By way of military conquest yes. Voluntarily not in our lifetimes.
Mexico joins the United States...in the 1990s?
- Thread starter History Learner
- Start date
By way of military conquest yes. Voluntarily not in our lifetimes.
Marc
Donor
Annexation is ASB for so many reasons that it would be exhausting to list.
A sovereign merger of the two nations while implausible isn't impossible. But keep in mind, Mexico is going to demand terms in regards to integrating laws as well as such cultural factors as official languages.
One simple deal breaker, in regards to laws: read up Ley General de Población. (Imagine Planned Parenthood becoming a well supported government agency).
A sovereign merger of the two nations while implausible isn't impossible. But keep in mind, Mexico is going to demand terms in regards to integrating laws as well as such cultural factors as official languages.
One simple deal breaker, in regards to laws: read up Ley General de Población. (Imagine Planned Parenthood becoming a well supported government agency).
DougM
Donor
The population of the US is about about 328M. The population of Canada and Mexico is about half that.
Canada has 13 territories and provinces and Mexico has 31 one states so between them they will want at least 26 states.
So basically the US is “giving away” at least 1/3 of the House and the senate. And reducing the influence (onavetage) to less the 2/3 of what it currently is. Add in that the smaller population states are going to lose even more of that as it is arguabley better to be 48 of 50 then 74 of 76 when it comes time to grab an “important” job in congress so you can get your influence and you pound of flesh in the horse trading for pork.
So thier is absolutely no way this is going to happen. Canada... maybe. For the most part Canada is viewed as the suburb of the US and has a pretty similar culture and language and such. And even that will be a hard sell. But Mexico? No way. To be blunt. The US in not going to accept a bunch of people with such radically different culture and language and (for a lot of folks) the race issue is just to much.
To be frank thier is about 100M Americans that are not of European ancestory and if you add in 125M Mexicans of predominantly Non-European or at least non Northern European (Caucasian) ansestory then you have a country of about 450 to 460 million of which 225M are not “white”. So you have effectively made a predominately white European country into one that is at best half. This is not going to play well in Much of the current US. And you have made the under paid (by US levels) population a population that has demonstrated over the years the willingness to work for lower pay and in worse jobs citizens of the country.
So you are taking away the domination of thier culture and threatening thier jobs and for what? From the average citizens point of view absolutely ZERO gain, yes ultimate it will make a more powerful country but in the short term it will be an expense and a lot of work to fix Mexico, much of it is noticeably worse off then the US and it has HUGE corruption issues in both illegal activities (drugs organized crime and what have you) and politics. These are all issues that will be a pain to fix and will take time resources and lots of money.
It was one thing for West Germany to pay to bring East Germany up to speed, It was within the lifespan of many people alive at the time part of the country but Mexico has NEVER been part of the US. So thier is no natural incentive to pay the cost (both in effort and money) to bring them into the US.
So I say this entire concept is (at least up until this day) ASB level of impossible, You would have to change Mexico and the US so much they would not be Mexico or the US anymore. And the same holds true about Canada. The US may be willing (and even that is HIGHLY doubtful) but I think you would have to change Canada to much to make them willing. Unless you are putting forward something like an WW3 aftermath situation.
Canada has 13 territories and provinces and Mexico has 31 one states so between them they will want at least 26 states.
So basically the US is “giving away” at least 1/3 of the House and the senate. And reducing the influence (onavetage) to less the 2/3 of what it currently is. Add in that the smaller population states are going to lose even more of that as it is arguabley better to be 48 of 50 then 74 of 76 when it comes time to grab an “important” job in congress so you can get your influence and you pound of flesh in the horse trading for pork.
So thier is absolutely no way this is going to happen. Canada... maybe. For the most part Canada is viewed as the suburb of the US and has a pretty similar culture and language and such. And even that will be a hard sell. But Mexico? No way. To be blunt. The US in not going to accept a bunch of people with such radically different culture and language and (for a lot of folks) the race issue is just to much.
To be frank thier is about 100M Americans that are not of European ancestory and if you add in 125M Mexicans of predominantly Non-European or at least non Northern European (Caucasian) ansestory then you have a country of about 450 to 460 million of which 225M are not “white”. So you have effectively made a predominately white European country into one that is at best half. This is not going to play well in Much of the current US. And you have made the under paid (by US levels) population a population that has demonstrated over the years the willingness to work for lower pay and in worse jobs citizens of the country.
So you are taking away the domination of thier culture and threatening thier jobs and for what? From the average citizens point of view absolutely ZERO gain, yes ultimate it will make a more powerful country but in the short term it will be an expense and a lot of work to fix Mexico, much of it is noticeably worse off then the US and it has HUGE corruption issues in both illegal activities (drugs organized crime and what have you) and politics. These are all issues that will be a pain to fix and will take time resources and lots of money.
It was one thing for West Germany to pay to bring East Germany up to speed, It was within the lifespan of many people alive at the time part of the country but Mexico has NEVER been part of the US. So thier is no natural incentive to pay the cost (both in effort and money) to bring them into the US.
So I say this entire concept is (at least up until this day) ASB level of impossible, You would have to change Mexico and the US so much they would not be Mexico or the US anymore. And the same holds true about Canada. The US may be willing (and even that is HIGHLY doubtful) but I think you would have to change Canada to much to make them willing. Unless you are putting forward something like an WW3 aftermath situation.
Some random thoughs in no particular order
Immigration from non-mexican sources is probably clamped down on in order to get this through at all. Not just on the US side of things but Mexican side. Say 125,000 a year 1991-2001, to be raised to 500,000 for make it say another 25 years, likely extended to longer given 1) Mecico's electorate added in and Mexico's OTL laws 2) backlash from nativeborn americans during the period of adjustment.
On a food level, quite a bit changes. Move the shift towards even more spicy food we've been in the 2010s to the 2000s. Same reasons as OTL but only moreso. Slower rise of south/southeast/east asian food in the US than in OTL 1991-2019 due to the immigration slowdown.
Every big city would have LA-sized latin minorities as percentages of their population. "Urban" would mean black or brown and not just black.
Immigration from non-mexican sources is probably clamped down on in order to get this through at all. Not just on the US side of things but Mexican side. Say 125,000 a year 1991-2001, to be raised to 500,000 for make it say another 25 years, likely extended to longer given 1) Mecico's electorate added in and Mexico's OTL laws 2) backlash from nativeborn americans during the period of adjustment.
On a food level, quite a bit changes. Move the shift towards even more spicy food we've been in the 2010s to the 2000s. Same reasons as OTL but only moreso. Slower rise of south/southeast/east asian food in the US than in OTL 1991-2019 due to the immigration slowdown.
Every big city would have LA-sized latin minorities as percentages of their population. "Urban" would mean black or brown and not just black.
This thread _would_ fit the 1/3 or more of the US being latin challenge of another thread. In a related note: I suspect old mexico+california+new mexico might have Quebec-style bilingualism in place in TTL.
Mexican states gradually become American states and get representation in Congress. That would radically change the American political landscape. George W Bush would probably still win in 2000 by being able to get the Mexican vote by virtue of being the governor of a once border state with a large American population of Mexican descent and having a head start in getting the Mexican vote.
History Learner
Banned
Given initial annexation would occur under George H.W. Bush most likely, I feel like that would an effect on how the long run of politics works out as well as the general environment of the 1990s.
Lusitania
Donor
Lol...
To those in the US who think Mexicans or Quebec going to adopt English They must be snorting something. Take it from a Canadian Quebec will never accept English as their language no matter how much $$$ you throw st them. Also spend some time in Puerto Rico which as 100 years of American connection and yes many people can speak English but the common language at work and at home is Spanish. While people say Latinos are adopting English, no they learn English but their every language is Spanish go to any Latino-Mexican neighborhood in US.
If Caucasian American are freaking out about possibility of these “brown” people becoming American citizen think of the uproar when the Quebec senator starts speaking in French or the southern Mexico representative speaks only in Spanish.
You would see a condition of any political integration a movement for English becoming the US official language and that my friends would kill the whole integration process. People would want to live in the US but keep their identity.
To those in the US who think Mexicans or Quebec going to adopt English They must be snorting something. Take it from a Canadian Quebec will never accept English as their language no matter how much $$$ you throw st them. Also spend some time in Puerto Rico which as 100 years of American connection and yes many people can speak English but the common language at work and at home is Spanish. While people say Latinos are adopting English, no they learn English but their every language is Spanish go to any Latino-Mexican neighborhood in US.
If Caucasian American are freaking out about possibility of these “brown” people becoming American citizen think of the uproar when the Quebec senator starts speaking in French or the southern Mexico representative speaks only in Spanish.
You would see a condition of any political integration a movement for English becoming the US official language and that my friends would kill the whole integration process. People would want to live in the US but keep their identity.
Mexico has a national identity/distinctiveness beyond literally just not being the US, so there'd be less at stake psychologically imo.
mexico joining the us on it's own would involve lots of bags of raw diamonds for people on both sides but canada? probably requires a literal alien threat or something else extreme
mexico joining the us on it's own would involve lots of bags of raw diamonds for people on both sides but canada? probably requires a literal alien threat or something else extreme
History Learner
Banned
One thing on my mind is that this would likely force a U.S. focus on the domestic side of things in the 1990s, which can have multiple effects. For example, as I mentioned upthread, the lack of American involvement could have an alternate outcome to the Balkan Wars; could Greater Serbia emerge? Likewise, without American political support for it, might NATO be slower to expand and thus Russia feel less threatened in the long run?
fascinating counterfactual.
I except Mexico to be folded into the following states:
Baja California and Baja California de Sur is appended into California
Sonora and Chihuahua are merged to form Sonora state
Coahuila stays as is
Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas merge to form Rio Grande
Sinaloa and Durango form Sinaloa
Nayarit, Jalisco, and Colima form Jalisco
Aguascalientes, Zacatecas, and San Luis Potosi form San Luis Potosi
Guanajato and Queretaro form Guanajato
Edomex, Morelos and Mexico City form Edomex
Michoacan stays as is
Guerrero stays as is
Hidalgo, Tlaxcala, and Puebla form Puebla
Veracruz stays as is
Oaxaca stays as is
Chiapas and Tabasco form Chiapas
Campeche, Yucatan, and Quintana Roo form Yutacan
15 new states in total. I tried to balance the factors of both population and area.
I except Mexico to be folded into the following states:
Baja California and Baja California de Sur is appended into California
Sonora and Chihuahua are merged to form Sonora state
Coahuila stays as is
Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas merge to form Rio Grande
Sinaloa and Durango form Sinaloa
Nayarit, Jalisco, and Colima form Jalisco
Aguascalientes, Zacatecas, and San Luis Potosi form San Luis Potosi
Guanajato and Queretaro form Guanajato
Edomex, Morelos and Mexico City form Edomex
Michoacan stays as is
Guerrero stays as is
Hidalgo, Tlaxcala, and Puebla form Puebla
Veracruz stays as is
Oaxaca stays as is
Chiapas and Tabasco form Chiapas
Campeche, Yucatan, and Quintana Roo form Yutacan
15 new states in total. I tried to balance the factors of both population and area.
Modern Imperialism
Banned
Could the crime rates of pre-1992 US stay high and not decrease but continue to increase? This dips over into Mexico and Latin America(Americans trade them guns for drugs). Mexico still has people supporting joining the US but even more so then otl due to increased social issues in the country. Cartel influence in government and corruption are even higher then otl and more blatant. Salinas mismanaged the 1994 crisis even worse then otl but somehow barely stays in power but through very corrupt and shady ways. His brother is caught and found out like otl but only a few years later then otl. The assassination of rivals is successful but people have good idea of who behind it and when he wins the next election people riot because fraud and political intimidation is the only way he would have won again. Also many start showing evidence about him having connections to cartels and illegal activities. EZLN partisans continues and is more intense then otl. This these issues plug Mexico into deep social and economic upheaval. Crime and political violence skyrocket.
This starts causing serious issues in the US. Mexicans are starting to flee over the border in record number. The UN warns of a possible refugee crisis beginning(not that extreme but not far off from it. They aren’t no where near Syrian levels of unrest in Mexico. It’s more like cartels controlling rural communities, high unemployment, lack of good paying work, high crime, and low level constant violence. Mexico basically in a deep recession if not a depression. Salinas economic policies actually most likely helped Mexico somewhat in the long run but his backhanded and corrupt ways will likely overshadow that especially if he stays in power longer. His policies might sometimes be good but that doesn’t mean anything if he mismanaging the whole country and pissing off everyone. The amount of immigrants flooding border would be bigger then anything in otl US history. US in the 90s is in an economic boom and doing very well while its neighbor is looking like a border line failed state. People go we’re there is opportunity. Mexico in this situation could easily become the top domestic and foreign issue to the US especially when Mexicans in Mexico take up arms(not separatist or minorities. Actual Mexicans especially in the north). The National Guard has probably been sent to the border after the issue became bad enough. This could actually have major impact on US foreign involvement due to them getting distracted with Mexico. The Americans public might not always care about the rest of the world but Mexico is right next to them and they have many people within there country still highly connected to it personally. This isn’t Bosnia or Rwanda. Those places might be much worse but Americans don’t have to worry about any of that effecting them directly so it’s just another far off conflict. Mexico doing bad on the other hand would much more directly impact your average Americans. Texans will expect the government to act if they are being flooded by immigrants fleeing an unstable and economically struggling Mexico.
This could just start out as the US doing something like Panama invasion but on a much more massive scale. Basically the US gets sick of Salinas mismanagement and increasingly Putin like governance of Mexico(minus popular support of Putin. Salinas more depending on bribery, extortion, and other backhanded methods but that can only get a person so far. You need at least some actual support). This would be 1996 or 1997. They tell Salinas to step down and for Mexico to have fair elections under US or UN supervision. He said no which leads to a US invasion of Mexico to impose it by force. The unipolar movement is even stronger in Mexico then otl but ignored or unnoticed by the US public for the most except among some Mexican-Americans especially newly arrived or second generation ones. Most people in the US would consider annexing Mexico as a burden. Racism also still plays in here. It isn’t no where near as bad as the past but many Americans still consider Mexicans and Mexico as “ungovernable” to put it nicely. You have to convince them Mexico joining the US is better in the long run for them. Mexico nearly falling apart and requiring US intervention could be what does this depending on how things develop.
US invasion and occupation is going to be rather easy at least at first. Mexicans aren’t going to fight back against US military especially for unpopular president. American military likely intentionally deploy more Mexican Americans to the front lines to make things with the locals more cordial and friendly. US actions could have massive support from both sides of the border(internationally people might take this opportunity to criticize the US somewhat but most don’t take that seriously. Also US has a lot of international freedom in the 90s with USSR just dissolving awhile back). The US military, government, and public might actually be surprised by how welcoming the Mexicans are towards the invasion. Any anti-government partisan are either told to set down their arms and go home once the US takes the area. Most do while others actually become collaborators with the US and offer to help them. The US government and politicians might have use the events in Mexico as an excuse for drug and crime issues within the states. One of the reasons and pretexts for the invasion of Mexico besides unrest is the US wanting to get rid of cartels and criminal elements in Mexico without having to worry about international laws or government legal system. The US will actually be much more civil and kind towards Mexicans much more so then Arabs or Muslims which will avoid most criticism over the other stuff they do in Mexico during the invasion. The US likely knows where most cartels and drugs are based and the locals help can help fill in any blanks. The US military can literally just go bomb and raid cartels with no regard to procedure at all. The locals aren’t going to say anything about it because honestly many of them are probably for it. Many have lived in fear of these people for years. YouTuber who just spoke badly of cartel few years back was tortured and killed by them. The locals are most likely telling the US troops everything about them. Communism is gone. The US puts up with a lot of criminal activity but they don’t tolerate ones who are blatant and don’t serve their interests anymore. The 90s saw the US kill many cartel kingpins because they only caused trouble for the US once the Cold War was over.
The US is good at making itself look good. The US military could look more like liberators in this situation more then anything. The US military especially the Marines could have used a situation like this to encourage more Mexicans to join the military(marines often just want muscle and numbers. Army is more strict about education requirements but those usually get lessen in situations where they need manpower. Mexico might not have a lot of casualties at all but Mexico is big. You still need enough men plus enough to fill US military requirements elsewhere). Mexicans can get citizenship and fight a person they dislike if they join. Many probably do. If a bunch of the soldiers invading are actual Mexicans that is just good for self image. People can’t throw around the word imperialist or tyrant as easily especially to people in Mexico. Add in the fact the US is clearly out cartels and bring order to much of the country while acting rather civil you have a Mexican public that is even more favorable towards the US. Soldiers there are also could be left with a more positive image of Mexico and it’s people. They likely been policing mostly so that and not have to worry about getting surprised attacked like the Middle East so many probably just enjoy many of the leisure aspects of Mexico.
The after math of the invasion and the elections after could see some interesting stuff. Much of the world is shocked about how the invasion of Mexico went down even Americans. The US did have a lot of international support for the invasion but people would be shocked by how receptive the Mexican people were to the US invasion. Many would have thought burning of US flags and anti-US protest and even attacks on tourist would happen to some level but the complete opposite happens. Mexicans welcome US troops. They offer food, water, and help. Many US soldiers act kindly back especially Mexican Americans soldiers. US military even sets up some community programs during the invasion to help people within Mexico who are poor or drifting. Mexicans even can be seen waving US flags alongside Mexico flag or sometimes without it at all. The US likely keeps some troops there for a few years after the invasion and probably do away with any nationalistic or protectionism policies(US government will feel like they deserve something economically out of doing this so they probably get the new leadership to get rid of stuff like foreigners not being able to own land. Classical liberal economic policies minus the nationalist elements of the previous government would basically mean the US interest groups and people buying up a large portion of Mexico after the invasion which only increases economic integration and dependence.
Let’s say the first Mexican election after the invasion is 1998. Mexico not just having normal elections but also multiple others and referendums(US clean house after invasion. The amount of corruption they would uncover during an invasion of Mexico would shake Mexican society. Many powerful and wealthy people will likely face criminal charges or trails. Hell many Americans ones too but those likely don’t get revealed as much). One referendum is on how to restructure Mexico. Original this is more of a vote of adopting a more federal or unitary system but the unipolar movement demand an option to join the US is added to it. It’s added to the ticket. What happens next shocks US and the rest of the world.
Mexicans in 1998 with a vote of near 80 percent to join the United States. Mexicans take to the streets waving US flags and singing the national anthem in Spanish(this is more Pan-Americanism starting to take off. They still cherish their culture and respect it but they start associating more with the US based on general ideas and values relating to being Americans. Mexicans can technically be considered Americans too. Mexican-Americans could feed into this even more). Many Mexicans even make reference to Bolivar dream and their own history to show its desire to join the US. The US see many Mexicans do the same within the states too. Non-Hispanic Americans are more confused and unsure how to take this. Mexico sends a request to US about possible annexation which sees heavy debates in the houses and between the presidential candidates. The US has tied itself to Mexico a lot by this point. Their businesses have flooded the country, many US and duel citizens are buying up Mexican lands, some troops are still there, and the US has started building up Mexico after the invasion more so to prevent a future repeat of this(like they did with Japan or Germany. Or the south might be a better comparison). Many start thinking they might as well just take the whole thing but can’t agree on details. Politicians might start pointing out how annexation will protect US businesses from going overseas(they literally have one less place to go). That would be the best way to sell it to white and black Americans who are very unsure about this. At this point it the request could be accepted by US but revising is likely to take place. The US would offer Mexico status similar to Puerto Rico at first but they would immediately turn that down. They are too big to do that too(they will feel like they should have equal say to the other states on the federal level). A few more ideas get turn down until all sides come to agreement.
Mexico is likely divided up into 6 or 7 states while the very rural Beja California is added to US California and Arizona might get that coastal panhandle. The US is going to haggle them down on senate seats as much as is reasonable and possible. By the start of 1999 the US has officially annexed Mexico. This would impact the 2000 election and the US political system but not as dramatically as people would think. In this pod the political foundation of Mexico would have be shaken and shattered right before the annexation. Many politicians and parties either fade away, go to prison, killed, or join/merge into the US political systems(that would be a unspoken part about joining the US. US is still setting a lot of the terms). This actually helps the republicans the most. Immigration issue is largely gone now and they have not built up as much of stigma with the Hispanic community as otl. They are voters now and rather socially conservative often times. The republicans will lobby and work with the Catholic Church much more so then otl especially in Mexico where they still likely have a good amount of influence. George W. Bush win would not be a debated one because his dad is cunning bastard and would have campaigned hard in Mexico with the support of the Catholic Church(his dad loved playing the role of the “good Christian” or “family values”. Many Mexicans would buy into it). The most ironic part those even if the republicans still go hard against immigration Mexicans would not care anymore because they are part of the US. Many of them don’t like or care for other Hispanics. They might actually even support strict immigration policies. Mexico often doesn’t one people from Guatemala or Central America in otl(but then again I could see the annexation of Mexico leading to America annexing more of North America down the road. If the US border was somewhere like Panama or even southern Mexico almost no one is getting into the US unless they are allowed too). Annexing Mexico could make the US more conservative. The republicans would put on past failures and blames on the “socialist policies” of Salinas and his party even those they did the opposite but that won’t matter to them since they are typically associated with ideologies that can be easily demonized in the US. This would have Mexicans supporting republicans economic and social policies. The republicans will have even more support out west too especially when many Mexicans move north in large numbers. California could be turn back red.
The plus side those 911 might be avoided. The US will be too busy at home to do as much internationally as otl. They might not attack if they think the US is drifting away from involving themselves as much in the Middle East. The 2008 crash will likely still happen. This is where I think republicans dominance will end but not in the same way as otl. The party would have reign dominant for nearly a decade at this point as president and in all houses but the crash would kill its support and the party is honestly too big at this point to keep that many people agreeing. They would split. Likely between the religious/social conservatives, libertarians/classical liberals, and more moderates/centralist. Democrats would be more centralist(think Bill Clinton). Mexicans would not buy into or even support your more left wing democrats you see currently in otl. They would not even vote for Obama(I’m sorry but I heavily doubt many Mexicans would ever vote for a black man. Many of them are racist too). Democrats are probably more libertarian on social issues instead of social justice warriors or focused on identity politics. Economically they would be centralist. That type of party could win in 2008 on this pod but I’m not sure who they would pick. Mexico rapid development might have made the crash even worst(bigger bubble pop). The oil would prices would be less bad those. Mexico does have a good bit of it.
Lastly the USA team might actually win its first World Cup in the 2000s or 10s. Mexico talent and US funding would be a good soccer team and actually have places to play where people will watch them. Those I don’t know how American football could spread in Mexico once its annexed.
This starts causing serious issues in the US. Mexicans are starting to flee over the border in record number. The UN warns of a possible refugee crisis beginning(not that extreme but not far off from it. They aren’t no where near Syrian levels of unrest in Mexico. It’s more like cartels controlling rural communities, high unemployment, lack of good paying work, high crime, and low level constant violence. Mexico basically in a deep recession if not a depression. Salinas economic policies actually most likely helped Mexico somewhat in the long run but his backhanded and corrupt ways will likely overshadow that especially if he stays in power longer. His policies might sometimes be good but that doesn’t mean anything if he mismanaging the whole country and pissing off everyone. The amount of immigrants flooding border would be bigger then anything in otl US history. US in the 90s is in an economic boom and doing very well while its neighbor is looking like a border line failed state. People go we’re there is opportunity. Mexico in this situation could easily become the top domestic and foreign issue to the US especially when Mexicans in Mexico take up arms(not separatist or minorities. Actual Mexicans especially in the north). The National Guard has probably been sent to the border after the issue became bad enough. This could actually have major impact on US foreign involvement due to them getting distracted with Mexico. The Americans public might not always care about the rest of the world but Mexico is right next to them and they have many people within there country still highly connected to it personally. This isn’t Bosnia or Rwanda. Those places might be much worse but Americans don’t have to worry about any of that effecting them directly so it’s just another far off conflict. Mexico doing bad on the other hand would much more directly impact your average Americans. Texans will expect the government to act if they are being flooded by immigrants fleeing an unstable and economically struggling Mexico.
This could just start out as the US doing something like Panama invasion but on a much more massive scale. Basically the US gets sick of Salinas mismanagement and increasingly Putin like governance of Mexico(minus popular support of Putin. Salinas more depending on bribery, extortion, and other backhanded methods but that can only get a person so far. You need at least some actual support). This would be 1996 or 1997. They tell Salinas to step down and for Mexico to have fair elections under US or UN supervision. He said no which leads to a US invasion of Mexico to impose it by force. The unipolar movement is even stronger in Mexico then otl but ignored or unnoticed by the US public for the most except among some Mexican-Americans especially newly arrived or second generation ones. Most people in the US would consider annexing Mexico as a burden. Racism also still plays in here. It isn’t no where near as bad as the past but many Americans still consider Mexicans and Mexico as “ungovernable” to put it nicely. You have to convince them Mexico joining the US is better in the long run for them. Mexico nearly falling apart and requiring US intervention could be what does this depending on how things develop.
US invasion and occupation is going to be rather easy at least at first. Mexicans aren’t going to fight back against US military especially for unpopular president. American military likely intentionally deploy more Mexican Americans to the front lines to make things with the locals more cordial and friendly. US actions could have massive support from both sides of the border(internationally people might take this opportunity to criticize the US somewhat but most don’t take that seriously. Also US has a lot of international freedom in the 90s with USSR just dissolving awhile back). The US military, government, and public might actually be surprised by how welcoming the Mexicans are towards the invasion. Any anti-government partisan are either told to set down their arms and go home once the US takes the area. Most do while others actually become collaborators with the US and offer to help them. The US government and politicians might have use the events in Mexico as an excuse for drug and crime issues within the states. One of the reasons and pretexts for the invasion of Mexico besides unrest is the US wanting to get rid of cartels and criminal elements in Mexico without having to worry about international laws or government legal system. The US will actually be much more civil and kind towards Mexicans much more so then Arabs or Muslims which will avoid most criticism over the other stuff they do in Mexico during the invasion. The US likely knows where most cartels and drugs are based and the locals help can help fill in any blanks. The US military can literally just go bomb and raid cartels with no regard to procedure at all. The locals aren’t going to say anything about it because honestly many of them are probably for it. Many have lived in fear of these people for years. YouTuber who just spoke badly of cartel few years back was tortured and killed by them. The locals are most likely telling the US troops everything about them. Communism is gone. The US puts up with a lot of criminal activity but they don’t tolerate ones who are blatant and don’t serve their interests anymore. The 90s saw the US kill many cartel kingpins because they only caused trouble for the US once the Cold War was over.
The US is good at making itself look good. The US military could look more like liberators in this situation more then anything. The US military especially the Marines could have used a situation like this to encourage more Mexicans to join the military(marines often just want muscle and numbers. Army is more strict about education requirements but those usually get lessen in situations where they need manpower. Mexico might not have a lot of casualties at all but Mexico is big. You still need enough men plus enough to fill US military requirements elsewhere). Mexicans can get citizenship and fight a person they dislike if they join. Many probably do. If a bunch of the soldiers invading are actual Mexicans that is just good for self image. People can’t throw around the word imperialist or tyrant as easily especially to people in Mexico. Add in the fact the US is clearly out cartels and bring order to much of the country while acting rather civil you have a Mexican public that is even more favorable towards the US. Soldiers there are also could be left with a more positive image of Mexico and it’s people. They likely been policing mostly so that and not have to worry about getting surprised attacked like the Middle East so many probably just enjoy many of the leisure aspects of Mexico.
The after math of the invasion and the elections after could see some interesting stuff. Much of the world is shocked about how the invasion of Mexico went down even Americans. The US did have a lot of international support for the invasion but people would be shocked by how receptive the Mexican people were to the US invasion. Many would have thought burning of US flags and anti-US protest and even attacks on tourist would happen to some level but the complete opposite happens. Mexicans welcome US troops. They offer food, water, and help. Many US soldiers act kindly back especially Mexican Americans soldiers. US military even sets up some community programs during the invasion to help people within Mexico who are poor or drifting. Mexicans even can be seen waving US flags alongside Mexico flag or sometimes without it at all. The US likely keeps some troops there for a few years after the invasion and probably do away with any nationalistic or protectionism policies(US government will feel like they deserve something economically out of doing this so they probably get the new leadership to get rid of stuff like foreigners not being able to own land. Classical liberal economic policies minus the nationalist elements of the previous government would basically mean the US interest groups and people buying up a large portion of Mexico after the invasion which only increases economic integration and dependence.
Let’s say the first Mexican election after the invasion is 1998. Mexico not just having normal elections but also multiple others and referendums(US clean house after invasion. The amount of corruption they would uncover during an invasion of Mexico would shake Mexican society. Many powerful and wealthy people will likely face criminal charges or trails. Hell many Americans ones too but those likely don’t get revealed as much). One referendum is on how to restructure Mexico. Original this is more of a vote of adopting a more federal or unitary system but the unipolar movement demand an option to join the US is added to it. It’s added to the ticket. What happens next shocks US and the rest of the world.
Mexicans in 1998 with a vote of near 80 percent to join the United States. Mexicans take to the streets waving US flags and singing the national anthem in Spanish(this is more Pan-Americanism starting to take off. They still cherish their culture and respect it but they start associating more with the US based on general ideas and values relating to being Americans. Mexicans can technically be considered Americans too. Mexican-Americans could feed into this even more). Many Mexicans even make reference to Bolivar dream and their own history to show its desire to join the US. The US see many Mexicans do the same within the states too. Non-Hispanic Americans are more confused and unsure how to take this. Mexico sends a request to US about possible annexation which sees heavy debates in the houses and between the presidential candidates. The US has tied itself to Mexico a lot by this point. Their businesses have flooded the country, many US and duel citizens are buying up Mexican lands, some troops are still there, and the US has started building up Mexico after the invasion more so to prevent a future repeat of this(like they did with Japan or Germany. Or the south might be a better comparison). Many start thinking they might as well just take the whole thing but can’t agree on details. Politicians might start pointing out how annexation will protect US businesses from going overseas(they literally have one less place to go). That would be the best way to sell it to white and black Americans who are very unsure about this. At this point it the request could be accepted by US but revising is likely to take place. The US would offer Mexico status similar to Puerto Rico at first but they would immediately turn that down. They are too big to do that too(they will feel like they should have equal say to the other states on the federal level). A few more ideas get turn down until all sides come to agreement.
Mexico is likely divided up into 6 or 7 states while the very rural Beja California is added to US California and Arizona might get that coastal panhandle. The US is going to haggle them down on senate seats as much as is reasonable and possible. By the start of 1999 the US has officially annexed Mexico. This would impact the 2000 election and the US political system but not as dramatically as people would think. In this pod the political foundation of Mexico would have be shaken and shattered right before the annexation. Many politicians and parties either fade away, go to prison, killed, or join/merge into the US political systems(that would be a unspoken part about joining the US. US is still setting a lot of the terms). This actually helps the republicans the most. Immigration issue is largely gone now and they have not built up as much of stigma with the Hispanic community as otl. They are voters now and rather socially conservative often times. The republicans will lobby and work with the Catholic Church much more so then otl especially in Mexico where they still likely have a good amount of influence. George W. Bush win would not be a debated one because his dad is cunning bastard and would have campaigned hard in Mexico with the support of the Catholic Church(his dad loved playing the role of the “good Christian” or “family values”. Many Mexicans would buy into it). The most ironic part those even if the republicans still go hard against immigration Mexicans would not care anymore because they are part of the US. Many of them don’t like or care for other Hispanics. They might actually even support strict immigration policies. Mexico often doesn’t one people from Guatemala or Central America in otl(but then again I could see the annexation of Mexico leading to America annexing more of North America down the road. If the US border was somewhere like Panama or even southern Mexico almost no one is getting into the US unless they are allowed too). Annexing Mexico could make the US more conservative. The republicans would put on past failures and blames on the “socialist policies” of Salinas and his party even those they did the opposite but that won’t matter to them since they are typically associated with ideologies that can be easily demonized in the US. This would have Mexicans supporting republicans economic and social policies. The republicans will have even more support out west too especially when many Mexicans move north in large numbers. California could be turn back red.
The plus side those 911 might be avoided. The US will be too busy at home to do as much internationally as otl. They might not attack if they think the US is drifting away from involving themselves as much in the Middle East. The 2008 crash will likely still happen. This is where I think republicans dominance will end but not in the same way as otl. The party would have reign dominant for nearly a decade at this point as president and in all houses but the crash would kill its support and the party is honestly too big at this point to keep that many people agreeing. They would split. Likely between the religious/social conservatives, libertarians/classical liberals, and more moderates/centralist. Democrats would be more centralist(think Bill Clinton). Mexicans would not buy into or even support your more left wing democrats you see currently in otl. They would not even vote for Obama(I’m sorry but I heavily doubt many Mexicans would ever vote for a black man. Many of them are racist too). Democrats are probably more libertarian on social issues instead of social justice warriors or focused on identity politics. Economically they would be centralist. That type of party could win in 2008 on this pod but I’m not sure who they would pick. Mexico rapid development might have made the crash even worst(bigger bubble pop). The oil would prices would be less bad those. Mexico does have a good bit of it.
Lastly the USA team might actually win its first World Cup in the 2000s or 10s. Mexico talent and US funding would be a good soccer team and actually have places to play where people will watch them. Those I don’t know how American football could spread in Mexico once its annexed.
Democrats would probably be even less libertarian than OTL. US less white, so they'd assume identity politics would work better(even if it doesn't lole) plus lots of catholics so probably shifting right on abortion/lgbt.
GOP? likely evolves as OTL even if economically they don't ever go tea partyist.
GOP? likely evolves as OTL even if economically they don't ever go tea partyist.
So taking some cues from what others suggested in the thread and some of my own ideas, I got this WIP of a united North America since Canada joining as well. Quebec is independent while Chiapas is under military occupation due to the ongoing Zapatista uprising.
I could use some suggestions on which other Mexican states I should combine and some second opinions if anyone's got any:
Numbered states in order of when I made them on the map:
1. Rio Grande
2. Yucatan
3. Chihuahua
4. Sonora
5. The Maritimes (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island)
6. Newfoundland (Newfoundland and Labrador)
7. Ontario
8. Columbia (British Columbia)
9. The Prairies (Manitoba and Saskatchewan)
10. Alberta
11. First Nations (Yukon, Northwest Territories, Nunavut)
12. Mexico State ([Unmarked]. State of Mexico, Morelos, Tlaxcala)
13. Chiapas ([Under Rebellion])
I think Canada would want to remin as is, they'd argue that if they had to merge two province's the US should merge some states.
The perception of Mexico as a Mad Max wasteland (fueled by lurid crimes such as the kidnapping and ritual human sacrifice of Mark Kilroy; the Railway Killer murders; and the initial belief that Mexican nationals committed the Yogurt Shop Murders) would make annexation a non-starter.
If Clinton or Bush try to run on this as a campaign issue, the other wins in a landslide. If they both support it, we probably end up with President Perot (who's got a big ole chart of crime rates in Mexico...)
If Clinton or Bush try to run on this as a campaign issue, the other wins in a landslide. If they both support it, we probably end up with President Perot (who's got a big ole chart of crime rates in Mexico...)
Modern Imperialism
Banned
It’s helpful to remember the term white is much more general and flexible in the Americas more so then most places. Mexicans are basically a mix of whites(mostly Spaniards) and assimilated natives to various degrees. Many Mexicans look pretty white. Mexicans and Italian for example aren’t really that different in complexion(that’s one reason I always found race as a odd concept). Many that look more white will probably mark themselves down as “white Hispanics” on a US census. US Mexico going to share many similarities to the south. Classism going to still be an issue. How “white” you are is probably often associated with your economic status. More upper and middle class Mexicans especially in the heart land of Mexico will not want to be associated with the “cholos” up north or in the US Western states(notice how cholo translates to a slang for indigenous but also refers to gang members a lot. That very intentional). Americans forget this but northern Mexico and most Mexicans in the US are ones with more indigenous blood most of the time. The Spanish didn’t wipe them out like the Anglos did. They just did a really job at making them speak Spanish and be Catholic. The reason Mexico doesn’t keep track of race is because they want to avoid the issue and everyone just say their Mexican to make things simple. Hispanic concept of race is often more tied to culture, economic status, and nationality. If you watch Mexican or any Latin American media you notice many dark individuals will become more white looking over time. Race is still kind of a thing there but wealth and nationality usually outrank that to the people there. No pun intended, but it isn’t as black and white as the US. The only race Mexicans will usually show hostility towards are blacks and people who embrace native roots.
That’s why I don’t think identity politics will even develop in this US or become common in this pod(still can in Europe and the Canada). Mexico would make the US much less Eurocentric in its outlook of the world. California demographics will be much more Hispanic then otl which ironically kills much of the rise of the new left there. Republicans also won’t have the same stigma with Mexican community like otl. If the democrats play identity politics the party would die. Young people aren’t a consistent voting bloc and black people don’t have the majority in any states. Also the centralist Democrats are usually the ones with the most money and connections. New age liberals are almost completely screwed in the US without California. They often rely on populism which is gone without California. Also Mexico being part of the US would completely destroy many ideas associated with identity politics. Black people going to Mexico right after annexation are going to quickly realize Mexico is just as racist if not more so then Dixie is towards them. Republicans are going to play on upper and middle class Mexicans biases towards “cholos”/lower class and blacks when they bring up social policies. Black people out west are probably going to move back to the south in even larger numbers then otl. All that cheap labor would deprive them of work. Mexicans probably also don’t like them in there neighborhoods. LA Kings have been arrested for trying to force blacks people to leave there neighborhoods. Compton is majority Mexican right now. In this pod it would be nearly all Mexican. Blacks might actually start showing more hatred towards Mexicans then white peoples or at least start lumping them as and the same.
How would the US treat the Mayans and natives in the southern Mexico? Wouldn’t the US have to re-examine it’s native policy for the first time in decades? I could see them annexing Mexico and not being sure on how to treat these native groups. All I know is giving the Anglo treatment towards natives wouldn’t be realistic or even legal by international law by this point.
As far as race, one thing it benefits from is that Latino identity (especially politically) was much more fluid in the US at this time. The GOP carried a majority or near majority of the Latino vote until 2008, courtesy of Texas and Florida Republicans kind of setting the standard and thier expirience with Tejano/Mexican and Cuban voters.
Hell, even today's current tensions has less to do with skin color and more to do with they fact many are poor and don't speak English, and they are taking jobs.
Given any US annexation of Mexico would involve lots of infrastructure and economic development, lots of resources toward English education, and from both, likely millions of new jobs on bith sides of the Rio Grande, that likely gets largely muted.
Also helped by the fact I am sure there is a large chunk of middle and upper class Mexicans that would consider themselves "white" or at least equivalent. Mexican racial politics are, as others here have pointed out, interesting in the Chinese sense.
Oh, and there would be an economic boom on bith sides, which will mute a LOT of complaints.
You know why illigal immigration from Mexico has dropped off a cliff the past few years? Mexico got its shit together and the economy is booming - by 2050 they will be one of the ten biggest economies on Earth, bigger than Western Europe aside from Germany.
I see annexation speeding that boom up by 20 years, given the crackdown on crime and corruption, and the massive investment from the US, plus whatever doesn't go to China but American-Mexico ITTL. Hell, annexation may actually get the credit for it ITTL, which will do wonders for making the move popular in the Mexican states.
All that growth will not only mitigate the OTL flow of Mexicans north, but likely impact the US economy as a whole... again, a lot of the current resentment has racial overtones, but is based around economics. Fear that that guy is taking work and money when there already isn't enough. Here? Lots of money and jobs to go around.
As Mexico grows richer, and speaks more English, I think most Americans will be more than happy to embrace thier new countrymen. Or at least the ones who vote Republican (see: GOP base opinions on Cubans).
By 2016 ITTL, we have an American Mexico that has seen an economic transformation, a generation being taught English in schools, and added bonus, has seen American boys from the Mexican states fighting in Afghanistan.
If there is any resentment, it is likely directed towards the poorest of Mexicans, or far more likely, towards Central Americans... both of which may see Mexican-Americans among its most fervant advocates.
"Let me tell you hermanos: we are going to build a wall, and those Guatemalan putas will pay for it!"
Hell, even today's current tensions has less to do with skin color and more to do with they fact many are poor and don't speak English, and they are taking jobs.
Given any US annexation of Mexico would involve lots of infrastructure and economic development, lots of resources toward English education, and from both, likely millions of new jobs on bith sides of the Rio Grande, that likely gets largely muted.
Also helped by the fact I am sure there is a large chunk of middle and upper class Mexicans that would consider themselves "white" or at least equivalent. Mexican racial politics are, as others here have pointed out, interesting in the Chinese sense.
Oh, and there would be an economic boom on bith sides, which will mute a LOT of complaints.
You know why illigal immigration from Mexico has dropped off a cliff the past few years? Mexico got its shit together and the economy is booming - by 2050 they will be one of the ten biggest economies on Earth, bigger than Western Europe aside from Germany.
I see annexation speeding that boom up by 20 years, given the crackdown on crime and corruption, and the massive investment from the US, plus whatever doesn't go to China but American-Mexico ITTL. Hell, annexation may actually get the credit for it ITTL, which will do wonders for making the move popular in the Mexican states.
All that growth will not only mitigate the OTL flow of Mexicans north, but likely impact the US economy as a whole... again, a lot of the current resentment has racial overtones, but is based around economics. Fear that that guy is taking work and money when there already isn't enough. Here? Lots of money and jobs to go around.
As Mexico grows richer, and speaks more English, I think most Americans will be more than happy to embrace thier new countrymen. Or at least the ones who vote Republican (see: GOP base opinions on Cubans).
By 2016 ITTL, we have an American Mexico that has seen an economic transformation, a generation being taught English in schools, and added bonus, has seen American boys from the Mexican states fighting in Afghanistan.
If there is any resentment, it is likely directed towards the poorest of Mexicans, or far more likely, towards Central Americans... both of which may see Mexican-Americans among its most fervant advocates.
"Let me tell you hermanos: we are going to build a wall, and those Guatemalan putas will pay for it!"
The GOP will likely end up with Mexico for the same reason it wins dixie OTL: Republicans are better at earmarks for states than democrats are. This will affect the GOP in time, probably early loss of #nevertrumper max boot types but earlier expansion into catholic rustbelt areas since a dixie+mexico GOP that's socially conservative but able to refrain from speaking in tongues/being slain in the spirit publically would be less radioactive to midwest/northeast catholics.
This isn't even factoring in mexican/black or mexican/puerto rican or other latin electorla conflict within areas...
This isn't even factoring in mexican/black or mexican/puerto rican or other latin electorla conflict within areas...
History Learner
Banned
On the matter of social conservatism, it is notable Mexican City is the only place were Abortion is legalized in Mexico; even then, it is restricted to the first 12 weeks and 85% of gynecologists are conscientious objectors.