New York as a British exclave?

[stalkere]

Suppose the ARW runs differently. We tend to think of the US as a single entity, but we're looking through the lens of 2011.

Stop a second and look at it through the eyes of 1783, maybe a different 1783.
No victory at Saratoga, and maybe the Sullivan's campaigns against the Iroquois are not as successful. If the Brits hold the Hudson and Mohawk, up through Canada, and the Iroquois hold Upstate NY, Western NY and Western Pennsylvania, you might have New England as a "Northern US Republic" and the rest as the "Southern US" - or maybe a Balkanization will occur. This will not look all that strange to the people of this world, not nearly as strange as it does to us.

States rights and state identities were a WHOLE lot more important to people in those days than they are to us. The concept of the "US" was a shadowy ideal to them, just as strange as the notion of dying for the honor of Virginia might seem to us.

 

[King Gorilla]

Suppose the ARW runs differently. We tend to think of the US as a single entity, but we're looking through the lens of 2011.

Stop a second and look at it through the eyes of 1783, maybe a different 1783.
No victory at Saratoga, and maybe the Sullivan's campaigns against the Iroquois are not as successful. If the Brits hold the Hudson and Mohawk, up through Canada, and the Iroquois hold Upstate NY, Western NY and Western Pennsylvania, you might have New England as a "Northern US Republic" and the rest as the "Southern US" - or maybe a Balkanization will occur. This will not look all that strange to the people of this world, not nearly as strange as it does to us.

States rights and state identities were a WHOLE lot more important to people in those days than they are to us. The concept of the "US" was a shadowy ideal to them, just as strange as the notion of dying for the honor of Virginia might seem to us.

True. The problem is, the scenario you are describing would almost certainly make for a more centralized United States, as they are surrounded on all sides by hostile neighbors. The existence of dangerous external enemies tends to be extremely unifying.

 

[Falastur]

If the Brits hold the Hudson and Mohawk, up through Canada, and the Iroquois hold Upstate NY, Western NY and Western Pennsylvania, you might have New England as a "Northern US Republic" and the rest as the "Southern US" - or maybe a Balkanization will occur. This will not look all that strange to the people of this world, not nearly as strange as it does to us.

Interesting. I tended to assume that any TL where the US forms multiple states (or fails to federate) is a world where they would lose the ARW, but perhaps I am wrong...

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

Being a New Yorker - I want to further discussion of not the possibility of New York City becoming a British enclave but how the civic and political culture of the city would develop under continued Brit rule?

 

[MadMaper 13]

Being a New Yorker - I want to further discussion of not the possibility of New York City becoming a British enclave but how the civic and political culture of the city would develop under continued Brit rule?

If NY dose remain a british i could see that most of the trade between Brition and the US is done through NY which would lead to a trade mentality

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

I was actually thinking the Americans would probably try to build up Baltimore or Boston as a rival port to New York City.

 

[MadMaper 13]

I was actually thinking the Americans would probably try to build up Baltimore or Boston as a rival port to New York City.

But the British could put up trade barriers to other ports to promote NY

 

[King Gorilla]

I was actually thinking the Americans would probably try to build up Baltimore or Boston as a rival port to New York City.

Its important to keep in mind, that New York at this time period is merely a large port city. New York was overshadowed by Both Boston and Philedelphia in commerce, finance, population, and industry. What gave New York dominance was the Erie Canal, which made it the primary endpoint for great lakes trade. This won't happen in the ATL.

New York would most likely be a prosperous city. But the source of its wealth will have less to do with banking or industry than shipping and smuggling. New York would be a way around respective tariffs of both America, and Britain. Its growth would be hemmed in largely due to the need to make it into a fortress city. While the population may be wealthy and loyal, when factoring in garrisoning, it will likely be a net loss in revenue for Britain.

 

[Falastur]

Being a New Yorker - I want to further discussion of not the possibility of New York City becoming a British enclave but how the civic and political culture of the city would develop under continued Brit rule?

I'd like to see that too. Honestly, American culture and the differences between the states in the early period are one of the things I truly have no clue about. I would imagine that "exclave New York" would be fairly culturally American without deviating too far from the British stereotype - far moreso than the far more territorially-integral south - but as for details, I've no clue so I'd be interested to read thoughts.

I was actually thinking the Americans would probably try to build up Baltimore or Boston as a rival port to New York City.

Would they, though? I mean yes, eventually they would build up, but remember that even in the immediate aftermath of the ARW, the Americans were still sending the vast, vast majority of their trade to Britain and British colonies, through British and American traders both. With a British port right on their borders yes there may be some antagonism over the political ramifications (though the presence of a British south would I'm guessing likely deter too much aggression as they couldn't simply overrun New York as if it were New Orleans and hope to end the war instantly) but wouldn't it be the natural choice for those American traders not already ploughing a route back to the motherland on their own ships to trade directly through New York? I could picture it becoming a bit of a local trade hub in the short term, just as Calais used to be the centre of trade with the continent for England back in the medieval era.

Of course, over time as trade branched out all over the place New York's importance would probably decline - I hardly see it being like an American Hong Kong - but I can still imagine it being a thriving place for over-the-border markets, just as a couple of the (British) southern cities probably would also.

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

How would immigration to New York City? New York City is probably to going to be the hub for many a Loyalist to flee from the independent American states and I imagine there beings lots of Irish and Scottish people immigrating to the city.

 

[King Gorilla]

How would immigration to New York City? New York City is probably to going to be the hub for many a Loyalist to flee from the independent American states and I imagine there beings lots of Irish and Scottish people immigrating to the city.

New York City as previously mentioned will almost certainly get alot of loyalist immigration that would have otherwise went to canada. Most of this will be confined to Manhattan. Now New York will go through a period of heavy fortification, establish a military and naval garrisons and the prerequisite support facilities. This will take up land, and cost money the main question being, how much of this would come out of New York's coffers.?

The second question is, how much immigration did Canada get in the decades preceding the Revolutionary war? New York in this ATL is by destiny a merchant port and garrison town. Immigrants won't be arriving for future homesteading, they will have to deal with a tight military presence, and the internal trade networks that built up its industry in OTL won't be there. New York's golden age would be for the period where American and British use it as a middlemen to get around tariffs. When the need to cheat tariff barriers is over, or for that matter reduced, it will decline.

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

To my knowledge, there wasn't much of a population in Canada save for the French settlers and the native American peoples.

 

[Skokie]

New York State (I don't think a city-state Hong Kong deal would survive) would essentially be OTL Canada.

Many of the loyalists who founded what we know of as Canada would probably go to NY instead. As would many of the loyalists who went to Europe and the Caribbean, I imagine.

ETA: I think "West Jersey," Manhattan, Long Island, Staten Island and the Hudson Valley up to and including West Point would be the absolute minimum.

 

[Socrates]

I don't think a city-state Hong Kong deal would survive

It doesn't need to be able to survive for the British to get it in a peace deal. Even the British having it for another twenty years, and getting a huge loyalist influx, could have huge ramifications.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

New York State (I don't think a city-state Hong Kong deal would survive) would essentially be OTL Canada.

Many of the loyalists who founded what we know of as Canada would probably go to NY instead. As would many of the loyalists who went to Europe and the Caribbean, I imagine.

ETA: I think "West Jersey," Manhattan, Long Island, Staten Island and the Hudson Valley up to and including West Point would be the absolute minimum.

You mean East Jersey right....

 

[reformedcpmuser]

New York in the late 18th century was a port city for a variety of goods. British exclaves historically have been founded for the trade of a particular lucrative good. In the case of Hong Kong, that good was opium. What special cash crop, drug, or precious mineral would New York have to offer the British?

The rise of railroads in the mid 19th-century would put a dent in the British control and taxation of entry into the Hudson and Erie Canal waterway systems.

I just don't see a special, lucrative trade item that would compel the British to hold onto Manhattan.

 

[King Gorilla]

I just don't see a special, lucrative trade item that would compel the British to hold onto Manhattan.

Grain for the Caribbean colonies and navel stores.

 

[reformedcpmuser]

Grain for the Caribbean colonies and navel stores.

What would the grain be used for? Alcohol distilling? Slave consumption?

Opium had one and only one use: narcosis. Also, opium could only be grown in certain environments. Grain (cereals), can be grown in many different environments.

 

[Falastur]

New York in the late 18th century was a port city for a variety of goods. British exclaves historically have been founded for the trade of a particular lucrative good. In the case of Hong Kong, that good was opium. What special cash crop, drug, or precious mineral would New York have to offer the British?

The rise of railroads in the mid 19th-century would put a dent in the British control and taxation of entry into the Hudson and Erie Canal waterway systems.

I just don't see a special, lucrative trade item that would compel the British to hold onto Manhattan.

The rise of railroads and canals is a moot point as I was only hoping to discuss the possibility of it happening. There's no necessary obligation for Britain to be able to keep New York, nor - if they do keep it - for the city not to eventually decline and become a poor and underpopulated territory clinging to the motherland for support.

As for a special trade item, the British Empire was a trading empire. Perhaps just the ability to funnel all American trade through their port, rather than necessarily controlling a particular substance?

 

[Solomaxwell6]

Its important to keep in mind, that New York at this time period is merely a large port city. New York was overshadowed by Both Boston and Philedelphia in commerce, finance, population, and industry. What gave New York dominance was the Erie Canal, which made it the primary endpoint for great lakes trade. This won't happen in the ATL.

This is what I was thinking. Far more likely is the B&O railroad developing a little earlier, and Baltimore becoming the equivalent of our New York.

What would be an interesting possibility is Britain subsidizing the Erie Canal in an effort to dominate American trade and force as much as possible through NYC. Historically, the main issue was the huge expense. If Britain offers to pay a certain amount of the costs to New York State, NY might very well accept. After all, the alternative is midwestern trade being routed through other states. A lot of cities in New York prospered because of the Erie Canal, not just NYC.