Thread Topic: What if Wilson gave in to the strikers?
EruditeTroll: While the IWW was opposed to entering the war, what really pushed them into revolt was President Wilson’s ban on strikes in the middle of the Longshoremen’s Strike. However, Labor Secretary William Wilson (yes, really) and Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin Roosevelt both opposed him, arguing that Wilson should instead have forced the bosses to give in to most of the strikers’ demands.
What if Wilson had given in? Could the Revolution have been averted? And what impact would a US intervention into Europe have looked like?
Ballymoar: I’m doubtful it would have been enough. The IWW was strongly anti-war. Furthermore, their demands included a halt to arms shipments, which would have made a US intervention impossible.
Comrade Washington: Obviously the arms shipments were going to continue, but they could have expanded safety inspections and not cut corners, as well as giving the workers a nice fat pay raise. I don’t think Debs could have gotten the workers behind a general strike under these conditions, and he was always pretty good at picking his battles. It’s why he didn’t challenge Wilson’s reelection despite all the bullshit the KKK pulled in 1916.
Ballymoar: That would have slowed down an intervention drastically.
Cambot87: Let’s assume that the IWW backs down. Debs isn’t happy about it, but he’s not going to fight it. They give the workers a bunch of concessions so everybody can live with it.
Realistically, it would have taken months to get an expeditionary force ready. The US Army was pretty small before the war. Otherwise, the Red Army would have been crushed within months. I don’t think we’d see significant US troops in Europe until August or so. But the British and French wouldn’t have had this sudden loss of supplies. They’d have been in much better shape. Throwing a bunch of fresh Americans into the trenches might have been enough to stop the Kaiserschlacht.
Fuck, that probably extends the war by another year. And Wilson is in charge of the whole country when the American Flu hits…
Comrade Washington: If Wilson has a bloody war and a botched pandemic response, then that sinks the Democrats in 1920. Debs runs on a “this war was a mistake” platform, wins outright. But since reality isn’t a War Plan game, he doesn’t instantly create the ASU. It would take him a while to push all his reforms through Congress, dealing with the Supreme Court. Maybe the Socialists just remain one of America’s major parties, pushing through reforms for a bit, then losing to the Democrats or Republicans and fighting to stop their reforms from getting rolled back. At best – if Debs is successful enough that someone from his party wins in 1928 – I think we get a moderately socialist America by 1940, albeit one still flying the Stars and Stripes.
EruditeTroll: Honestly, Germany was in pretty shabby shape in 1918. The French were just in worse shape. I think that if the Kaiserschlacht fails, the war ends in 1918. Maybe Germany sues for peace, offers up more colonies, gives back Alsace Lorraine.
If Germany loses, they might go falangist instead of Britain and France. Who would even rule a Falangist Germany?
Ballymoar: Hermann Göring? He was a war hero and fairly popular until his association with the far right made him PNG.
Red Ranger: Or Heinrich Himmler.
Comrade Washington: I don’t know that name *mimir-fu*
Dear Lord. That guy was seriously
nuts. Even by falangist standards. The Black Hundreds would probably have liked him, though.
Shit, this is getting interesting. Debs in the White House, this Himmler guy running Germany, Germany allied with Russia against a non-falangist Second Entente…
EruditeTroll, would you mind if I took this and started a TL?
EruditeTroll: Go for it.
(Narrator: Comrade Washington’s timeline “Red Eagle, Black Sun” won a Newt Award)
- From
www.althistoria.net
