US Politics Without WWI

What would US politics have been like had Wilson kept the United States out of the War?

I've seen a lot of assumptions that the US would have a stronger Socialist movement, but I think the Palmer Raids would likely occur so long as there's a revolution in Russia to freak out folks in the US.

Without the civil liberties crackdowns by Wilson, the 1920 election won't be the same sort of landslide I think.
 
What would US politics have been like had Wilson kept the United States out of the War?

I've seen a lot of assumptions that the US would have a stronger Socialist movement, but I think the Palmer Raids would likely occur so long as there's a revolution in Russia to freak out folks in the US.

Without the civil liberties crackdowns by Wilson, the 1920 election won't be the same sort of landslide I think.
If there is no WW1 then the revolution probably wouldn't happen
 
You can't divorce on how WWI ends from what happens in the US as it was too big an event and would have a definite impact. Did the CP win? In that case German-Americans would be in much more influence, it would be in any case due to the fact there would be no reason to question their patriotism if the US stays out of it. Is there a negotiated settlement? In that case the US is likely more isolationist than ever smug in the fact that the war it stayed out of was a bloodbath that accomplished little. Do the Brits and French win the war at the end but at a cost of more blood and treasure? They are even deeper in debt, the Great Depression happens quicker and is even deeper. Do the Brits and French win relatively quickly due to screw ups by Germany that don't happen OTL ? The Revolution and the Great Depression likely don't happen at all.
 
Most likely POD to keep the US out of the war is TR in '12 then '16. He'd be aggressive enough Germany wouldn't try anything to drag the US in.
 
So give the US a larger land force, enough so that the Germans would not want them added to the Entete order of battle.
 
Depends on what policies the US adopts.

If food experts to the Entente continue unrestricted, then prices, as OTL, will go through the roof. That's probably enough to sink the Democrats in 1920, even w/o entering the war.
 
Depends on what policies the US adopts.

If food experts to the Entente continue unrestricted, then prices, as OTL, will go through the roof. That's probably enough to sink the Democrats in 1920, even w/o entering the war.
One should not forget that a Communist revolution in Germany was very much on the agenda at this time, and would very likely have led to much more violent Palmer Raids than OTL.

If the Western Allies had been supported by American food more than in OTL, the risk of a successful Communist revolution in Germany, and potentially a Communist bloc already established as far as the Rhineland by 1920, can only increase.

If the threat of Communism spreading was greater, it might have led to a more internationalist United States after the war, as it did after World War II. With a Communist Germany as well as Russia – and the Baltic States presumably not independent – there would be more opportunity to support “guerilla” Communist activity inside the United States, most likely aimed at the Jim Crow caste system in the South. That threat, especially as it would likely have been backed up by extensive Communist propaganda, could well have given the state of “racial science” in the 1910s and early 1920s led to a de facto authoritarian system emerging throughout the United States.
 

kernals12

Banned
Without WW1, no isolationist backlash to the internationalism of Wilson and Roosevelt and instead America's influence on world events continues to grow continually.
 
As already said it depends on how the war goes. If war is avoided the US is seen as an emerging powerhouse but not a great power. Allied win sees London running about a third of the world directly and another third indirectly. A CP win sees an eventual five power world of two tiers: US, (AH), UK, Ger, (and Japan) vs France, Brazil, Italy, Russia, and either Argentina or South Africa. Look for a tripolar world led by the big dogs.
 
A CP win sees an eventual five power world of two tiers: US, (AH), UK, Ger, (and Japan) vs France, Brazil, Italy, Russia, and either Argentina or South Africa.
How would it do this?

I have generally assumed a Central Powers win would fatally weaken the UK – perhaps at least partially transferring its global power to resource-super-rich Australia – and weakining France if it lost its colonies in Africa, Indochina and the Middle East. I have just now thought that in fact Germany – had it won the war and the US kept out – would have ran at least the Indochinese colonies in a more centralised manner than did France, and would have not made the slightest long-term plans for any independence of these colonies. Nor, of course, would the other Central Powers have done so in the Middle East, which might have been beneficial in terms of lessened racial conflict and the absence of a radical fascist movement in those regions of Europe populated by large numbers of Jews.

On the other hand, if the Central Powers win racially based social movements might have been stronger than they were in Britain, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. Quite obviously, a de facto authoritarian United States as I noted in my previous post would have quite probably been in effect ruled by the second Ku Klux Klan. If there had been no Pierce v Society of Sisters, the religious freedom that made the US such a place of refuge could easily have declined and/or disappeared. Still, Dietrich Rüschemeyer in Capitalist Development and Democracy does show that even with these prevailing attitudes, Britain and especially Canada and New Zealand would not have been likely to develop right-wing totalitarian politics à la Nazi Germany.
 
Does this affect Mexico in any way?

Pershing and his Punitive Expedition entered Mexico in early 1916 whereas the Zimmerman Telegram was in 1917, so could the situation with Mexico heat up at all?
 
Top