Super-US in alt-NATO

Warning: This is a ‘high concept’ proposition. So, please accept the basic premise I present here, and work within that, rather than delving into the particulars of how we would get to this point or how likely it would be.

My question is how would an analogue of NATO function if the US were even more dominant? Take, for example, your typical Super-US found in many timelines (rather, many maps), that has annexed much more of the Western Hemisphere. For ease of discussion, assume simply double the population and economy.

Setting aside butterflies (any alt-WW2 and alt-Cold War will obvious be vastly different), would this NATO function better, with an even more dominant member, or worse, with the other members more cautious? Would it be more coordinated or less? What other differences might we see?
 
The issue isn't whether the USA is larger and more powerful. The issue is whether the USA is more expansionist and imperial. NATO was imagined as a multilateral partnership among democratic states. If the USA were more interested in traditional imperial power politics, such as it was following the Monroe Doctrine, then NATO could be as you imagine it. But the USA moved away from that idea as part of decolonization and the Cold War. Can't have an imperial center if the Good Guys TM are fighting an ideological war against totalitarianism.

This could have been averted in a few ways at a few points. If the US had annexed Cuba as I wrote in other threads (1, 2) then things might have been different. If WW2 / the Cold War had just been Great Powers conflicts, instead of colored with ideological conflict against centralized totalitarianism, then things might have been different. But otherwise? I can't see it happening.

Unless you go to the very beginning of post-Revolutionary history and reshape the USA into something completely unrecognizable. Maybe Washington doesn't step down and dies in office, butterflying away the "two term limit" tradition; perhaps the Twelfth Amendment did away with the four-year term length in Art.2 Sec.1 for some reason; suppose Jackson decides to tear up the Constitution and proclaim himself unimpeachable President-for-Life ("you and what army?"). Unimaginably, maybe the Colonies decided to escape one King George [Hanover] only to proclaim a new King George [Washington].

But if you do that, are you really talking about the United States of America anymore?
 

Toraach

Banned
It is possible if european alies of the US are weaker than in the OTL. Example a scenario found in one alternate history book I read some time ago, that the USSR dominated all of continental Europe, except the south of Italy and Norway. The British Isles and Norway, Sweden and Southern Italy were totally dependend on the USA in this alternate cold war (I don't remember what with Greece and Turkey).
 

Toraach

Banned
How big is super US, and how much of the population is in it unwillingly?
Well, about an unwilling population, I could say from a historical experience of my country that as long as there is enough to eat, most population is happy and calm. Problems come to be when a full bowl isn't that full anymore as it has used to be. If the superUS is still the biggest economy and retains much of otl US economic specifics from coresponding periods in history, it should prepare enough oportunities for its population to have good material conditions, so in turn they would be happy, and after three or such generations they would be fully integrated with the "imperial society".

Canada is a natural candidate to being a part of the superUS.
 
How big is super US, and how much of the population is in it unwillingly?

Assume most if not all of North America, including Central America. Assume also that the population is about as content as OTL, within acceptable variations.

To the point @danteheadman raised, I think a more important question is whether or not the other members of altNATO are inclined to view this altUS as imperialistic, given the even greater power disparity. On the other hand, could that relatively high level of trust stay constant? Or, another angle, would it be so big that others are less worried, simply because of how unwieldy such a large government might be?
 
Well, about an unwilling population, I could say from a historical experience of my country that as long as there is enough to eat, most population is happy and calm. Problems come to be when a full bowl isn't that full anymore as it has used to be. If the superUS is still the biggest economy and retains much of otl US economic specifics from coresponding periods in history, it should prepare enough oportunities for its population to have good material conditions, so in turn they would be happy, and after three or such generations they would be fully integrated with the "imperial society".

Canada is a natural candidate to being a part of the superUS.

Various European colonial empires were huge empires. Natives from elsewhere still didn't integrate.
 
The USA would be around two thirds the global economy at its height.

Presupposing that US foreign policy is similar, I don't think there would be much difference in the formation of NATO. America already outmassed everyone else in NATO at its formation. I think you would see greater pressure for Europe to unite itself though - it's even more apparent that any other option leaves it forever in the shadow of the new world.
 

Toraach

Banned
Various European colonial empires were huge empires. Natives from elsewhere still didn't integrate.
A diffret set of circumstances. Natives did not have any direct benefits from that and wery culturally very diffrent. I speak more akin to belarusian and ukrainian slavs in the SU. During Brehniev era they were integrated. Also in the case of the US is a matter of adopting englosh language and this as the real history of the US shows was the most important in inyegration.
 
Top