it. Spain couldn’t even beat the Dutch in the Netherlands, not like they’re going to bother taking New Amsterdam.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 1:26 PM
Originally written by Neville Maximum:
> California is a problem coming and going, partner. If there’s
> no migration, then there’s not enough people to make it worth
> Spain’s trouble to hold onto it, either!
That’s oversimplifying to the point of absurdity. It would be worth less, not worthless. A near-empty California give less motivation to keep it, but it’s easier to hold with fewer rebellious locals around, too.
This has come up before. Many times. Check out Red Dawn’s excellent “When We Were Young” timeline, which is based on a variant of the No California Migration premise, or Orb’s seminal “Night and Steel” timeline, which has a near-empty California as a flow-on.
Or, failing that, use the search engine to find the dozens of discussion threads on this topic. You’re not discussing anything new here.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:28 PM
So basically we need a specific divergence which gives the English early control of Tigeria.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:36 PM
Everyone, this thread is drifting. Does anyon have any ideas for how to solve both halfs of the challenge?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:38 PM
@Tin Man
No, don't have a map. Would you mind drawing one based on what I've described?
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 1:41 PM
Originally written by The Last Gunfighter:
> Everyone, this thread is drifting. Does anyon have any ideas for
> how to solve both halfs of the challenge?
No, because it can’t be done, as you’ve already been told. We’ve moved on to discussing whether one half or the other of your challenge can be accomplished. That might be possible, and more interesting to boot.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:47 PM
@ Hats
Stop being a spoilsport. If you can’t think of a way to make it work, don’t disencourage everyone else from trying.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:49 PM
TLG, stop being a jackanape. If you’re so precious about your scenario, tell us exactly what you have in mind and we’ll see if we can help.
*
From: Hats
Time: 25 December, 1:54 PM
Wow, TLG, you are a piece of work. Since Guido has already had to drop a warning over conduct in this thread, I won’t say anything else except welcome to my eyes shut list. Population: you.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 1:56 PM
@ Patrician
Dont want to give too much away, but it’s mostly set in Africa.
*
From: Patrician
Time: 25 December, 1:59 PM
If that’s the best you can do, goodbye. I have better things to do on Christmas than help someone who refuses to be helped.
*
From: Neville Maximum
Time: 25 December, 2:16 PM
Those timelines are much too long. You can’t expect me to read all of them!
*
From: Pierre Dubois
Time: 25 December, 2:53 PM
Much as it pains me to agree with Hats about anything, he’s right in this case. TLG, you might as well be farting into the wind.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 3:48 PM
Is there anyone left who actually feels up to meeting an AH challange?
*
From: Tuar'e'mont Tua'ru'il
Time: 25 December, 4:02 PM
Love to read a scenario based on this, but don't know enough about it to suggest how you could achieve it.
*
From: Lopidya
Time: 25 December, 4:14 PM
Does it matter for your scenario if there’s still Plirites in North America?
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 4:33 PM
@ Lopidya
It would be fine if there’s still religious Plirite influence. Mkes no difference for my scenario. The only things I nede are that there are only two states, and that linguistically they must be Anglophone and Hispanophone. But the later the divergence the better, since it could flow-on to what I have in mind elsewhere in the world.
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 6:11 PM
You’re all going about this challenge wrong. A later divergence date is perfectly plausible, if you think about the essential requirements.
The original poster wants a dual state North America where English and Spanish are the dominant languages today. Not in 1900. Not in 1800. Today.
That’s plenty of time for linguistic change, and for military conquest, too.
Why couldn’t two military great powers emerge in North America, even after independence? Wars are complex things. Given the right circumstances, I could easily see a post-independence state conquering most of its neighbours. And holding them, too. Sure, they might be unhappy subjects, but subjects they could remain.
New England has the potential on the eastern seaboard, I think, and Mexico in the south. Not easy, of course, but not impossible either. (Not even im-possible.)
If conquest can be achieved in the right timeframe, then linguistic change would follow. Consider: languages, even well-established languages, can decline over time. Particularly in the era of modern communications.
If New England launches a successful program of military expansion, say sometime after 1870 when its industrial advantage will really be at its height, then it might take over much of North America.
If New England can hold its conquests, then English will be a clear majority language over the whole eastern half of the continent. Of course, there will be significant linguistic minorities, but they will be as islands in an English sea. Most official communications will be in English; so will most education, especially higher education.
Given that sort of linguistic pressure, I’d expect substantial declines in the proportion of minority language speakers. Sure, French or Dutch will never disappear entirely, but they will gradually attrite speakers, particularly in smaller communities. Before too long, the majority of their speakers will be bilingual; in a few generations, many of them will speak English as their first language.
*
From: Broken Drum
Time: 25 December, 6:38 PM
Originally written by HistoryMinor:
> If New England launches a successful program of military
> expansion, say sometime after 1870 when its industrial advantage
> will really be at its height, then it might take over much of North
> America.
That’s some impressive space-cuckoos you have singing there, partner. New England launching a continent-wide military expansion program after 1870? Using what, genetically enhanced super dolphins?
Sure, they’ve got more population and manufacturing capacity than any other individual nation in North America, but not all of them together. New England might get away with conquest once, maybe even twice. But don’t you think that after that, the rest of the continent would form a defensive alliance to stop them? Especially if New England is annexing whole nations.
And don’t even get me started on the possibility of foreign intervention from Europe, Argentina, or Brazil.
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 6:48 PM
@ Broken Drum
Guess it’s easier to bitch than to create, hey?
I didn’t say it was likely. Just that it was possible. Mistrust can stop nations allying together; foreign wars can keep the European and South American powers busy elsewhere. Don’t write off a whole scenario as impossible just because there’s circumstances where it might not happen.
*
From: The Last Gunfighter
Time: 25 December, 6:54 PM
@ HistoryMinor
Lov you’re style, man! Can you develop that scenario a bit more?
*
From: Broken Drum
Time: 25 December, 7:14 PM
Originally written by HistoryMinor:
> I didn’t say it was likely. Just that it was possible. Mistrust can stop
> nations allying together; foreign wars can keep the European and South
> American powers busy elsewhere. Don’t write off a whole scenario as
> impossible just because there’s circumstances where it might not happen.
There’s mistrust, and there’s bloody insanity.
Mistrust is: Alleghania and Louisiana stand aside while New England invades Tigeria over some trumped-up pretext.
Bloody insanity is: Alleghania, Louisiana, California, Mexico, and everyone else in North America don’t notice when New England cunningly invades and annexes them one by one, and they just stand around smoking kunduri and do nothing about it, because, well, they think that New England’s armies have flashy uniforms or something.
Spot the difference?
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 7:16 PM
@ The Last Gunfighter:
Glad you like my suggestions, but I can’t help noticing that this is about the fifth thread you’ve started where you ask other people to come up with ideas for you, but you’re never willing to put any time or thought into developing them yourself. I think that this time you should flesh things out on your own.
*
From: Sword of Allah
Time: 25 December, 7:21 PM
Originally written by Broken Drum:
> Bloody insanity is: Alleghania, Louisiana, California, Mexico, and everyone
> else in North America don’t notice when New England cunningly invades and
> annexes them one by one, and they just stand around smoking kunduri and
> do nothing about it, because, well, they think that New England’s armies
> have flashy uniforms or something.
If Alleghania, Louisiana, and the rest are involved in a lengthy war; they might not be able to do something about it when New England starts the attack. And they probably won't be a very good shape to do much after they stop fighting each other. After all, there is historical precedence for that (multiple occasions, for that matter). War-weary Persia and Byzantium getting largely swallowed by the Caliphate, for one.
*
From: HistoryMinor
Time: 25 December, 7:23 PM
@ Broken Drum
There’s constructive criticism, and there’s unhelpful pedantic nitpicking.
Constructive criticism is: pointing out the problems with someone else’s allohistorical scenario and suggesting alternatives to make it work.
Unhelpful pedantic nitpicking is: carping and quibbling and refusing to change your position or keep an open mind, and never actually coming up with any scenarios or ideas of your own.
Spot the difference?
*
From: Dozy
Time: 25 December, 7:31 PM
I think that the best time to create an English-speaking great power in North America is in later colonial times. Maybe do something to muck about with the Nine Years War. You’d have to change the alliance structure or diplomatic priorities a fair bit – maybe have Sweden intervene, for instance – but it might be possible for England to make some major colonial acquisitions as a result of that war (or a close allohistorical analogue).
That wouldn’t be enough in itself to create a single English nation in North America, but it would be a good start.
*
From: Mark Antony the Guide
Time: 25 December, 7:39 PM
Right. There’s far too much hostility in this thread. I’m closing it now before things get even worse. The Admin can sort out any necessary punishments in the morning.
Compliments of the season to everyone who celebrates it, and good luck to everyone else.
* * *
[1] This refers to the Red River which forms the OTL Texas-Oklahoma state border, not one of the at least six other Red Rivers in OTL USA or Canada.
* * *
Thoughts?
Last edited:
