Republic of New England

What would have happened had the Hartford Convention led to the secession of New England from the United States?

Well, here are my two takes:

#1: Civil war breaks out after a prolonged War of 1812. Puny New England valiantly holds the other states off for a good while, but is eventually defeated and endures "reconstruction."

#2: The USA shatters. Total Balkanization. Read Harry Turtledove's Disunited States of America.

#3: It happens, but is in name only. It reenters the Union.

#4: The USA shatters and Britain takes back control.

#5: Britain forms an alliance with New England and takes control of the rest of the USA.

#6: War of 1812 ends in stalemate, like OTL, but it takes longer. 1817 or so. The two countries respect each other and live and peace.


#4 is most plausible, IMO. #1 is most exciting to me, if you're looking to make a TL. :)
 
World1935.png
 
I really doubt the UK has the means or the desire to take back over, especially what with that whole other thing they had going on.
 

RousseauX

Donor
Decades of Darkness is actually really plausible for most of it with regards to America.

Basically the US becomes even more of an expansionist, slave-holding power, and remains so.
 
Decades of Darkness is actually really plausible for most of it with regards to America.

Basically the US becomes even more of an expansionist, slave-holding power, and remains so.

It is plausible in the attitude the United States takes, but not in the actual outcome of the actual expansion.

Most likely the expansionist US would see some advance into Northern Mexico, and the Caribbean (fulfillment of the ostend manifesto) but never make it to the degree of DOD.

Slavery would likely survive into the 1900s though; in the US and Brazil.
 
Read Decades of Darkness. It's a challenging read because of its length and depth , but it's well worth it.

It's also not very plausible. It can give one a rough idea of the consequences on the Americas (the world at large can go really any way due to butterflies) but the US could never go on an annexing spree like it does in DoD.
 
It's also not very plausible. It can give one a rough idea of the consequences on the Americas (the world at large can go really any way due to butterflies) but the US could never go on an annexing spree like it does in DoD.
You mean like it did in OTL? ;)

It's comforting to think that DoD is implausible. But that's not true.
The POD is far back enough that most of DoD is frighteningly plausible. The only major quibble I have is Aragon's rebirth.
 

RousseauX

Donor
You mean like it did in OTL? ;)

It's comforting to think that DoD is implausible. But that's not true.
The POD is far back enough that most of DoD is frighteningly plausible. The only major quibble I have is Aragon's rebirth.
I basically agree with this as far as America is concerned. But the European part of DoD was a German-wank and I guess while not impossible, is implausible.
 
Wasn't it written as an "American Draka" thought exercise?

I don't really know. I read it waaaaaaaay back.

You mean like it did in OTL? ;)

It's comforting to think that DoD is implausible. But that's not true.
The POD is far back enough that most of DoD is frighteningly plausible. The only major quibble I have is Aragon's rebirth.

The USA annexed all of Mexico, all of Colombia, all of the Andes, and this is apparently possible? Especially since this USA is, as Savoy points out, similar to Draka and therefore racially motivated in its expansion, how would taking on a bunch of Mestizos and Hispanics work?
 
I don't really know. I read it waaaaaaaay back.

The USA annexed all of Mexico, all of Colombia, all of the Andes, and this is apparently possible? Especially since this USA is, as Savoy points out, similar to Draka and therefore racially motivated in its expansion, how would taking on a bunch of Mestizos and Hispanics work?
You don't remember how the USA is facing guerilla wars that are going to probably cause Bad Things in the long run? Or how the American system of slavery became increasingly Latinized through peons and such?
The US bit off more than it can chew, yes, but that's hardly implausible.

Germany is going to be in trouble too. It controls a smaller land area than the US, but has, IIRC, more than double the people to oppress.
 
You don't remember how the USA is facing guerilla wars that are going to probably cause Bad Things in the long run? Or how the American system of slavery became increasingly Latinized through peons and such?
The US bit off more than it can chew, yes, but that's hardly implausible.

Germany is going to be in trouble too. It controls a smaller land area than the US, but has, IIRC, more than double the people to oppress.

Honestly I read it waay back when I first joined and even then I don't think I finished the whole thing. I still think the US would collapse under the pressure of such a huge hostile population before it was able to extend itself that far...
 
Honestly I read it waay back when I first joined and even then I don't think I finished the whole thing. I still think the US would collapse under the pressure of such a huge hostile population before it was able to extend itself that far...

I tend to agree. In international relations the numbers for a successful insurgency is considered to be 3% of the population actively involved and another 10% tacitly supporting them. In this situation, those numbers are likely to be many times bigger. It would be the Haiti revolution on a huge scale. Look at the problems the British had holding down Kenya, or the French had in Algeria. And in these places they weren't try to outright enslave the population, so a great many kept their heads down. Here the entire non-white population is going to be up in arms at every opportunity.

That said, however, we're criticising DoD for something its not trying to be. As others have mentioned, its aiming to be the most plausible way to get a Draka-like situation, which it largely achieves. That's very different from being the most likely scenario out of a New England secession.

I think the most likely situation is that the rest of the United States goes on a sectionalist path, eventually resulting in further Northern secessions. Just in this timeline, the support of New England and the British would mean such secessions were successful. The underground railroad would then become more and more problematic for the USA, causing a lot of tension, possible wars, and eventually more states giving up slavery.

This is actually probably quite a good way to get a balkanised North America, with different independent federations in New England, the Midwest etc, Pacific coast etc.
 
Last edited:
The USA annexed all of Mexico, all of Colombia, all of the Andes, and this is apparently possible?

Yes, it is as long as it is done by a lucky, patient *USA which is willing to adapt and use brutal, but effective methods to pacify their new territories.

Especially since this USA is, as Savoy points out, similar to Draka and therefore racially motivated in its expansion, how would taking on a bunch of Mestizos and Hispanics work?

DoD *USA grants citizenship to (white) Hispanic and even rich Mestizos who are willing to accept the annexation of their countries.
 
think i considered DoD reasonable plausible up to 1920 or so after that it became rather wankish in many respects, and of course it was a major aussie wank.

to and to answer the original question i think New England would go for a alliance with britain, and britain would end up taking control of a sizeable portion of the us (most likely Oregon territory and the Louisiana purchase area at least). might beat the remaining us, and start a policy of divide & rule, keeping it down & controllable.
 
Britain at that point had no real interest in trying to actually control the U.S. A seceding New England probably means Britain can give enough support for the natives in the NW to hold their own though.
 
Top