Politician, Cultural, and Economic effects on the USA if they never join WW1

As it say. The United States never get into the war in Europe. (No sinking of the Lusitania, no Zimmermann Telegram.) Germany and it allies claim victory over France and the United Kingdom.

But what of the USA in itself? How are they affected by this? How would it look like without it joining the War, and the defeat of the Allies?
 
Possibly a stronger socialist movement. America had one of the fastest growing socialist movements in the world but a mixture of wartime anti-sedition laws, nativist backlash against the minorities who made up a large amount of its members (particularly Germans) and the first Red Scare struck a blow to its momentum that it was never able to recover from.
 
A large part of how the US reacts domestically will be determined by the nature of the German victory in Europe. Is it a "total" victory in which an OTL Brest-Litovsk is matched by a nasty France-screw in the West that permanently ends its role as a Great Power, with presumably a lesser but still damaging treatment of Italy? Or is it a relatively muted victory in which Germany wins without utterly destroying its continental rivals? The latter is probably acceptable to the US in so far as there would be no strong fear of a "Eurasian hegemon" to arouse strategic anxieties in the New World, but the former in which presumably the only remaining European Great Power to oppose the Germans is a battered Britain would be much more likely to worry the US. While isolationism always had a role in American politics, OTL proved that it does not take a Eurasian state knocking on North America's door to get the US excited about getting into some power politics; an ascendent Germany would possibly be enough to get the Americans into an early 'Cold War mindset' of sorts, what with all those Washington Naval Treaty-Free battleships coming online in the following years...
 

Riain

Banned
I've read that Wilson was concerned that if Germany won it would mean the end of the US' liberal political climate where taxes were low and the Army was kept small and underequipped, he believed that the US would have to militarise significantly on a permanent basis. He was probably correct in this belief and I think it would be difficult to see Roosevelt's 'Good Neighbour' policy in Latin America occurring with a powerful Germany looking to expand its trade and influence, so the US would probably keep intervening in Latin America in the 30s, perhaps on a bigger scale and further afield.

The US would likely take other steps to enable militarisation, such as increased taxation and possibly a draft to keep the Army and National Guard up to the increased strength authorised in the 1916 Defense Act.
 
I am thinking on how close the war would be for it to be the case.

In a Central Powers win scneario I had, the Germans do win, but by the skin of their teeth (namely, they beat France. Russia withdraws because of the provisional gov sees France's loss as them being doomed and so cut losses while the British eventually get them to a draw of sorts). Germany would get France's Empire, but proibably has to split it between themselves and their allies (north Africa would probably becoming Ottoman vassals for example) while they consolidate their gains and make sure everything becomes stable.
 
I am thinking on how close the war would be for it to be the case.

In a Central Powers win scneario I had, the Germans do win, but by the skin of their teeth (namely, they beat France. Russia withdraws because of the provisional gov sees France's loss as them being doomed and so cut losses while the British eventually get them to a draw of sorts). Germany would get France's Empire, but proibably has to split it between themselves and their allies (north Africa would probably becoming Ottoman vassals for example) while they consolidate their gains and make sure everything becomes stable.

I figure the USA would continue down the era of Progressivsm without much worry. The only big issue might be another attempt at a Paris Commune over in France that could jeoparidze that, but the likelihood at that is unknown. In the event it doesn't though, I still see the Entente and the USA moving further left to contrast against the imperial Central Powers. Russia would focus mainly on building itself though probably look to outside Europe for allies, such as the US.

Some form of the Great Depression could happen through the mix of a stock market crash occuring at the same time as the Dust Bowl though probably be contained to the USA. Would further fuel leftish thoughts. This would probably mean Democrats would remain conservative and Republicans progressive so FDR could run as a Repub and capitliize on the Roosevelt legacy.

Conflict with Japan may be inevitable if Japan continues down the path of empire and their interests clash against the US in China though this could lead to China-US relations being alot better.
 
Given China's OTL friendliness with Germany why not the reverse? Pro-German China and pro US-UK Japan?

It all depends who Germany would chosoe regarding the Sino-Japanese wars. Russia might get invovled if the Japanese think they can snag some Far East land from them. US would get involved because of their itnerests in China.

And whether the US and UK would be close here os up to debate
 
The War was a massive boost to US political might, manufacturing and farming leading to a confident outward looking 60 years of world dominance without a major rival. A Europe aligned with and dominated by Germany after a quick and not too dirty war could mean the US never gets out of its inward looking mindset. This doesnt mean the US economy declines the North American internal market is still huge but instead Mitteleuropa takes the place of the US in world affairs.

The really interesting outcomes could be what happens to the two maritime powers Great Britain and Japan.
 

Deleted member 109224

I don't see why in the face of the Bolshevik revolution there wouldn't still be a Red Scare. The US entered the war so late that it didn't really impact the Russian situation.

There'd still likely be some form of cultural anti-German backlash too if the US and Germany are butting heads over time down the line.

Democrats won't be loathed the way they were in the 1920s due to Wilson taking the US to war and creating an illiberal police state to engage in it.
 
I don't see why in the face of the Bolshevik revolution there wouldn't still be a Red Scare. The US entered the war so late that it didn't really impact the Russian situation.

There'd still likely be some form of cultural anti-German backlash too if the US and Germany are butting heads over time down the line.

Democrats won't be loathed the way they were in the 1920s due to Wilson taking the US to war and creating an illiberal police state to engage in it.

It depends. Bolsheviks may not get the same success here and if Germany does win at the tail-end, they'd be spending the next decade cosoldiating their gains and making sure their allies to fall apart, so they won't be doing much outside of Europe except screwing up Africa
 
I am thinking on how close the war would be for it to be the case.

In a Central Powers win scneario I had, the Germans do win, but by the skin of their teeth (namely, they beat France. Russia withdraws because of the provisional gov sees France's loss as them being doomed and so cut losses while the British eventually get them to a draw of sorts). Germany would get France's Empire, but proibably has to split it between themselves and their allies (north Africa would probably becoming Ottoman vassals for example) while they consolidate their gains and make sure everything becomes stable.

If Germany wins by the skin of their teeth, then they aren't getting France's empire and would be lucky to get back their own empire from British occupation. And the Turks aren't getting any of it either.

Germany would be too battered to make much of a complaint, and would likewise be too damaged by the war to go on any foreign adventures for a while. The United States will be worried at Germany's success but also won't need to fear the Germans messing around much in Latin America for the time being. But there will probably be a military buildup in the US, especially of the Navy.
 
I've read that Wilson was concerned that if Germany won it would mean the end of the US' liberal political climate where taxes were low and the Army was kept small and underequipped, he believed that the US would have to militarise significantly on a permanent basis. He was probably correct in this belief and I think it would be difficult to see Roosevelt's 'Good Neighbour' policy in Latin America occurring with a powerful Germany looking to expand its trade and influence, so the US would probably keep intervening in Latin America in the 30s, perhaps on a bigger scale and further afield.

It'd be really difficult to see either a Germany capable of that sort of power projection or a United States that somehow intervened more severely than it already did during the 1920s. Roosevelt's 'Good Neighbor' policy was more a reaction to that and the challenge of the Great Depression than anything else. There's also the factor of Germany having their hands full securing their positions in Eastern Europe ensuring Brest-Litovsk becomes the status quo and Africa as they won't have lost their colonies and might possibly get a few more at France's expense.
 
If Germany wins by the skin of their teeth, then they aren't getting France's empire and would be lucky to get back their own empire from British occupation. And the Turks aren't getting any of it either.

Germany would be too battered to make much of a complaint, and would likewise be too damaged by the war to go on any foreign adventures for a while. The United States will be worried at Germany's success but also won't need to fear the Germans messing around much in Latin America for the time being. But there will probably be a military buildup in the US, especially of the Navy.

Well, some of the empire could be substitutes for war reparations. If they won, they would st the very least keep everything they already had. The Ottomans would at the least force the British out of Arabia so the Ottomans and Rishidi could finally end the war with the Sauds
 
Well, some of the empire could be substitutes for war reparations. If they won, they would st the very least keep everything they already had. The Ottomans would at the least force the British out of Arabia so the Ottomans and Rishidi could finally end the war with the Sauds

That's the thing, Germany has no colonial empire by 1917 since it's all in British/allied hands. They'd need to negotiate something at the peace conference to get that empire back, which could include things like reducing the demand for reparations from France, not taking pieces of the French empire if France needs to sell anything, etc.
 
That's the thing, Germany has no colonial empire by 1917 since it's all in British/allied hands. They'd need to negotiate something at the peace conference to get that empire back, which could include things like reducing the demand for reparations from France, not taking pieces of the French empire if France needs to sell anything, etc.

Why would they have to negotiate to their own colonies? back if they're the victors though
 

Riain

Banned
It'd be really difficult to see either a Germany capable of that sort of power projection or a United States that somehow intervened more severely than it already did during the 1920s. Roosevelt's 'Good Neighbor' policy was more a reaction to that and the challenge of the Great Depression than anything else. There's also the factor of Germany having their hands full securing their positions in Eastern Europe ensuring Brest-Litovsk becomes the status quo and Africa as they won't have lost their colonies and might possibly get a few more at France's expense.

The 1916 Defence Act was already a step in the direction Wilson feared; doubling the size of the Army and NG, giving the NG money for much more training, forming the ROTC, buying 375 planes, 10 battleships, 6 battlecruisers, 10 scout cruisers, 50 destroyers and 67 submarines.

I don't think Wilson was expecting major battles in Latin America the day after the war ended or anything that drastic, certainly the Military and Naval expansion authorised in 1916 had a 5 year schedule for completion. Rather I think that instead of a benign Britain in effect enforcing the Monroe Doctrine the US would have to deal with Germany who might well do similar interventions as the US in support of its business interests, or picking sides during instability and supplying assistance to that side during the 20s.

Because they are currently occupied by the British and until they're dictating terms in London, Britain's the one negotiating the terms on their future.

That will be the case because the Germans will have:
  • defeated the BEF in France, possibly capturing a large part of it and having a large part flee back to Britain without its equipment
  • will occupy the Belgian and French channel coast
  • will be shelling Britain with Langer Max guns and bombing with planes
  • will have broken the blockade by having access to the food of France and Spain
  • will have uboats and other naval units operating from Le Harve and Cherbourg
Britain will gladly hand back Germany's colonies and throw in a few more to end this state of affairs.
 
Top