'Most Ideal' possible early US development path?

I was reading The American Dream by @okmangeez again, and I started wondering whether or not something similar to that was possible without an ISOT event. Basically, if everything for the US goes right, what is the absolute best sort of development path we could see them take without ASB intervention? Slavery being abolished in the original constitution? Ironclads by 1840? Female soldiers by 1860? Airships and biplanes by 1880? In this case, 'best' / 'most ideal' is defined as the highest rate of technological and sociological change possible. There can be more than one POD if needed, but they have to be after 1740. At the very least, I want by the time 1900 rolls around the US to have complete racial equality, very good gender equality, and 1920s level tech. Bonus points if they are good allies with other nations, possibly with a League of American Nations like in TAD, and also if they manage to avoid what they did to the native Americans OTL.

So, I guess to summarise, in most ISOT TLs the ISOT is kept secret from the general public, and the rapid rate of advancement is explained as just being lucky. But what if the ISOT didn't happen, and it actually was just luck?
 
Well I mean its possible, technically, if you were to look at an infinite number of pods and timelines, but the vast majority of them would not both have the United States and the level of egalitarianism you're describing. By 1776 the ball had already been set on things like attempting to destroy the Native Americans and the development of Western "scientific" racism; those things most of the time won't just go away because some white, wealthy plantation owners in the US decided to condemn them more strongly. So sure with a pod in the 1200s its easy to end up there, but not so much by the end of the 18th century.
 
Last edited:
President John Quincy Adams was very supportive in expanding federal power in regards to science, proto industrialization, and infrastructure. He was also one of the first truly abolitionist politicians in America. Perhaps if had a second term and had more influence over Congress would put the country in the right direction.
 
There can be more than one POD if needed, but they have to be after 1740.

S
Okay, the resolution of what we call the French and Indian War of 1754–63, and what Europe calls the Seven Years War, even though nine years before the treaty was signed!, led to a lot of colonists settling past the Appalachian mountains.

And disease is what did in the vast majority of American Indians.

So, avoid the war and/or have it more of a stalemate. Plus, even though the major form of smallpox has already been introduced with tragic consequences, have the minor version (alastrim minor) travel widely. Yes, even at this belated date.

Just maybe, you end up with a checkboard U.S. in which many Indian nations are truly respected as smaller nations. The earlier tragedies are still remembered in song and story.
 
Last edited:

Lusitania

Donor
The other major thing is that there was a constant rivalry between states and federal government. Remember that policies that benefit northern states (high tariffs) to help spur local industry vs southern states whose agricultural economies were hurt by these policies. Federal bank was another major area that could of helped USA grow and prosper.

The thing is that following ARW the franchise of voting was not universal as it is today. Many states had property, tax or education restrictions.

Therefore a more equalitarianism US goes against the political and general thinking of the time. The leaders and businessmen who led the ARW and were prominent in the US after independence were all from landed gentry and prominent families who wanted flower for themselves not to be dispersed universally to uneducated people.
 
War of 1812. Fulton's Demologos is built sooner, and Stephen Decatur starts his shell gun experiment sooner.
So rather than just a few Naval highlights of USN Frigates, you have 1813-1815 a series of steam powered floating batteries with super thick woodenwalls impervious to even the Royal Navy 68 pounder Carronades, while USN Columbiad Shellguns, break every major Royal Navy blockade along with the Ships of the Line trying to enforce them.
The Star Spangled Banner is not a song of endurance, but USN 'Battlebarges' kicking RN ass.
Treaty of Ghent gives most of British North America to the USA
 

Lusitania

Donor
War of 1812. Fulton's Demologos is built sooner, and Stephen Decatur starts his shell gun experiment sooner.
So rather than just a few Naval highlights of USN Frigates, you have 1813-1815 a series of steam powered floating batteries with super thick woodenwalls impervious to even the Royal Navy 68 pounder Carronades, while USN Columbiad Shellguns, break every major Royal Navy blockade along with the Ships of the Line trying to enforce them.
The Star Spangled Banner is not a song of endurance, but USN 'Battlebarges' kicking RN ass.
Treaty of Ghent gives most of British North America to the USA
Sorry but that is negated by the lack of federal army and the fundamental shortcoming exposed by the war. The federal government was starved for $ by the states who did not trust any other state or the federal government. The ability of the US gaining BNA is negligible. If the US had better success in beginning then British would of brought better and stronger forces to liberate it. Wellington turned down the command to invade USA but he would not of done so to liberate BNA from the invaders.
 
Can't liberate BNA if the USN can sink any RN three Decker that gets close to a port.
And the OP did say multiple PoDs to wank the early USA
 

Lusitania

Donor
Ok we need to distinguish fantasy and realistic USA. The period between ARW and war 1812 the young and poor USA did not have the capability to invest in such an endeavor. The British Navy is the largest navy in the world.
 
Where did New England get coal and iron for its factories?

Wat if West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee dig coal mines earlier, built railroads earlier and start manufacturing steel farming tools earlier?
How would an earlier industrialization of the South change the path of history?
 

Lusitania

Donor
Where did New England get coal and iron for its factories?

Wat if West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee dig coal mines earlier, built railroads earlier and start manufacturing steel farming tools earlier?
How would an earlier industrialization of the South change the path of history?
That predisposes us to an earlier industrial Revolution. Plus it als o requires huge amount of $$$$ that the US does not have. The US after ARW till war of 1812 was poor. Any industry that existed or was created was for most part created with British capital and relied on existing technology, a bauble resources and need. None of that existed in the US with its population size.
 
Ok we need to distinguish fantasy and realistic USA. The period between ARW and war 1812 the young and poor USA did not have the capability to invest in such an endeavor. The British Navy is the largest navy in the world.
Since Columbiads and Fulton's ship had both been produced, why do you think they couldn't have been done in time for 1812, just a few years sooner?

You need one steam battery for each major port, armed with shell firing guns
Not ASB level development

Columbiads with explosive shells means people talk of the Battle of Chesapeake Bay like OTLs Battle of Sinop, where large wooden ships found to be very vulnerable

Do you thing the war would turn out the same with Cochrane's Flotilla looking like the aftermath of the first day of Hampton Roads?
 

Lusitania

Donor
Since Columbiads and Fulton's ship had both been produced, why do you think they couldn't have been done in time for 1812, just a few years sooner?

You need one steam battery for each major port, armed with shell firing guns
Not ASB level development

Columbiads with explosive shells means people talk of the Battle of Chesapeake Bay like OTLs Battle of Sinop, where large wooden ships found to be very vulnerable

Do you thing the war would turn out the same with Cochrane's Flotilla looking like the aftermath of the first day of Hampton Roads?
Again requires a huge expenditure and does noting for the massive failures invading BNA. So yes if we had a different US with a better funded federal government no one that was bankrupt and had a hard time building the navy it did.
 
Again requires a huge expenditure and does noting for the massive failures invading BNA. So yes if we had a different US with a better funded federal government no one that was bankrupt and had a hard time building the navy it did.
If the US Navy wipes the floor with Royal Navy, getting supplies to the Canadian militia and British garrisons becomes harder. I still think the most likely outcome of the war of 1812 is status quo antebellum, with the British holding onto their remaining colonies in North America but never again threatening American sovereignty. However, an outright win by either side is not ASB. Also remember in OTL, neither the land nor sea campaigns were onesided. We focus a lot on the British/Canadian land victories and the American victories at sea because they involve underdogs outperforming expectations (and often involve the "Goliaths" displaying a fair amount of incompetence). We should remember though that there were American victories on land and British victories at sea. The Brits occupied Maine and Detroit. The Americans captured and sacked Toronto. If the Royal Navy fares poorly, then the Americans have more of a chance to recover from the losses of not having a well-trained federal army. The War of 1812 would also depend on how the war against Napoleon goes.

Other than the War of 1812, you could have the USA annex more of northern Mexico, or they could get Cuba from Spain, which would probably require either war or Spain being really desperate (if you want to have them sell it). I suppose if you wank the US Navy enough, you could have the USA seize the British West Indies in the late 19th century. Keep in mind even though territory comes with resources, there's more to wanking a country than territory. For example in OTL the British Empire became larger after WWI, since it got a huge chunk of Germany's colonies, but I wouldn't say it got stronger; it was weakened both by the ar itself and the fact that a lot of those colonies cost more resources to administer than they brought in. Also if the Spanish-American war goes as it did in OTL, you might want to have the USA acquire more of Spain's Pacific colonies, such as all of the Mariana islands instead of just Guam.

Keep in mind that things overseas can influence the USA at a (somewhat) domestic level as well. Different events in different countries will produce different waves of immigration. If you want to make the country more technologically advanced, having more scientists, mathematicians, and inventors immigrate is a big help. If you want it t be more liberal, having more liberal immigrants helps.
 
That predisposes us to an earlier industrial Revolution. Plus it als o requires huge amount of $$$$ that the US does not have. The US after ARW till war of 1812 was poor. Any industry that existed or was created was for most part created with British capital and relied on existing technology, a bauble resources and need. None of that existed in the US with its population size.
These are relative terms. The USA wasn't poor in 1812. According to one source by 1820 per capita was.

GDP (PPP) per capita in 1990 International Dollars
Country / Region110001500160017001820187019131950197319892008
Austria4254257078379931,2181,8633,4653,70611,23516,36024,131
Belgium4504258759761,1441,3192,6924,2205,46212,17016,74423,655
Denmark4004007388751,0391,2742,0033,9126,94313,94518,26124,621
Finland4004004535386387811,1402,1114,25311,08516,94624,344
France4734257278419101,1351,8763,4855,27113,11417,30022,223
Germany4084106887919101,0771,8393,6483,88111,96616,55820,801
Italy8094501,1001,1001,1001,1171,4992,5643,50210,63415,96919,909
Netherlands4254257611,3812,1301,8382,7574,0495,99613,08216,69524,695
Norway4004006106647238011,3602,4475,43011,32318,15728,500
Sweden4004006958249771,1981,6623,0966,73913,49317,71024,409
Switzerland4254106327508901,0902,1024,2669,06418,20420,93525,104
UK4004007149741,2501,7063,1904,9216,93912,02516,41423,742
12 country average5994257989071,0321,2432,0873,6885,01812,15716,75122,246
Portugal4504256067408199239751,2502,0867,06310,37214,436
Spain4984506618538531,0081,2072,0562,1897,66111,58219,706
Other5394004725255847111,0271,8402,5387,61410,82219,701
West European average5764277718899971,2021,9603,4574,57811,41715,80021,672
Eastern Europe4124004965486066839371,6952,1114,9885,9058,569
Former USSR4004004995526106889431,4882,8416,0597,1127,904
United States4004004004005271,2572,4455,3019,56116,68923,05931,178

In 1820 the U.S. had a per capita income slightly above the average for Western Europe. Only the UK was far higher. The country was militarily unprepared because of national policy, not because the country was too poor. The U.S. could've afforded a bigger fleet, and Fulton naval designs. They had standing army of 8,000 men, they could have had 10-12,000, if they thought it was important. No they couldn't defeat the RN, but they could've defended the country much better then they did.
 

Lusitania

Donor
These are relative terms. The USA wasn't poor in 1812. According to one source by 1820 per capita was.

GDP (PPP) per capita in 1990 International Dollars
Country / Region110001500160017001820187019131950197319892008
Austria4254257078379931,2181,8633,4653,70611,23516,36024,131
Belgium4504258759761,1441,3192,6924,2205,46212,17016,74423,655
Denmark4004007388751,0391,2742,0033,9126,94313,94518,26124,621
Finland4004004535386387811,1402,1114,25311,08516,94624,344
France4734257278419101,1351,8763,4855,27113,11417,30022,223
Germany4084106887919101,0771,8393,6483,88111,96616,55820,801
Italy8094501,1001,1001,1001,1171,4992,5643,50210,63415,96919,909
Netherlands4254257611,3812,1301,8382,7574,0495,99613,08216,69524,695
Norway4004006106647238011,3602,4475,43011,32318,15728,500
Sweden4004006958249771,1981,6623,0966,73913,49317,71024,409
Switzerland4254106327508901,0902,1024,2669,06418,20420,93525,104
UK4004007149741,2501,7063,1904,9216,93912,02516,41423,742
12 country average5994257989071,0321,2432,0873,6885,01812,15716,75122,246
Portugal4504256067408199239751,2502,0867,06310,37214,436
Spain4984506618538531,0081,2072,0562,1897,66111,58219,706
Other5394004725255847111,0271,8402,5387,61410,82219,701
West European average5764277718899971,2021,9603,4574,57811,41715,80021,672
Eastern Europe4124004965486066839371,6952,1114,9885,9058,569
Former USSR4004004995526106889431,4882,8416,0597,1127,904
United States4004004004005271,2572,4455,3019,56116,68923,05931,178

In 1820 the U.S. had a per capita income slightly above the average for Western Europe. Only the UK was far higher. The country was militarily unprepared because of national policy, not because the country was too poor. The U.S. could've afforded a bigger fleet, and Fulton naval designs. They had standing army of 8,000 men, they could have had 10-12,000, if they thought it was important. No they couldn't defeat the RN, but they could've defended the country much better then they did.
In 1812 yes it was richer than some other European countries but structural constitutional it stripped the federal government of ability to finance the higher navy.

The thing is that it was a multi year expense that would if required federal government have ability to finance a larger navy. The thing is till 1812 there was no appetite to have the federal government to have such expense. So while there was wealth in the country there was no federal ability to finance.

To change the federal government gor it to have a larger navy and forces would mean a pod during ARW and constitutional
 
In 1812 yes it was richer than some other European countries but structural constitutional it stripped the federal government of ability to finance the higher navy.

The thing is that it was a multi year expense that would if required federal government have ability to finance a larger navy. The thing is till 1812 there was no appetite to have the federal government to have such expense. So while there was wealth in the country there was no federal ability to finance.

To change the federal government gor it to have a larger navy and forces would mean a pod during ARW and constitutional
I have to disagree. You need no constitutional changes, all you need is a Congress to pass a budget. Jefferson, and Madison followed incredible stupid economic, and fiscal policies. Instead of an embargo in 1807 higher tariffs would do more damage to the British, promote industrial growth in the NE, and have paid for a bigger fleet, and regular army. A bigger fleet would've been a boom for ship yards from Portsmouth, NH, to Norfolk, VA. Just maintaining the fleet from the Quasi war with the French would be a good start. In 1800 Congress authorized 9 x 74 gun ships of the line, they should have laid down a few of them, and some more big frigates. Going into war with no preparation was foolish, when so much could have been done.
 
Top