Replace the United States with Mexico as a superpower

Maoistic

Banned
With the year 1714 as a base, try to put Mexico into the role of the United States as the preeminent superpower of the Americas.
 
Last edited:
Have Britain lose every colonial war in the Americas after 1714. 13 colonies with powerful France and Spain on their doorstep are not going to revolt. New Spain expands northward throughout the 19th century and gains independence in the first half of 20th century. It then helps French and British colonies gain independence.
 
Have Britain lose every colonial war in the Americas after 1714. 13 colonies with powerful France and Spain on their doorstep are not going to revolt. New Spain expands northward throughout the 19th century and gains independence in the first half of 20th century. It then helps French and British colonies gain independence.

Hmm, wouldn't there still be a concern if France still holds to Canada+Louisiana of a country emerging to dispute the future position with New Spain? Maybe if France still looses West Lousiana to Spain in some alt!7YW or something else, and Spain is able to secure it long-term and it joins with New Spain after independence or in Mexico's own Manifest Destiny or something...
 
Hmm, wouldn't there still be a concern if France still holds to Canada+Louisiana of a country emerging to dispute the future position with New Spain? Maybe if France still looses West Lousiana to Spain in some alt!7YW or something else, and Spain is able to secure it long-term and it joins with New Spain after independence or in Mexico's own Manifest Destiny or something...
It's not hard to define a Mexico/Louisiana border because of Geography. I think they would get along.
 
It's not hard to define a Mexico/Louisiana border because of Geography. I think they would get along.

Well, I meant in regards to Lousiana itself having also the potential to become a superpower. A factor of the US becoming one was not having much of a competition in its corner of the world, I'd think at least, so if Mexico has competition, it might hamper somewhat that. Even if its not a hostile race or something.
 
Well, I meant in regards to Lousiana itself having also the potential to become a superpower. A factor of the US becoming one was not having much of a competition in its corner of the world, I'd think at least, so if Mexico has competition, it might hamper somewhat that. Even if its not a hostile race or something.

That depends on Louisiana's population. It might still become a Mexican satellite.

Don't forget that the overwhelming majority of New France's population IOTL was concentrated in Quebec (80-90% of it IIRC). Even assuming the rest of New France's population increases to a similar level, Mexico's population is significantly greater.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
You would have to go back farther than 1714 for this, because Mexico's punching under its weight in the game of world power lies mostly in its historically weak political and economic institutions. Those were already firmly in place by the beginning of the 18th Century.
 
With the year 1714 as a base, try to put either Mexico into the role of the United States as the preeminent superpower of the Americas.
Mexico needs to keep Louisiana and the control over the Missisipi. That region is rich in coal,farmland and the Missisipi makes transporting goods through all north America really cheap and easy. Mexico/New Spain doesn't control Louisiana after the 7 years war.
Then you would need Mexico to keep this region and not be sold to France again. To do this you need Mexico to not be linked to Spain during the Napoleonic wars. There are two options for this,an early declaration of independence or the "confederate" option which I will go in detail later on.
An early declaration of independence before the Napoleonic wars could mean a bloody civil war as OTL but this time with all the might of the Spanish empire. Mexico could get aid from Britain but to counter that Spain might just seek for an alliance with the US which could mean the lose of Louisiana. I don't find this option to be optimal.
Now I am going to expand on the confederate option. The count of Aranda which was one of the main ministers under Charles III saw that the rise of the US would be inminent and that the US would dwarf Spanish and French influence in America over time. To stop the rise of the US he proposed to send Spanish princes to America,one to Perú and another one to Mexico. This new kingdoms would be under the sovereignity of the emperor of Spain and the islands.
This hispanic confederation with the right prince could lead to enlighted depotism focused on Mexico allowing Mexico to open trade,start industrialization and populate the northern lands more agressively. This would mean a smoth transition unlike OTL which would remove all the debt and legitimacy issues and on top of that Mexico could rely on Spain and Peru (all of Spanish south America) for support against the US which was butting heads against Britain for most part of its early history.
Could the US still expand into Louisiana in this TL? Possibly but the chances of the US beating the Spanish navy (combined with the armies that Mexico and Peru could build) is really slim and with the control over the Missisipi there is a really high chance for Mexico to protect all Louisiana and recieve thousands of inmigrants to all that fertile land, and on top of that Mexico could expand into the west and hold huge oil reserves and the iron mines of Utah which could lead to a solid industrialization.
 
You would have to go back farther than 1714 for this, because Mexico's punching under its weight in the game of world power lies mostly in its historically weak political and economic institutions. Those were already firmly in place by the beginning of the 18th Century.
Mexico was described by Von Humblot to be more developed than Germany when he made his journey in the early XIX century. It is stupid to believe that Mexico with such a vast land area and resources could not have the potential to become a superpower under some circumstamces. The 13 colonies were meant to be a consumer market for the British industry (navigation acts) and an agrarian society (Jefferson amogst others argued to keep it this way) and under the right leadership (federalists) it became an industrial powerhouse.
This is an Alternate history forum and saying never is reserved to very few cases like Switzerland becoming a superpower in 1898.
Mexico becoming a superpower is totally doable with luck and under certain circumstances with its state in 1714
 
Let's not forget the greatest setback to a Mexican superpower: small population. In OTL, they had to invite Americans to Texas to stop being a minority to the Native Americans.
 
Last edited:
If Mexico had been able to continue the tribute payment the Spanish had going, and without having Americans moving westward, then it could've been not that big of an issue long-term. The country had alternatives. It could've accepted the Cherokee who had already been living there since the early 1800's. The Spanish invited them in precisely to have something to keep American expansionism in check. If Mexico had followed suit, it could've probably made a buffer zone between the Trinity and Sabine rivers. Which could be expanded to the would-be Indian Territory if they gained the support of the displaced Five Tribes.
 

Maoistic

Banned
You would have to go back farther than 1714 for this, because Mexico's punching under its weight in the game of world power lies mostly in its historically weak political and economic institutions. Those were already firmly in place by the beginning of the 18th Century.
This idea of "institutions" is very weak. Mexico right now is a middle power (still in the top 5 economies of the Americas though) because the French bent backwards for the US, allowing it to become independent decades ahead of any other colony and developing the infrastructure necessary for industrialising before Mexico which allowed it to develop a more powerful military that stole about half of Mexican territory.
 
The small population was only a problem in the north, though.

Yes, but they won't become a superpower if they would be outnumbered by the Natives in the North.

Mexico had a larger population than the 13 colonies throughout all the XVIII century though

Yes and after they never managed to catch up afterwards.
If the Mexicans wanted to keep the Great Plains and Louisana and become at least the superpower of the Americas they would simply have to attract the same number or more of immigrants to these regions, because they won't become a superpower if much of their territory is just a great, dry emptyness, where you are chased by Native Americans. Fairly easy after gold is discovered in California and oil in Texas.
Also, if you insist, they could receive the Five Civilized Tribes, driven away by Jackson and allow them to settle and form a state. You could even have a Native American belt of states, as they are forced Northwards by coming European immigrants.
Still, you have to prevent Americans from coming to settle and the European immigrants must assimilate in the Mexican society and speak Spanish (would they be willing?) The Mississippi would have to become a "Border Wall of Nature".
I don't believe you thought of this, but Mexican Alaska?
This way, Mexico would become the dominant power of the Americas and of the Pacific, but the US would still be a force to be reckoned with and the Manifest Destiny would become more Lebensraum-like. I can see an Edward Grey telegram, promising the US the Great Plains if they join WW1 against Mexico, but I can't foresee the internal butterflies before WW1, which would surely be a lot.
 
Last edited:
One thing to avoid a big push westward is eliminating or mitigating the Panic of 1819. Land prices rose, which made the cheaper Mexican land a desireable alternative for westward settlers.
 

Deleted member 67076

Plenty of ways to do this:

-Improve the Bourbon reforms in allowing the continental free trade agreement of 1776 to be pushed earlier, stimulating massive economic growth
-Miguel Hidalgo marches straight on Mexico City in 1811 instead of stalling; meaning the Mexican war of independence is effectively over as soon as it starts rather than degenerating into a 10 year long slog of a Civil war + revolutionary war that crippled its infrastructure and coffers
-The Mexican Empire stabilizes, keeping Central America and continuing its tribute agreements with the Comanche and inviting in other Native Americans to settle the north while other immigrants settle California
-Related to the above; an important European noble house takes the Throne of Mexico such as the Bourbons or Romanovs or Hapsburgs or whoever, effectively strong arming Spain into recognizing the Mexican state, meaning much earlier demobilization of the army (and more butter than guns, as the analogy goes)
-Delay Mexican independence through averting the Latin American Revolutionary wars. Mexico and the rest of Latin America continues its rapid, stable development throughout the 1800s until its far stronger than the fatherland. Additionally, this means a Mexico that has Central America, its north, potentially Louisiana, Cuba, Santo Domingo, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and maybe (although its a stretch) bits of Venezuela.
 
absolutely, if Mexico wants to keep the north, including the portion OTL ceded to the USA, Louisiana, and Florida, some population is needed. With a POD in early 1700's, that is easily attainable. The notion is that the changes that bring on super power status, also bring on changes that allow this. internal migration can be fostered, as well as multi-national immigration. And why the heck wouldn't these immigrants learn Spanish? they learned English and assimilated to the foreign culture of the USA.

OTL Louisiana was ceded to Spain after the 7 years war, but originally, the region was already claimed by Spain. 1714 is borderline late to beating France to populating it/making good on those claims, but it's not impossible. if they do make good their claims, that starts them off with regions west of the appalachian mountains, as well as OTL Georgia.

And if you go for the early Aranda Plan scenario, don't forget that this new country could include the west indies, most of central america, and the Philippines, and Florida. Aranda Plan is going to require an earlier POD, since in 1714 the Bourbons are kind of low on available princes.
 
absolutely, if Mexico wants to keep the north, including the portion OTL ceded to the USA, Louisiana, and Florida, some population is needed. With a POD in early 1700's, that is easily attainable. The notion is that the changes that bring on super power status, also bring on changes that allow this. internal migration can be fostered, as well as multi-national immigration. And why the heck wouldn't these immigrants learn Spanish? they learned English and assimilated to the foreign culture of the USA.

OTL Louisiana was ceded to Spain after the 7 years war, but originally, the region was already claimed by Spain. 1714 is borderline late to beating France to populating it/making good on those claims, but it's not impossible. if they do make good their claims, that starts them off with regions west of the appalachian mountains, as well as OTL Georgia.

And if you go for the early Aranda Plan scenario, don't forget that this new country could include the west indies, most of central america, and the Philippines, and Florida. Aranda Plan is going to require an earlier POD, since in 1714 the Bourbons are kind of low on available princes.
Spain would keep all islands under Aranda's plan to have ports all around the globe which would be set as commercial hubs.Charles the III had 2 other sons that could have taken the thrones of Mexico and Perú which were Gabriel and Antonio Pascual.Gabriel would die in 1788,so you could put one of the sons of Charles IV or Ferdinand of Sicily under one of the thrones.
Aranda's plan didn't become a matter of discussion until American's declaration of independence and in fact Charles the IV was about to pull the trigger until Britain declared war on Spain in 1804,as he didn't want to risk the life of his sons.
 
Top