Was the Loss of Britain a Major Blow for Britain?

[Faeelin]

ONe of the ideas you sometimes heard wistfully is that the addition of America to the British Empire (or rather not losing it in the Revolution) would have made Britain into a global hegemon even above and beyond OTL.

But did the loss of America really hurt Britain? Even after independence, Britain continued to trade and invest in America; the two pursued complementary foreign policy goals for much of the 19th and 20th century.

It seems as if even if the Revolution was aborted, nothing much would have changed in terms of British power.

 

[JJDXB]

ONe of the ideas you sometimes heard wistfully is that the addition of America to the British Empire (or rather not losing it in the Revolution) would have made Britain into a global hegemon even above and beyond OTL.

But did the loss of America really hurt Britain? Even after independence, Britain continued to trade and invest in America; the two pursued complementary foreign policy goals for much of the 19th and 20th century.

It seems as if even if the Revolution was aborted, nothing much would have changed in terms of British power.

Was the loss of Britain a loss for Britain?

I really can't see much change. Maybe Britain is nicer towards its local subjects and decides not to go brutal to keep order. Maybe that would have happened anyway, but I think the loss of America really pushed Britain to be more careful and be more harsh when the time came.

The AMR was more or less a very large protest against British almost hegemonic domination over America, maybe if the rebels are defeated, Britain realises its not worth inciting more anger and so gives in to the demands for reforms?

If it was aborted, it could only have been from caving in to pressure. Maybe Britain would have less desire to go elsewhere until the problems were sorted out. Voila the UK has a very resource rich country, and should be more prepared when the time comes to expand wherever.

 

[benjamin]

I've read some pretty credible papers asserting that the loss of America actually benefited the UK in both the short and long run. The cost of defending their North American colonies dropped tremendously (with the exception of fighting the ARW and Wo1812 of course). Canada's safety was enhanced since America could be appeased by small concessions in ways a rival European could not. The Northern Triangle Trade (Canada-America-Britain) was incredibly profitable to all the countries. American independence empowered the free trade politicians which was a great boon to Britain's economy. America was an outlet for radicals while forcing lesser reforms at home which acted as safety valves. America's economy diversified in a way that allowed her to become an industrial powerhouse. This may not have happened under British control. But as an industrial powerhouse America would become an untouchable supplier of food, arms and all sorts of goods during European wars. This alone may have saved Britain on a least two occasions.

So overall I think the UK actually gained more power by being rid of the American colonies. An America attached and subservient to Britain was a source of raw materials but a major financial cost and possible rebellion, while an independent America, despite the rivalry, was a trade partner, buffer against other European powers and potential ally.

Benjamin

 

[corourke]

Britain TTTL would also have a much harder time taking the stance it did against the slave trade that it did in OTL. That stance provided a pretext for countless interventions in the Atlantic (and I think other areas as well). Those interventions were usually settled in a way that benefitted Britain. With the USA independent, Britain could still benefit from slavery there without being obviously complicit in it.