NI: Foreign Policy after Successful Reconstruction

[John Fredrick Parker]

Thinking over a TL that involves Reconstruction is better handled, goes slightly longer (to 1882), and maintains its civil rights successes (black enfranchisement, etc) well past the end of the century. For this thread, I want to focus on one aspect of this change:

How would US Foreign Policy be affected after, say, 1877?

Would the US have a different position on the Berlin Conference (1884)? What about Hawaii? Or Latin America for that matter -- would a country that had a significant number of non-white voters still find itself drawn to old-fashioned imperialism? And assuming it still happens, would the US approach the coming Great War in Europe any differently?

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Just noting Derek's got what could be one possible outcome, although the butterflies...

 

[Johnrankins]

Thinking over a TL that involves Reconstruction is better handled, goes slightly longer (to 1882), and maintains its civil rights successes (black enfranchisement, etc) well past the end of the century. For this thread, I want to focus on one aspect of this change:

How would US Foreign Policy be affected after, say, 1877?

Would the US have a different position on the Berlin Conference (1884)? What about Hawaii? Or Latin America for that matter -- would a country that had a significant number of non-white voters still find itself drawn to old-fashioned imperialism? And assuming it still happens, would the US approach the coming Great War in Europe any differently?

The US might have a different position on the Berlin Conference but it wouldn't matter much as the US wouldn't go to war over Africa. I doubt its Latin American policy would change much it is still south of the border and is going to be of interest to the US.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

The US might have a different position on the Berlin Conference but it wouldn't matter much as the US wouldn't go to war over Africa. I doubt its Latin American policy would change much it is still south of the border and is going to be of interest to the US.

Sounds like there wouldn't be much change at all -- including US policy toward Hawaii and Spain* -- meaning the butterflies abroad could well be small enough we still get WWI, which mean's Derek's option may well be the first major change abroad.

That would still be interesting...

*I'm still hesitant if this includes the Filipine War

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

I would expect better relations with Haiti and Liberia and more interest in the war in Cuba, especially WRT slavery on that island. Other than that, not much difference.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Just because blacks will be able to vote in larger numbers does not mean that the US foreign policy will be any different.

Blacks are just as capable of being jingoistic, culturally-chauvinistic, and imperialist as white people.

You wouldn't have the defection of black soldiers to the Filipino insurgents as in OTL because they wouldn't be subject to Jim Crow behavior in the army and think they're fighting to impose JC on another group of non-whites in TTL, but that was a pretty small affair, numbers-wise.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Just because blacks will be able to vote in larger numbers does not mean that the US foreign policy will be any different.

Blacks are just as capable of being jingoistic, culturally-chauvinistic, and imperialist as white people.

I would expect better relations with Haiti and Liberia and more interest in the war in Cuba, especially WRT slavery on that island. Other than that, not much difference.

So we may actually have a sooner Spanish American War? Possibly -- though the Ten Years War, more or less, coincided with Reconstruction OTL, and the next rebellion wasn't until 1895, until after emancipation. Still...

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

So we may actually have a sooner Spanish American War? Possibly -- though the Ten Years War, more or less, coincided with Reconstruction OTL, and the next rebellion wasn't until 1895, until after emancipation. Still...

According to Wikipedia there was another war in 1879-1880, though it was a relatively minor affair. But there's no reason why butterflies from events in the US couldn't extend the 10 Years' War into, say, a 12 Years' War - or simply delay its beginning. Spain was going through unstable times itself, it wouldn't take too much of a push.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

According to Wikipedia there was another war in 1879-1880, though it was a relatively minor affair. But there's no reason why butterflies from events in the US couldn't extend the 10 Years' War into, say, a 12 Years' War - or simply delay its beginning. Spain was going through unstable times itself, it wouldn't take too much of a push.

Possibly, but I fear that would put the intervention in the 1880's and -- well, I suppose I might as well lay out my rough plans on TTL Presidents:

Abraham Lincoln (R) (1861-68) -- yep, that's the PoD*
Hannibal Hamlin (1869-72) -- tentative
Ulysses S Grant (R) (1873-80)
Samuel Tilden* (D) (1881-86)
Grover Cleveland (D) (1886-92)
(undetermined) (R) (1893-1900) -- tentatively considering Thomas Reed

Now, TTL, Reconstruction goes on in some form until 1882, and I don't know that Tilden or Cleveland would be as enthusiastic about a war over Cuba as a POTUS with a "new south"-ern base, so that's why I'm hesitant to have a war in the 1880's; any thoughts?

*and please, if anyone wants to talk about whether this would lead to a successful Reconstruction or not, let it be in another thread; if I do a TL, I will do one

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

snip

Is 1880 too early for the black South to make a difference in foreign policy?

You could have a Republican in 1881-1885 or 1885-1889 while keeping both those Democrats, unless that throws a monkeywrench into your TL.

It's your lunch, John, I'm just showing you the menu.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Is 1880 too early for the black South to make a difference in foreign policy?

Oh, no, no, hardly -- I was just thinking about the difficulties with regard to an actual armed intervention into Cuba in the 1870's, followed by partisan issues in the 1880's.

You could have a Republican in 1881-1885 or 1885-1889 while keeping both those Democrats, unless that throws a monkeywrench into your TL.

A Republican President would -- though, thinking on it, Congress could easily switch parties as early as 1886 (maybe 1882, though that would be stretching it).

Maybe 1887 or thereabouts Cleveland decides on giving his opposition's base a war to better his chances in 88?

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

snip

The more you wait on this war the greater the need to do some work on Spanish domestic politics. Get someone in power who's both pro-slavery and militarily incompetent at just the right/wrong time.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Here's a thought:

Fully-enfranchised blacks might not, on an individual level, have foreign-policy views significantly different from whites, but their party support would be significant.

Up until the New Deal, blacks were generally supportive of Republicans. In TTL, more Southern states could go for the GOP if black people can vote. I'm thinking Mississippi and South Carolina, due to their large black populations.

You might butterfly away the election of certain Democrats in TTL. The Dems might end up being further marginalized than OTL (for awhile, they were a Southern-only party) or they'd have to reform in order to get black support.

I'm wondering, if more blacks could vote, could TDR's "Bull Moose" effort succeed (if it isn't butterflied away) or be defeated by the GOP? No Wilson in TTL, maybe.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

The more you wait on this war the greater the need to do some work on Spanish domestic politics. Get someone in power who's both pro-slavery and militarily incompetent at just the right/wrong time.

How about Alfonso XII doesn't die of tuberculosis? Would that do it?

You might butterfly away the election of certain Democrats in TTL. The Dems might end up being further marginalized than OTL (for awhile, they were a Southern-only party) or they'd have to reform in order to get black support.

Possibly, though they had plenty of northern support too -- OTL, Tilden won his home state of New York, as well as New Jersey and Massachusetts (!) in 1876.

I'm wondering, if more blacks could vote, could TDR's "Bull Moose" effort succeed (if it isn't butterflied away) or be defeated by the GOP?

Maybe...

No Wilson in TTL, maybe.

Make that "definitely".

 

[MerryPrankster]

Hooray. I hate Woodrow Wilson.

He banned the film The Spirit of 1776 because it could offend the British in a time of war, put political opponents in prison, ran a police state, and was incredibly, incredibly racist.

Getting rid of him would be spiffy.

I wonder, would more voting blacks mean no Prohibition? IIRC many racists thought gin made blacks "uppity" and supported it on those grounds, but blacks themselves might support Prohibition on the same grounds other Americans did.

(Religion, working men spending their money on alcohol and beating their wives, etc.)

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

How about Alfonso XII doesn't die of tuberculosis? Would that do it?

You'll have to ask a Spaniard for pointers there, all I know is the basics.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

I had a thought: if the Spanish American War happens a decade or so early, that could push up WW1 -- after all, UIAM, Wilheim II was inspired by the former as proof the world community wasn't as solid a cop as he had thought.

On prohibition, that may be for another thread, but there were certainly plenty of drys in the abolitionist movement before the ACW, and most support for it had little to do with race and much to do with gender.

 

[Mikestone8]

I'm wondering, if more blacks could vote, could TDR's "Bull Moose" effort succeed (if it isn't butterflied away) or be defeated by the GOP? No Wilson in TTL, maybe.

Sorry to rain on the parade, but Wilson would still have had an electoral college majority even without any votes form the old Confederacy - and the 1868 and 1872 results suggest that he probably would have carried some states in that region.

Nor do I really see how TR benefits. iirc most Blacks who were able voted fior Taft both in Primaries and in November. Black delegates from the South certainly backed him at the Convention.

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

Sorry to rain on everybody's parade, but an earlier Spanish-American War will set back Teddy Roosevelt's political career considerably, even assuming his first wife's death from kidney failure is not butterflied away.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

You'll have to ask a Spaniard for pointers there, all I know is the basics.

I may also keep Isabella from going into exile in 1868 (IIANM, this had a lot to do with the start of the Ten Years War in Cuba), but have something crop up a dozen years later or so... though that may be for another thread.

Sorry to rain on the parade, but Wilson would still have had an electoral college majority even without any votes form the old Confederacy - and the 1868 and 1872 results suggest that he probably would have carried some states in that region.

Well, ITTL, my thinking was more that, by 1912, Democrats would be nuts to nominate somebody as unapologetically racist as Wilson; plus the butterflies, you know...

Nor do I really see how TR benefits.

Sorry to rain on everybody's parade, but an earlier Spanish-American War will set back Teddy Roosevelt's political career considerably, even assuming his first wife's death from kidney failure is not butterflied away.

That I will grant you -- though it doesn't rule out a TR-like figure in, say, 1892...