What governmental system would America have without the Founding Fathers?

RNG

Banned
If the first Revolutionary War failed and the Founding Fathers were executed and so another war happened later, what would the governmental system be like? How different or similar would it be? How would this affect the rest of the world's governmental systems? How would history change? What you think?
 
It would likely evolve to something similar to the Canadian system, where the powers of the Governor is gradually reduced (but the position not eradicated altogether, as he represents the King), while shifting to responsible government where the legislature (led by the prime minister/premier) handles most aspects of government.
 

Jasen777

Donor
After this 2nd War of Independence (probably not called that of course) is successful? By then the possibilities would be very wide indeed, depending on what happened before...
 
I doubt there'd be a single government for all the colonies together. Most likely the dominion model resurfaces and several colonies are merged giving 3-5 governments each with a Governor General.
The type of government occurring later depends on which of these achieves independence through revolution and how they cooperate. A league of unitary republics might be the most/only likely scenario.
 
Execution of all the separatist leaders seems pretty harsh for the British at this point. I think they'd avoid that specifically to not risk stirring the hornet's nest further.

They'd probably adopt a two pronged strategy towards the colonies - divide and conquer, and concessions. Perhaps commercially binding each to Britain individually, while erecting more trade barriers between Pennsylvania and New York, for example. Note that this is the exact opposite of what the young US eventually did IOTL: create a national market and erect tariffs to protect industry against foreign (read British) industry. They'd have to address the taxation and representation issue. There are a number of ways they could go about that.

A second war for independence wouldn't necessarily happen. American nationalism would be stillborn in favor of Virginia nationalism. Where the US was actually more technologically advanced than Britain in at least one industry by 1830, economic development would be stunted. Landowners would be more important across Britain's North American possessions, as in OTL's antebellum south. I could see the slavery issue becoming a problem earlier.
 
As for world governments, the British model and the French Revolution and Napoleonic Code had more of an influence. Those might still exist.
 
As for world governments, the British model and the French Revolution and Napoleonic Code had more of an influence. Those might still exist.

While the French Civil Code was quite influential, the governmental systems were not. The First Republic had two separate systems, both with an emphasis on legislative power, one monocameral, the other bicameral (with one assembly proposing the bills, the other one voting them). Napoléon's empire had an emphasis on executive, with three assemblies (one to discuss the bills without vote, one to vote without discussion and one to verify). Neither system was very reproduced elsewhere. Maybe the more influential system was the 1793 constitution, which was never activated.
 
I think OTL with the early peace proposals there was at least one list of figures specifically slated to be pardoned, so some people would be executed(probably the ringleaders) but many lower-level state officials etc would be fine. Plus some people will probably hightail it to Europe or Louisiana.
 
If we look to Europe, revolutionary waves tended to happen about 20 years after the previous events died down when the underlying causes weren't addressed. Long enough for a new generation to grow up mythologising the past events without an understanding of the human cost.

If we imagine a failed revolution, it would probably be over by around 1780. That puts the us at around 1800 for the next one. At that point, New England, New York and Philadelphia are a lot more developed and plugged into a more developed British Atlantic trade. The amount of immigration they were receiving also likely means most of the population has turned over. I suspect that would limit the next revolution to the South and the newly settled West (OTL Tennesee, Kentucy).

If successful, the next constitution could thus be much more dominated by plantation owner interests and views. I could imagine a more aristocratic system, with a House of Lords, and a president elected by Congress.
 
Execution of all the separatist leaders seems pretty harsh for the British at this point. I think they'd avoid that specifically to not risk stirring the hornet's nest further.

They'd probably adopt a two pronged strategy towards the colonies - divide and conquer, and concessions. Perhaps commercially binding each to Britain individually, while erecting more trade barriers between Pennsylvania and New York, for example. Note that this is the exact opposite of what the young US eventually did IOTL: create a national market and erect tariffs to protect industry against foreign (read British) industry. They'd have to address the taxation and representation issue. There are a number of ways they could go about that.

A second war for independence wouldn't necessarily happen. American nationalism would be stillborn in favor of Virginia nationalism. Where the US was actually more technologically advanced than Britain in at least one industry by 1830, economic development would be stunted. Landowners would be more important across Britain's North American possessions, as in OTL's antebellum south. I could see the slavery issue becoming a problem earlier.

Where was the US more advanced than Britain in 1830? That was the heyday of British leadership in economics that wasn't really challenged technologically until the 1870s.
 
The United States of America would not exist, full stop. The elites behind the (first) American War of Independence would not be given the chance to start a second one any time soon if the British are even halfway competent at colonialism, which they definitely are. They also probably wouldn't even be able to get all the colonial governments to work together again anyways if they did somehow manage to escape any consequences from the first war and initiate a second. Honestly, if the actual OTL American War of Independence was part of a timeline, a lot of people would call it ASB or at least authorial fiat. Add in the conquest of the majority of North America's best lands by the USA, without much contest except from Mexico and with France practically handing its colonies over on a silver platter, and it'd definitely be considered ASB. The chances of a second war happening are slim, and the chances of it succeeding even more so. The idea of the United States all seceding together as one country, and then staying that way, would appear as unworkable in TTL as the idea of every Hispano-American country merging into one.

There'd still be post-colonial Anglo states in British North America, which would probably include all or at least most territory east of the Mississippi eventually, but it's very unlikely these would merge into two huge countries with the territory of OTL Canada and the USA. You're much more likely to see multiple smaller states, most or all of them part of the Commonwealth of Nations or some equivalent. I expect New England and the Maritimes would be one country, for example, despite the former being American and the latter Canadian in OTL. The lack of a threat from the USA being independent means the region's cultural ties won't be severed, but will instead grow even stronger. Similarly, the people living in areas around the Great Lakes will likely regard each other as kin more than they will the coastal regions. The South might remain as a recognizable politico-cultural block, though perhaps split between the Upper South and Lower South or between Appalachia and the lowland areas, and might revolt over the British Empire banning slavery. The Middle Colonies are probably considered one coherent cultural area as well.

I doubt any Louisiana Purchase happens, or that the British would care as much about territory west of the Mississippi, but I also doubt the French would colonize much beyond the mouth of the Mississippi due to their scarcity of colonists. I would, therefore, expect a significantly larger number of Métis living west of the Mississippi than OTL due to prolonged native contact with the French. As such, various Métis/Native countries are likely to exist, though probably under the thumb of one great power or another. California, New Mexico, and Texas might remain Mexican, as well. Butterflies may change things entirely to such an extent that nothing recognizable occurs, but just saying "butterflies change everything" is boring.

I expect presidential systems would have nowhere near their OTL popularity, with parliamentary systems being far more dominant. Additionally, constitutional monarchy might be more common in North America, though probably mostly under the British Monarch like OTL Canada and Australia. Possibly some sort of Organization of Anglo-American States forms in the future, or maybe an EU equivalent, but that's too far away from the PoD to talk about with any detail.
 
Where was the US more advanced than Britain in 1830? That was the heyday of British leadership in economics that wasn't really challenged technologically until the 1870s.

I consulted my sources again. It was actually in the textile industry, surprisingly. The power looms designed by Francis Lowell and Paul Moody were the most advanced of their day. The American textile industry invested in the latest generation of looms at a much faster rate than the British, because American tariffs after 1816 made industry competitive and the real wage in the US was much higher than that in Britain. I misstated facts in my first post - this started in the 1820s.
 
...
If successful, the next constitution could thus be much more dominated by plantation owner interests and views. I could imagine a more aristocratic system, with a House of Lords, and a president elected by Congress.

The plantaion interests are going to be crossways with the anti slavery moment spreading out of Britain. Theres several ways that can develop, but tensions are likely in many scenarios. It could even be the basis for a seperatist movement.
 
The plantaion interests are going to be crossways with the anti slavery moment spreading out of Britain. Theres several ways that can develop, but tensions are likely in many scenarios. It could even be the basis for a seperatist movement.

I think it will be a bit too early for this to be a major factor. But if we look to Europe, revolutionary waves tend to be a big one followed by a small one followed by a big one, so this could be an issue if the one around 1800 is too timid. By 1820 or so it the north is likely to be very hostile to any revolution based in the south.
 
I think it will be a bit too early for this to be a major factor. But if we look to Europe, revolutionary waves tend to be a big one followed by a small one followed by a big one, so this could be an issue if the one around 1800 is too timid. By 1820 or so it the north is likely to be very hostile to any revolution based in the south.

Examples? The only set of years that somewhat match this pattern that I can think of is 1789, 1830, 1848, 1871 for France. I don't think Poland's uprisings fit this pattern.
 
I think it will be a bit too early for this to be a major factor. But if we look to Europe, revolutionary waves tend to be a big one followed by a small one followed by a big one, so this could be an issue if the one around 1800 is too timid. By 1820 or so it the north is likely to be very hostile to any revolution based in the south.

I was thnking a bit later, & a slavery motivated separatist group based solely in the south, probably west of Appalachia. If the region in what we identify as Alabama & Mississippi is dominated by profitable slave holders then that may be the ground zero for a revolt.
 
Examples? The only set of years that somewhat match this pattern that I can think of is 1789, 1830, 1848, 1871 for France. I don't think Poland's uprisings fit this pattern.

Italy in the 1860s. I was talking about across Europe as a whole, given they tended to be continent wide waves. Given North America would be separate colonies, I felt that was most appropriate.
 
Top