The Yankee Dominion: A Map and World Building Project

Reader mode
Gian

Gian

Banned
Nazi Space Spy said:
As for the Russian minority in Alaska, I suppose that isn't an issue so long as it doesn't spark a political party. I think thats where the real conflict with Hail Britannia was.
Click to expand...

Well, 10-15% seems a good cap right (and that's for a province of 800,000 people)

Also, what about my other suggestion to just lump the Scottish and Irish populations in the Maritimes together and then create an "American Gaelic" standard separate from both?
 
Gian

Gian

Banned
Zyxoriv said:
I just realised, has this Dominion/Commonwealth country actually got a name - is it Columbia, just The Yankee Dominion, America?
Click to expand...

Right now, we're calling it whatever we wanted. But one of my proposals (which was thankfully adopted) was that it should be an independent kingdom/empire under a junior branch of the House of Hanover (ie one of George III's sons)
 

Oryxslayer

Yeah, I'm not totally against a small Russian thing, but with a few conditions. I imagine that "Anglo" and "french" are two large melting pots, absorbing most whites that come in on their own. Small white ethnic communities surrounded by the whole will eventually be snuffed out through the years - Primary education for children, jobs requiring a national tongue, leaving the migrant pocket for a new region or the suburbs, it goes on. Generally the process of how we now refer to most Whites in America as "Americans" even though they come from a whole multitude of places. This even happens for racial minorities...but they will always have trouble escaping prejudice.

The multitude of timelines on here have explored this topic extensively: Boreoamerica goes for the extreme of Inclusion, in contrast to Hail Brittania which seems to take the OTL process and extend it. In general, the manner this timeline has developed has been about ease of conversion. If a community is new, or has constant communications with the greater nation, there is a good chance they will get settled by people seeing themselves as "dominioners" and absord the posket into Franco or Anglo. However, if a region is isolated, or a language and culture is intractably ingrained in a region, then it is easier to let it exist contained to the pocket it exists. The French are expelled south and thrive there, but the 5 Tribes are well established and exist. The Rockies cut off the West coast for a long period allowing a different sort of community to grow. But the plains? They get integrated.

For Russians, they are remote and cut off from the core. The thing is, the region was poor and Russia had other territories on her mainland that needed settlement. Alaska took a back seat. There isn't really a reason for settlers to call for more Russians to come, barring a crisis in the motherland. So, I am fine with Russians being a small minority - and even a large one if there is a MASSIVE push factor like civil chaos.

This also applies to other regions of the country. Gaels in the NE are easily in contact with the Anglos, they probably end up "Dominion-Gaelic" or whatever the country is called. But Newfoundland might be remote enough for a culture to grow there. The Upper(Wisonsin) peninsula could be another such case with Finns. Some of Pike is across the continental divide - I expect more Latinos there than whites because of ease of travel. The Spanish in Florida are another case, though different. I imagine the region was originally a Spanish territory - easier to let them stay in Florida then force conversion. But Whites settle the North bringing tensions. Then with AC, Anglos and Francos move in to retire or suburbanize. So the state is 'cuturally' Spanish with that as the language of most 2nd/3rd generation residents, per this settlement policy, but recent migration has made most suburbs and new cities (Orlando) White and English/French speaking. I imagine this would bring massive tensions.

So if you can justify why a community might be cut off and have reason to develop in its own and pull in new followers or former residents from the motherland, we can probably fit it in somewhere.
 
Gian

Gian

Banned
Oryxslayer said:
Yeah, I'm not totally against a small Russian thing, but with a few conditions. I imagine that "Anglo" and "french" are two large melting pots, absorbing most whites that come in on their own. Small white ethnic communities surrounded by the whole will eventually be snuffed out through the years - Primary education for children, jobs requiring a national tongue, leaving the migrant pocket for a new region or the suburbs, it goes on. Generally the process of how we now refer to most Whites in America as "Americans" even though they come from a whole multitude of places. This even happens for racial minorities...but they will always have trouble escaping prejudice.

The multitude of timelines on here have explored this topic extensively: Boreoamerica goes for the extreme of Inclusion, in contrast to Hail Brittania which seems to take the OTL process and extend it. In general, the manner this timeline has developed has been about ease of conversion. If a community is new, or has constant communications with the greater nation, there is a good chance they will get settled by people seeing themselves as "dominioners" and absord the posket into Franco or Anglo. However, if a region is isolated, or a language and culture is intractably ingrained in a region, then it is easier to let it exist contained to the pocket it exists. The French are expelled south and thrive there, but the 5 Tribes are well established and exist. The Rockies cut off the West coast for a long period allowing a different sort of community to grow. But the plains? They get integrated.

For Russians, they are remote and cut off from the core. The thing is, the region was poor and Russia had other territories on her mainland that needed settlement. Alaska took a back seat. There isn't really a reason for settlers to call for more Russians to come, barring a crisis in the motherland. So, I am fine with Russians being a small minority - and even a large one if there is a MASSIVE push factor like civil chaos.

This also applies to other regions of the country. Gaels in the NE are easily in contact with the Anglos, they probably end up "Dominion-Gaelic" or whatever the country is called. But Newfoundland might be remote enough for a culture to grow there. The Upper(Wisonsin) peninsula could be another such case with Finns. Some of Pike is across the continental divide - I expect more Latinos there than whites because of ease of travel. The Spanish in Florida are another case, though different. I imagine the region was originally a Spanish territory - easier to let them stay in Florida then force conversion. But Whites settle the North bringing tensions. Then with AC, Anglos and Francos move in to retire or suburbanize. So the state is 'cuturally' Spanish with that as the language of most 2nd/3rd generation residents, per this settlement policy, but recent migration has made most suburbs and new cities (Orlando) White and English/French speaking. I imagine this would bring massive tensions.

So if you can justify why a community might be cut off and have reason to develop in its own and pull in new followers or former residents from the motherland, we can probably fit it in somewhere.
Click to expand...

I think Newfoundland (and possibly parts of NS, CB, and SJ), yep fair enough to allow to have Irish and Scots mix together to form a unique "American Gaelic." As for Alaska, you could prolong the Russian Civil War by several years, which leads many Whites to come to Alaska
 

Oryxslayer

Gian said:
Right now, we're calling it whatever we wanted. But one of my proposals (which was thankfully adopted) was that it should be an independent kingdom/empire under a junior branch of the House of Hanover (ie one of George III's sons)
Click to expand...

Yeah, we have the monarch and his house name, just not the countries name. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that following colonial unrest, the guy gets instituted as a way for the colonies to have self government and local taxes but still be part of the empire. So the name probably has to come from that "era" so to speak. It was simply "The Colonies" or "North American Territories." Maybe something to do with the Atlantic? Or maybe pull on the Philadelphia capitol and tie back to Greece? Or maybe named after a PM or historic Monarch (most already have states)? Columbia just seems to easy to let slide.
 

Nazi Space Spy

Banned
I think we're best off just keeping the name America. There wasn't any movement to change the name of the country in OTL and I see no reason why in a world following a blunted revolution that would change.
 

Nazi Space Spy

Banned
I came up with this as a possible bloodline for the alt-Royal Family, starting with OTL's King William IV taking the American throne. In his place, Princess Charlotte survives and reigns into the 1880s, with her descendants on the throne today.

Monarchs of the Commonwealth of America.
170px-King_William_IV_by_Sir_David_Wilkie.jpg

1785-1837: William I (1765-1837)

220px-1st_Earl_of_Munster.jpg

1837-1842: William II (1794-1842)
170px-Queen_Victoria_by_Julia_Abercromby.jpg

1842-1889: Mary I (1800-1889)
220px-Prince_Albert_Victor%2C_Duke_of_Clarence_%281864-1892%29.jpg

1889-1919: William III (1862-1919)
Prins_arthur_af_connaught_large.jpg

1919-1946: George I (1870-1946)
220px-Juliana_1963.jpg

1946-1992: Mary II (1892-1992)
220px-HRH_Prince_Michael_of_Kent_62_Allan_Warren.jpg

1992-Present: George II (1926-Present)
​
Notes:

William I: Born the son of King George III, he installed as the Commonwealth's first monarch in 1785. A constitutionalist with reformist tendencies, the first American King is revered and respected in historical memory.

William II: The son of King William I, who is best remembered for carrying on the Hanoveran tradition of feuding fathers and sons. The King, upon ascending to the throne, began to assert himself politically and openly favorited Henry Clay during this time. Dies childless after a brief five year reign, and was widely unpopular.

Mary I: The younger sister of William II, Mary reigned for nearly fifty years and was widely popular for reinventing the monarchy and solidifying the concept of the constitutional monarchy. Tragically, her beloved husband died before the birth of their only child, Prince George, who would likewise predecease his mother in 1888. Dying of heartbreak after the loss of her only son and husband a year later, she was succeeded by her grandson Prince William.

William III: The playboy King, whose reign oversaw great industrial and military advancements for the Commonwealth. His last years were plagued by the First Great War, and in 1919 he fell to the Spanish Flu like millions of his subjects. Though popular for most of his reign, his lavish lifestyle had begun to grate on the public during his final years.

George I: The younger brother of William III, King George I was a more introverted and prudent monarch. He presided over the Great Depression and led the nation first through the Pacific War and then through the carnage of Second Great War. Dying just weeks after "V-Day" (Victory Day) from lung cancer, he was succeeded by his daughter Mary.

Mary II: The longest lived monarch to date, Mary reigned for 46 years, nearly beating the record of her great-grandmother. The Queen's reign saw the Second Pacific War and the ensuing introduction of the atomic age and the Cold War. Dying in 1992, she was succeeded by her eldest son Prince George.
 
Last edited:

Oryxslayer

Some of these memorable dates - V-Day, Cold War, etc, may not end up existing as the globe comes together but I definitely like the lineup. Larger post coming tomorrow.
 

Nazi Space Spy

Banned
Oryxslayer said:
Some of these memorable dates - V-Day, Cold War, etc, may not end up existing as the globe comes together but I definitely like the lineup. Larger post coming tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Well, I mean ATL's equivalent. I'm envisioning some type of major conflict in the 1930/1940s.
 

Oryxslayer

Gian said:
I can probably do Tennessee's ridings if that's OK.
Click to expand...
b

I already created some TN, but a second map is never bad. Just make it compact, not another gerrymander... BTW, post coming in an hour

Edit: Dinner is going long, probably not in a hour.
 
Last edited:

Oryxslayer

Okay so first - new state districts

9qLNCn2.png

p0NPSPB.png

F5fAsVZ.png

RYhCxgE.png

uOYvueQ.png

dAuqiw9.png

Lilkykl.png


I don't like the shape of the Yellow district, but the Narrowness of the state forces it.

NjSvA6N.png

xMRoVo7.png

TeKz3az.png

n8YRRwY.png

We really need a new name for this state, since the south is rightly getting the Indiana name.

The main reason I was hyping up my post however was this - the beginnings of a ethnic/racial map. The Grey/Brown at the top of the list represents "diversity" where there is no one dominant race - mainly for cities.

ruAXnJm.png
TdFz3PE.png


As you can see, I have come around slowly to the ideas of both a small Russian community and a Gaelic one - but they are both not as they seem. For Russians in Alaska, we presently have no idea whether there will be a civil war, if so between what factions, and when. Or if Russia will fall into chaos or remain a beacon of stability. However, there is one group that will always be persecuted in Russia - the Jews. While the victims of the Pogroms would more likely head for the big East Coast cities and eventual assimilation, some sail for the small towns along the south coast of Alaska - far from the Anglo/Asian Anchorage. There they build a small community among the former Slavs previously there. This allows us to combine the Jewish Alaskan minority and the Russian Alaskan minority ideas while no capitulated to either or having to finalize anything about the world. It also prevents any sort of "Russian identity Party" from forming since the people living there would think of themselves more as Jews rather then Russians. I imagine them still being the smallest of the major groups in the region, but still large, something like: 31% East Asian, 28% Anglo/Franco Whites, 20-15% Native ,10-15% Slavic, 5-10% Others.

The Gaelic one is also weird. In my newly updated sheet I call them Gaelic-Americans because they no longer really speak the old language. The culture originally arrived through the early Scottish settlers seeking a colony, but this was taken over by the French and eventually the British. Under British rule political refugee Scots settled alongside their comrades. However, they were not alone. The migration of the French southwards opened up new properties that were quickly exploited by the Anglos. The arrival of dominion rule brought with it more direct political control. The old Anglo stereotypes were in full swing, and while the French were tolerated within their own territories the Gaels got the same policies as their Highland and Irish brothers back home. By the 1840s, the language was on its way out, and English was the language of governemnt. The two things that I think change the language and make it uniquely American and unique to this timeline are the arrival of the Irish and the Germans. The Irish who moved in along their cousins in the Northeast brought new speakers to feed the culture. This created a tongue that was a mixture of Scottish Gaelic and Irish Gaelic. But the Germans brought with them them the tools for the culture. Kindergarten and Local Traditional Schools spurred a revitalization. The trained German lawyers argued that government should protect the minority languages of the Northeast. But with this came the mixing of the traditions. German sayings, stories, and certain words found their way into the local Gaelic culture. Some Old Gaelic words fell out of fashion. This hard fight eventually forced concessions, and the Northeast islands became tolerated areas following this revitalization.

In this way, both cultures are similar yet different to previous incarnations. The Russians are there, but could better be called Slavic Jews with no loyalty to Moscow. The Gaels are protected in the Northeast islands, but their culture and tongue is more a bastard child of Highlander Gaelic, Irish Gaelic, English, and particularly German.

Oh and we should really focus on getting some of these plains states borders down so I can explore their cultures and districts. It seems we are confident about the West Coast and the territories to the East of Kansas City, but not in between.
 

Nazi Space Spy

Banned
I definitely prefer the second set of borders for Wabash (I like that name too - I propose we stick with it) and also am open to Russian Jews settling Alaska as a pretty good compromise solution.

The plains are a bit tricky for me, and I’m less confident in my proposals for the region. I’d love to see what you guys have on that!
 
Gian

Gian

Banned
I definitely like the Russian Jews settling Alaska and American Gaelic parts, but I think that the different settlement patterns at least (southern IL being settled by Virginians compared to the rest of the state) could necessitate splitting OTL IL and IN sideways (which was what I proposed for both Illinois and Charlottiana in the original thread)
 
Gian

Gian

Banned
So managed to do Tennessee's ridings:
UzmINZo.png


I have also included @Oryxslayer's ridings of Arkansas and Kentucky, but since I disagree about the proposed borders between IL and IN (I still think it makes much more sense to divide the two horizontally), I decided to put both proposals out there (in darker borders)

Pa5SlRU.png
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top