Slow the US expansion west as much as possible

Skallagrim

Banned
The easiest POD is to prevent the Constitution, and just have a TL where the Articles of Confederation get amended. In OTL, Jefferson agreed to the Louisiana Purchase even though he knew that his own reading of the constitution didn't give him that authority (he just figured the benefit was so very great, all other considerations kind of had to yield). If the USA remains a far more decentralised, confederal union, there will not be any way to get that sort of thing done, and the purchase just never happens. Americans moving in will still "pull a Texas" in various places, but that will initially yield independent settler republics, which may or may not see fit to join this confederal USA (which will probably not have a strong army, so can't offer any real protection anyway). Expansion will be a slow, more piecemeal process, which will allow Britain to move in on all of Oregon. Meanwhile, this confederal USA may not be able (or willing) to win a war against Mexico. If Anglo settlers in California still manage to tear themselves away from Mexico, they may very well end up becoming an independent republic. (Possibly under British protection, which Britain would offer because that would mean independent California is viable, and it therefore doesn't join the USA.)

Thecherry on top, by the way, would be if this confederal USA is more markedly Jeffersonian in its early years, and as such sympathises with france against Britain. An alt-War of 1812 sees Britain landing troops in New Orleans, and turning the city and environs into a British protectorate. With Britain controlling the mouth of the Mississippi, a lot of American motivation for wanting to settle the Louisiana Country (which is part of that river's watershed) would be gone. And also, Jeffersonianism would be discredited, so the USA may as a result ave a belated "Constitutional Convention" after this war, resulting in a much tighter federation, which turns to Hamiltonian policies. Such a USA would then be more interested in promoting its own industry and manufacturing, and would tend towards urbanism. The typically Jeffersonian desire for agrarian land out west would be much diminished.

So, the tl;dr for the above -- more Jeffersoniasm/decentralism first, followed by more Hamiltonianism/centralism.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Spain does not sell Louisiana to France. Napoleon can't sell it to the Americans.

Good point. - I wonder if or when the Americans would seize New Orleans and other cross-river territories by filibuster or straight-up military aggression.

If this does not happen for a few decades, and the U.S. lacks territory on both sides of the river, is the Indian Removal/Trail of Tears even possible.

Odds are it may return to France post 1815 if OTL does not get too much butterflies.

I'm not sure how one gets to this part, or it becomes likely for France to get Louisiana post-1815.
 
Good point. - I wonder if or when the Americans would seize New Orleans and other cross-river territories by filibuster or straight-up military aggression.

If this does not happen for a few decades, and the U.S. lacks territory on both sides of the river, is the Indian Removal/Trail of Tears even possible.



I'm not sure how one gets to this part, or it becomes likely for France to get Louisiana post-1815.

Mexico could just as easily claim it if Spain doesn't sell it. I can see an invasion of New Orleans area by insurgents. Then sell it to France or someone else for much needed money.
 
Good point. - I wonder if or when the Americans would seize New Orleans and other cross-river territories by filibuster or straight-up military aggression.

If this does not happen for a few decades, and the U.S. lacks territory on both sides of the river, is the Indian Removal/Trail of Tears even possible.



I'm not sure how one gets to this part, or it becomes likely for France to get Louisiana post-1815.

Maybe if Spain ruled Louisiana it would be sold all together with Florida. For more money ofcourse. Spain could use that money to restore order in their other Colonies.

I can't tell when the purchase happens with the US but I think no later than 1830. Definitely no later than 1830. This does affect the Native Americans within the US borders. An alternative deportation is likely though.

France getting Louisiana back isn't out of question. But it was more because it looks good.
 
Maybe if only the northern colonies go independent with the south remaining British (at least for a while), there would be more of a drive towards industry and centralization and less of one towards expansion. The south not being independent would weaken the agrarian, anti-federalist cause.
 
Wouldn't there be a spiralling effect with migration in the long run i.e. expansion to the west is slower, so there is less available land for newcomers, so the US are less attractive to migrants, so there is less pressure to get new lands, so expansion to the west is slower ?
 
Avoid Napoleon and have more wars with Spain. I could see America needing three wars and 2-3 extra decades to get from the Mississippi to the Pacific if Spain is still a regional power.
 
Avoid Napoleon and have more wars with Spain. I could see America needing three wars and 2-3 extra decades to get from the Mississippi to the Pacific if Spain is still a regional power.

Yeah that would have had a profound effect on US history and maybe the notion of manifest destiny. Which was primarily wars with the natives (and mexico) compared to other powers.
 
Avoid Napoleon and have more wars with Spain. I could see America needing three wars and 2-3 extra decades to get from the Mississippi to the Pacific if Spain is still a regional power.
Maybe instead of saying that the peasants should eat cake (yeah, I know that's not what she said) they could give them cake, avoid the nastiness of the revolution and allow España to bigen some reforms to placate the Criollos?

But that doesn't bode well for some of my ancestors :(
 
Nativists come to power, immigration halted. Wild West continues into the 1930s.

Popular conception of the cowboy is that he wields a submachine gun.
 
Top