How is it ahistorical?
I'm currently attempting to extrapolate for the effects that the continuation of stronger Spanish rule in Mexico and the New World in addition to a lack of a War of 1812 would have on the nature of North American geopolitics. Without these changes in mind, the United States would necessarily be weaker relative to OTL (and the Victoria 2 game where you can steamroller EVERYTHING, essentially, without real opposition).
The War of 1812, while the outcome was ultimately a stalemate, brought about numerous changes into the United States that were absolutely crucial to its development into a Great Power. First, the British blockade (also the Embargo Act) were essential to kickstarting American manufacturing, both by transitioning the New England economy away from a heavy commercial focus and by creating an environment in which projects like the Erie canal were incentivized and finished, and local cotton-manufacturing developed. Moreover, the war exposed flaws within the American financial sector, which would lead to the chartering of the Second Bank of the United States (which would be eventually strangled by Jackson [which in my opinion falls under the same category of his decisions as the Trail of Tears, but I digress]). All of this would eventually lead to a major post-war boom.
In terms of military power, the War of 1812 was also key in moving the US military into a professional institution. Without the War of 1812, there is no Winfield Scott to emphasize the importance of military professionalism (over the then-dominant belief in the effectiveness of state militia [based on Revolutionary War romanticizations]), or a West Point to develop a professional officer corps.
Moreover, popular perceptions after 1812 resulted in the Era of Good Feelings. In many ways, the War of 1812 was essential in further unifying the nation. There's a reason why the poem "The Defense of Fort McHenry" was used as the basis of the national anthem, after all: the importance of Baltimore and New Orleans for the American psyche cannot be underestimated, and were/are essential cornerstones to the developing national identity of the United States. The failure of the Hartford convention, the decline of the Federalists, and the era that followed post-war all certainly served to strengthen the unity of the nation. Just as an indication, even prominent southern and western leaders like Calhoun ultimately ended up supporting the charter of the Second Bank of the United States (which shows how much faith was put back into the national government and in the American democratic "experiment" after the war).
The War of 1812 also saw a definitive end to British support and supply of Native Americans, and was a catastrophe for many Native American tribes (who are really the biggest losers in the whole affair). Without the War of 1812, and even assuming light support from the British, there is no reason for a stronger Native American resistance to westward encroachment to be ahistorical in any way.
If you find this ahistorical, what would you propose be the end result of a lack of 1812 and the current (projected) setup of North America? I absolutely love having constructive disagreements, and it will help me focus and explain my own reasoning for these changes (both historical and game design). And if I'm convinced, I'll go with your proposal (or compromise the two).
Note that the United States would still be able to achieve "Manifest Destiny", it just faces some more hurdles as a result. The primary goal of these changes and this specific AH path is to make the gameplay more interesting and challenging for the US from Vanilla Vicky2/AHD. Not needlessly difficult, but all the same.
Really? Why would there be more immigration towards Canada instead of westwards (outside of stronger and longer-lasting resistance by Native Americans)? What was the reasoning behind going north to Canada? I understand why the immigration to Canada stemmed afterwards (the economic downturn in Canada compared to the postwar boom in the United States), but what was the original impetus that had northward migration to Canada anyways?
Last edited:
