TL-191: Filling the Gaps

Not particularly, no. While I consider it to be one of the most impressive works post-SGW for TL-191, I personally tend to see the US as a Prussian-style USSR which inevitably collapses, like OTL!USSR, in the early- to mid-1990s under the weight of its own strength.
Do you mean the former Canadian and Confederate parts-which I could see or the whole thing ? I think the post War of Secession /Pre Great War US is pretty united.
 
Do you mean the former Canadian and Confederate parts-which I could see or the whole thing ? I think the post War of Secession /Pre Great War US is pretty united.
Generally, yes, just the former Canadian, Caribbean, and Confederate parts of the US (the Canadian in me likes to imagine that Canada and Quebec join into something like the Laurentian Confederation or Quebec joins a reforged independent Canada). Maybe Utah breaking of as well. If Alaska isn't taken over by the Americans, then it stays Russian. If it is taken over by the Americans, then I can see that breaking off as well.
 
Late American Imperial Politics (1972-1991)

Part 4 - The 1984 U.S. Presidential Election

Dedicated in loving memory to Flora Hamburger Blackford (April 30 1888 - May 3 1981); Senator, Trailblazer, loving mother, an inspiration to us all.

In four years Joshua Blackford had gone from a man at the height of his life to one worn by years of trouble and conflict. From the death of the ever present Flora Blackford a scarce three months after the inauguration, to the continued threat of the FP-ANVA, to the economic malaise that that group had brought from the south to the American core, Blackford had little reason not to regret not letting someone else inherit this mess. Venezuela was a quagmire as always, and Germany was seemingly rebounding. Blackford had no presumptions of a fourth term in office. He'd carry the ship of state for no longer than he had promised. The campaign for the Socialist nomination thus began in earnest.

The immediate frontrunner for the nomination was all too familiar with running. Senator Gus Halberg had been the leader of the far-left hardline Marxist "Browderist" wing of the party since Browder himself had left the Senate in 1962. Halberg's policies of continuing state involvement in economic matters was popular among the Socialist base, but his lack of substance on the more pressing matter of the south did not endear him to many voters. Nonetheless, lacklustre opposition meant that Halberg swept the primaries against an untrusted former Vice President George McGovern, who having burned his bridges four years before by leaving the party made a critical error in assuming he would be welcomed back. Halberg's choice of controversial California Governor Carl Martin as his running mare reinforced his ticket's radicalism, and the most far-left major party ticket at that point in US history entered the fall campaign with a seemingly unbreakable polling advantage of ten points.

In the wake of his defeat McGovern once again turned to the Republicans, but yet again he was sidelined for his repeated party-switching. The Republicans, wishing to contrast themselves, selected a young, rather unknown former ambassador to Germany and Senator from Minnesota, Walter Mondale, as their standard bearer. Mondale came up somewhat short in charisma, but his youth played well against the 74 year-old Halberg and the 73 year-old Reagan, putting an end to a seemingly endless streak of SGW veterans as Presidential nominees. The choice of McGovern as running mate gave the ticket a balance of youthfulness and experience, and Mondale's work under a Socialist administration and McGovern's party history made it a palatable choice for dissolutioned Socialist voters.

The Democratic primaries were, in stark contrast, a story of the right regaining power. Former Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld had largely taken control over the party machinery, but it was clear he was not a suitable candidate for President. Luckily, a saving grace came in from Hollywood. Actor Ronald Reagan had been speculating what many would call a vanity bid for the Presidency for years, but when he ran in '84, he had the backing of Rumsfeld, the most powerful man in the party. Accusations of a vanity bid were quickly silenced when Reagan started winning primaries, and when he accepted the Democratic nomination, he made sure to reward his new benefactors. Donald Rumsfeld was named as running mate, and the new ticket polled at a record low 25%.

The general campaign was remarkably quiet. Halberg maintained a seemingly steady lead throughout its entirety, but the campaign was clearly more influenced by outside events more than anything else. President Blackford's announcement in early August that General Boris Lavochkin would take command of military units in the south, for the purposes of combating the FP-ANVA, made even Kentucky and Tennessee solidly Republican, and the FP-ANVA's response of a series of car-bombings in Philadelphia hardly helped Halberg. Mondale's better-than-expected debate performance gave him more ground, yet Halberg still had a seemingly insurmountable lead. In spite of this, there seemed to be a sense of weariness in the air. A sense that some sort of new perspective was needed.

And so, on November 6, 1984, President Joshua Blackford went to sleep early. It had been a hard day, and it was clear who would win anyways. He'd call Gus to congradulate him in the morning.

President Blackford woke the next day to a country that would never be the same.

1984nomap.png
1984.PNG
 
Just popping in to wish the Alternate History.com boards (and most especially the FILLING THE GAPS club) a Very Merry Christmas - Best Wishes to you all and thank you for keeping up the Good Work!
 
Here's a contribution to Filling the Gaps proper for a change

Earl Browder (1891-)

Born in Wichita, Kansas, Earl Browder was a steadfast member of the Socialist Party from a young age. His father William, a teacher and farmer, was sympathetic to the party, and Browder became a party member at age 16. His application for conscientious objector status having been rejected, he spent two years in the army before working as an office worker. He was kept as a reservist and brought back into service during the Great War in 1915 in spite of his vocal anti-war activism, serving unenthusiastically though diligently in the western theatre.

After the war Browder returned to Wichita, working as a trade union activist and running for State Senate in 1918, which he lost narrowly. His pre-war pacifist stance being vindicated by the immediate post-war atmosphere, Browder started rising as a force on the far-left of Kansas politics, criticising the Sinclair administration for not going far enough in pursuing Socialist policies. In 1924, Browder ran for the now open house seat representing Wichita, and won in an upset, defeating a moderate primary opponent and a Democrat and a Republican in the General Election.

Carried by Sinclair's landslide victory that year, Browder was the only Socialist representing Kansas in Congress, and struck a balance between representing his constituents and acting as the most radical voice in Congress. Winning re-election in 1926 and 1928, Browder publicly predicted that the post-war boom wouldn't last into the new decade, and was rather unfortunately vindicated. Though changing demographics in the largest city in Kansas allowed Browder to hold onto his seat for the duration of Blackford's Presidency, there was little appetite for Browder's radical platform on a broader stage while the Socialists were being blamed for the crash.

Holding his seat by only 357 votes in 1932, Browder became well known as a vocal critic of the Hoover administration in Congress, strongly opposing all of Hoover's austerity measures on the Ways and Means Committee. Browder won by a far more comfortable margin in 1934, and achieved a breakthrough in 1936, when he successfully convinced the Socialist Party of Kansas to vote against a "Populist" merger with the Republicans in order to defeat the Democrats. In doing so, Browder became the most prominent Socialist in the state. Easily re-elected in 1936, Browder began to shift his tone on Foreign Policy upon the Hoover Administration's decision to allow the Confederate States to re-arm. Perhaps to appeal to ultra-Hawkish Kansas, Browder began to oppose President Smith's policy towards the CSA.

In 1938, Browder chose against running for re-election. Instead, he took a gamble by running for Senate in a state that had never before elected a Socialist statewide official. Incumbent Andrew Frank Schoeppel, a conservative Democrat, faced an extremely divided field. Primary challenger Henry J. Allen ran as an independent, and the Republicans were split as well, between official nominee Benjamin S. Paulsen and "Populist" Arthur Capper. In a shocking upset, with such a divided field, Browder managed to win the seat with only 25% of the vote, becoming the first Socialist elected statewide from Kansas in history. Important to Browder's election was the "Red" Russian emigre community in Kansas, including the Peasants' and Workers' Red Army veterans that would later form the "Lenin Brigade" that fought in Sequoyah during the Second Great War. Browder's support was crucial to that unit's formation, and the Russian vote was crucial to Browder's election. Subtract it and Allen would have won the seat.

Now-Senator Browder's most important act during his early tenure was opposing the Richmond Agreement. One of three Socialist Senators to vote against its ratification, Browder claimed his opposition was to "the fundamentally dangerous Featherston Regime". The vote consolidated his support in Kansas, and Browder became a nationwide rallying figure for Far-Left Socialists and Hawks, disillusioned after the failure of John Reed's 1936 campaign for the Presidency. Vindicated by Featherston's betrayal of the agreement, Browder was a keynote speaker at the 1941 Remembrance day in Philadelphia, attracting a strong reception from an otherwise decidedly right-wing crowd for his anti-Confederate rhetoric.

Browder's growing base of support followed him impassionately, and in May 1941, while the world was on the brink of war, Browder's followers in the House formed the "Communist Caucus", ten strong. During the war, Browder's main activity concerned the "Lenin Brigade". Browder was the main backer of the project, and when it was formed he visited it for inspections several times. Browder rejected President LaFollette's offer to be Secretary of Labor, instead returning to Kansas to help organise the wartime government and consolidate local support.

Vocally supporting President LaFollette's proclaimed desire to re-integrate the CSA, Browder stood for re-election in 1944, successfully pushing against Dewey's landslide to win re-election with 35% of the vote in a three-way race. Subsequently there has been much speculation about Browder's political future, including much talk of a potential run for President in 1948.
 
New here. First time posting on this thread.
As a Mexican-American myself I had a few questions regarding México and its neighbors ITTL: What were relations like between Mexicans living in the USA, CSA, and the Empire? What were relations like between them within each country? How would Mexicans in each country react to see each other fighting against their own in another?

I've seen this post speculating that Mexican-Americans would be interred like the Japanese ITTL, but I doubt that be that case since I believe that all Mexicans living in the USA would be universally opposed to the Empire. It's mentioned in the books that Baja California was a transit point for refugees fleeing the Mexican Civil War into the USA. I also don't think they'd hold much love for the CSA either. It's also known that Featherston pressured Emperor Francisco José II to conscript Imperial Mexican soldiers to be used in Pittsburgh and in security warfare. So I wonder how other Mexicans would react to that. Another idea I have is that during the rise of Featherston, some Mexicans living in Sonora and Chihuahua would be targeted since they were RadLib strongholds and among one of their largest voting blocks, despite not an official program of discrimination against them. Mexican partisans and Republican exiles in those parts could well be a thorn in the side for Featherston and eventually fight alongside the USA when they invade (See this post for reference) So what do you think? I'm curious to know what you think relations would be.
 
Last edited:
I know it's mentioned the blacks were not allowed to serve combat roles in the US Armed Forces, but were other non-white minorities allow to serve? LaFollette declared that they could serve right near the end of GW2 in 1944, but what was it like for other minorities during that time? Also what was the most they could do in non-combat roles? In addition to being cooks, couriers, and transport drivers.
 
Last edited:
Say, in addition to the main Richmond Trial, what other tribunals would there be post-war? I know there's the Houston tribunal where Pinkard was tried and eventually executed. I'm thinking there be separate trials for military commander, local and state level Freedom Party leaders. Something like the Subsequent Nuremburg Trials (eg. High Command, Einsatzgruppen, Ministires, and individual trials) and specialized denazification courts.
 
Last edited:
New here. First time posting on this thread.
As a Mexican-American myself I had a few questions regarding México and its neighbors ITTL: What were relations like between Mexicans living in the USA, CSA, and the Empire? What were relations like between them within each country? How would Mexicans in each country react to see each other fighting against their own in another?
I think it's best to ask that type of question in the TL-191: After the End thread.
 
New here. First time posting on this thread.
As a Mexican-American myself I had a few questions regarding México and its neighbors ITTL: What were relations like between Mexicans living in the USA, CSA, and the Empire? What were relations like between them within each country? How would Mexicans in each country react to see each other fighting against their own in another?

I've seen this post speculating that Mexican-Americans would be interred like the Japanese ITTL, but I doubt that be that case since I believe that all Mexicans living in the USA would be universally opposed to the Empire. It's mentioned in the books that Baja California was a transit point for refugees fleeing the Mexican Civil War into the USA. I also don't think they'd hold much love for the CSA either. It's also known that Featherston pressured Emperor Francisco José II to conscript Imperial Mexican soldiers to be used in Pittsburgh and in security warfare. So I wonder how other Mexicans would react to that. Another idea I have is that during the rise of Featherston, some Mexicans living in Sonora and Chihuahua would be targeted since they were RadLib strongholds and among one of their largest voting blocks, despite not an official program of discrimination against them. Mexican partisans and Republican exiles in those parts could well be a thorn in the side for Featherston and eventually fight alongside the USA when they invade (See this post for reference) So what do you think? I'm curious to know what you think relations would be.
Welcome to the forum.

I see that you found my head-canon posts.

To answer your first questions, there really isn’t a whole lot said about Mexicans in either of those countries from the books. What is known is that Mexicans make up most of the low-paid work force in the CSA, especially when they begin to replace the African-Confederate population during SGW. There is, I think, only one mention of a Mexican-American working somewhere in California with one of the main characters.

Diplomatically, the CSA and Imperial Mexico may support each other, but it is clear that it’s the Confederates who have the dominant role in their relationship. Nothing is mentioned between the USA and Imperial Mexico, although one can assume that they eventually recognized the Empire as well as the CSA.

Mexicans in each country would probably view themselves more as loyal citizens of their respective countries than just Imperial Mexicans.

The idea I had in using the Internment Camps of Mexicans in the USA is a highly plausible concept when I was doing research on it. All sides of the war did it in real life and there were forced deportations of Mexicans and mostly Mexican Americans during the 1930s.

I am actually sympathetic to the idea of Imperial Mexico, but Dr. Turtledove wrote it out to be not much different than its real life Porfirian counterpart.

I gave Featherston some complexity in his racial view for my head canon. Hated anyone Black, but was sympathetic to Hispanic Confederates, Native Sequoyahns and Jews.

Yeah, I can see Featherston going after those Radical Liberals who don’t conform to the Confederate Freedom Party.
 
Thanks for your response, actually. In my head cannon, and as a Mexican myself, I don't see the Empire surviving post the Second Great War. I'm definitely leaning with David's After the End on this since I think Mexicans in the Empire would ultimately have of enough of them and the conservative aristocracy a second time; and perhaps welcome the US-backed coup overthrowing the Empire. Also, the US would probably want to get rid of a constant thorn on the side for them. Though at the same time post-war, there'd be migration by the thousands due to a poor economy and would be recruited for foreign labor similar to the Braceros program IOTL. Everyone's entitled to their own ideas; I'll give you that.
Welcome to the forum.

I see that you found my head-canon posts.

To answer your first questions, there really isn’t a whole lot said about Mexicans in either of those countries from the books. What is known is that Mexicans make up most of the low-paid work force in the CSA, especially when they begin to replace the African-Confederate population during SGW. There is, I think, only one mention of a Mexican-American working somewhere in California with one of the main characters.

Diplomatically, the CSA and Imperial Mexico may support each other, but it is clear that it’s the Confederates who have the dominant role in their relationship. Nothing is mentioned between the USA and Imperial Mexico, although one can assume that they eventually recognized the Empire as well as the CSA.

Mexicans in each country would probably view themselves more as loyal citizens of their respective countries than just Imperial Mexicans.

The idea I had in using the Internment Camps of Mexicans in the USA is a highly plausible concept when I was doing research on it. All sides of the war did it in real life and there were forced deportations of Mexicans and mostly Mexican Americans during the 1930s.

I am actually sympathetic to the idea of Imperial Mexico, but Dr. Turtledove wrote it out to be not much different than its real life Porfirian counterpart.

I gave Featherston some complexity in his racial view for my head canon. Hated anyone Black, but was sympathetic to Hispanic Confederates, Native Sequoyahns and Jews.

Yeah, I can see Featherston going after those Radical Liberals who don’t conform to the Confederate Freedom Party.
 
Speaking of Confederate Jewry, even though Featherston was tolerant of them and there was no official discrimination against them, would there still be some form of discrimination and bigotry by such individuals and among common southern folk? Would individual FPG and CSA Army soldiers commit attacks against Jews at home and in the US? A couple of examples I can think of is 1) Associate Justice James McReynolds despised his colleagues Louis Brandeis and Benjamin Cardozo IOTL, both Jews; and 2) George Patton also has been revealed to have anti-Jewish sentiment after his death and had antidifference toward Holocaust survivors. Would there also be individual lynchings against Jews in the South like IOTL?
Welcome to the forum.

I see that you found my head-canon posts.

To answer your first questions, there really isn’t a whole lot said about Mexicans in either of those countries from the books. What is known is that Mexicans make up most of the low-paid work force in the CSA, especially when they begin to replace the African-Confederate population during SGW. There is, I think, only one mention of a Mexican-American working somewhere in California with one of the main characters.

Diplomatically, the CSA and Imperial Mexico may support each other, but it is clear that it’s the Confederates who have the dominant role in their relationship. Nothing is mentioned between the USA and Imperial Mexico, although one can assume that they eventually recognized the Empire as well as the CSA.

Mexicans in each country would probably view themselves more as loyal citizens of their respective countries than just Imperial Mexicans.

The idea I had in using the Internment Camps of Mexicans in the USA is a highly plausible concept when I was doing research on it. All sides of the war did it in real life and there were forced deportations of Mexicans and mostly Mexican Americans during the 1930s.

I am actually sympathetic to the idea of Imperial Mexico, but Dr. Turtledove wrote it out to be not much different than its real life Porfirian counterpart.

I gave Featherston some complexity in his racial view for my head canon. Hated anyone Black, but was sympathetic to Hispanic Confederates, Native Sequoyahns and Jews.

Yeah, I can see Featherston going after those Radical Liberals who don’t conform to the Confederate Freedom Party.
 
Speaking of Confederate Jewry, even though Featherston was tolerant of them and there was no official discrimination against them, would there still be some form of discrimination and bigotry by such individuals and among common southern folk? Would individual FPG and CSA Army soldiers commit attacks against Jews at home and in the US? A couple of examples I can think of is 1) Associate Justice James McReynolds despised his colleagues Louis Brandeis and Benjamin Cardozo IOTL, both Jews; and 2) George Patton also has been revealed to have anti-Jewish sentiment after his death and had antidifference toward Holocaust survivors. Would there also be individual lynchings against Jews in the South like IOTL?
As noted welcome to the community.

Answering each of your questions in turn;

There wasn't a lot of anti-jewish bigotry that was seen in the CSA; like Blacks in the USA in certain states they were seen as an oddity and just one of those other minorities. Featherston outright said he didn't see a point about getting hot and bothered about Jews because there weren't enough of them. He liked Confederate-Hispanics and Native-Confederates because they were deeply loyal to Richmond and thus after he came to power, the Freedom Party.

There were likely a series of Tribunals across the former Confederacy but none that were mentioned; former Freedom Party officials were barred initially from offices but otherwise weren't touched. I think the Houston Trials were the biggest because Texas was seen as "neutral ground". But I have no doubt the US went state by state and investigated State and Muncipal Freedom Party officials along with Confederate Officers and of course Freedom Party Guard Commanders.

The Empire of Mexico was likely tolerated but the US but its existence was seen as a slap in the face of the Monroe Doctrine which was why thr US backed the Republicans during the Civil War.

One thing that isn't really stated that I've been mildly curious about on another topic is when Jeff Pinkard stopped identifying himself as a Stalwart and when he was actually made into a Freedom Party Guard; it was mentioned he was still a Warden and regular jailer when he was in command kf Camp P and the beginning of his stay at Camp Dependable because he showed deterrence go thr FPG that unloaded Willy Knight; even I think the highest ranking one was a Major at best though they were noted to be "high ranking ones" but the next time his rank was mentioned was when he was being promoted from Standard to Brigade Leader
 
Thanks for your response, actually. In my head cannon, and as a Mexican myself, I don't see the Empire surviving post the Second Great War. I'm definitely leaning with David's After the End on this since I think Mexicans in the Empire would ultimately have of enough of them and the conservative aristocracy a second time; and perhaps welcome the US-backed coup overthrowing the Empire. Also, the US would probably want to get rid of a constant thorn on the side for them. Though at the same time post-war, there'd be migration by the thousands due to a poor economy and would be recruited for foreign labor similar to the Braceros program IOTL. Everyone's entitled to their own ideas; I'll give you that.
It's all good, man. :)

Most of us have our own interpretations and we all try to give good reasons for it. Sometimes, we share off ideas from one another.

If you are interested, I wrote several more posts related to Imperial Mexico in TL-191. Here are some examples:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...federacy-tl-191.185493/page-209#post-20340232
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...federacy-tl-191.185493/page-191#post-19158761
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...federacy-tl-191.185493/page-211#post-20445508
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...federacy-tl-191.185493/page-193#post-19513080
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...federacy-tl-191.185493/page-221#post-20989405
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up, but has anyone considered doing a TL-191 biography on Helen Keller? She was born in Alabama, after all, and was a leftist activist during what would be before and during ATL's Freedomite era.
 
I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up, but has anyone considered doing a TL-191 biography on Helen Keller? She was born in Alabama, after all, and was a leftist activist during what would be before and during ATL's Freedomite era.
On a related note I have wondered if the Freedomites had any genocidal or even just eugenic polices about the handicapped or disabled like the Nazis did ? We know they would for black people but what about whites and others?
 
Top