What would be the internal borders of a Communist America?

[Shortline614]

Hello everyone,

This is a question that has been in my head for a while now. Let's say that in the 1930s, a communist revolution occurs in America. No other country grabs land from the new communist America. All the territory that the pre-communist America had, the communist America would have. After the revolution is over, what would the new internal borders of America be? For simplicity, I'll be using the term "republic" or refer to these subdivisions. The new communist government would get rid of the old state borders and replace them with new ones. Here are some ideas I had:

• The African-Americans in the south would get their own autonomous republic. It would almost certainly be based on ethnic lines.
• The Philippines would either be turned into either a puppet state or one of several republics. It really depends on whether the new communist government is more internationalist or not. If they're incorporated as republics, they can be autonomous or not.
• Alaska, Puerto Rico, and other territories would be given republic status. They will probably be autonomous.
• Large republics in the Great Lakes Region and Appalachia.

Thanks!

 

[Thisisnotausername]

First off, the reason the USSR was divided into republics was because it was, on paper, a union of independent states--each republic was a country, a nation. The leadership of a communist US, having considerably fewer separatist ethnic minorities to try and appease through offers of nominal statehood, would have no reason to think of or structure their state in such a way. A red US would be more like a Soviet Union consisting only of the Russian SFSR--you'll have your ASSRs (Autonomous Regions?), but most of the thing will be oblasts, although obviously not by that name (provinces? districts?).

So how would the US be divided, RSFSR-style? The Philippines wouldn't be part of it, at least not permanently--given that even the old imperialist bourgeois government had been promising eventual Philippine independence since the Jones Act in 1916, the communists certainly aren't going to try and make it a permanent part of America. It'll be spun off as a communist puppet state as soon as is deemed practical. ASSR equivalents will be created in places that differ from the US significantly ethnically or linguistically, largely the ones you suggest--Puerto Rico, Hawai'i, Alaska, the Navajo Nation, and the black belt, the last one most likely being divided between multiple *ASSRs due to its geographical dispersion. As for the rest, the obvious thing to do is to copy Soviet Russia's system of drawing up oblasts: disregard the old administrative borders and draw a bunch of new subdivisions anchored by major cities. So New York state, for instance, might be divided between the District of New York City, the District of Albany, the District of Syracuse, and the District of Buffalo; New Jersey would be split between the District of Philadelphia and the aforementioned District of NYC; and so on.

 

[Workable Goblin]

First off, the reason the USSR was divided into republics was because it was, on paper, a union of independent states--each republic was a country, a nation. The leadership of a communist US, having considerably fewer separatist ethnic minorities to try and appease through offers of nominal statehood, would have no reason to think of or structure their state in such a way.

That's true, but at the same time many of the states do have their own cultural identities--even leaving aside Hawai'i and Alaska, which were only territories at this point anyway, Texas at a minimum has a coherent self-identity (especially in the 1930s). Therefore, I'm not sure whether a communist revolution would really bother with restructuring states that much except to carve out ASSR-equivalents. Maybe some of the Western states would get blown up for American Indian ASSRs, but anything more seems like it would likely be more trouble than it's worth, once you've abandoned or muzzled federalism.

 

[Thisisnotausername]

That's true, but at the same time many of the states do have their own cultural identities--even leaving aside Hawai'i and Alaska, which were only territories at this point anyway, Texas at a minimum has a coherent self-identity (especially in the 1930s). Therefore, I'm not sure whether a communist revolution would really bother with restructuring states that much except to carve out ASSR-equivalents. Maybe some of the Western states would get blown up for American Indian ASSRs, but anything more seems like it would likely be more trouble than it's worth, once you've abandoned or muzzled federalism.

I mean, you have a point, but OP did specify that the old state borders were done away with, and keeping everything the same except that now a few Indian reservations and black majority areas of the south are (the equivalent of) states doesn't really feel in the spirit of that criterion. And although it's not hard to argue that Alaska would be something lesser than a "proper" ASSR due to its size, at least initially (perhaps instead the equivalent of an autonomous okrug?), I also don't really see why Hawaii's territorial status should stop it from becoming an ASSR, even if you insist on making them full state-equivalents--they had more than enough people for statehood by the thirties, and the main obstacles to Hawaiian statehood IOTL, racism and the opposition of wealthy plantation owners, are obviously not going to be issues when you're dealing with a communist government that's happy to admit majority black and Native American *states.

 

[Workable Goblin]

I mean, you have a point, but OP did specify that the old state borders were done away with, and keeping everything the same except that now a few Indian reservations and black majority areas of the south are (the equivalent of) states doesn't really feel in the spirit of that criterion.

I just feel that this criterion is mistaken or improbable. Lord knows enough of my threads have had people ignoring specifications I put in place to try to herd cats...

And although it's not hard to argue that Alaska would be something lesser than a "proper" ASSR due to its size, at least initially (perhaps instead the equivalent of an autonomous okrug?), I also don't really see why Hawaii's territorial status should stop it from becoming an ASSR, even if you insist on making them full state-equivalents--they had more than enough people for statehood by the thirties, and the main obstacles to Hawaiian statehood IOTL, racism and the opposition of wealthy plantation owners, are obviously not going to be issues when you're dealing with a communist government that's happy to admit majority black and Native American *states.

Oh, you misunderstood what I was saying with Alaska and Hawai'i; I was only dismissing them as examples of states with their own cultural identities that would resist being dissolved, since they weren't actually states in the 1930s. It wasn't meant to imply anything about what status they should or should not have after a hypothetical Communist revolution.

 

[Analytical Engine]

Might major cities/metro areas be hived off from the now-defunct-states as new subdivisions?

Say, New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc.

 

[Aisha Clan-Clan]

Probably OTL except for merging the dakotas and the virginias.

 

[Thisisnotausername]

Probably OTL except for merging the dakotas and the virginias.

Why would they do that?

 

[Imperial Advocate]

I can see an African-American majority state being set up in the South to “destroy” the heart of Southern conservatism if there is an uprising against communist rule. Probably the Micronesian territories and Hawaii will be set up as independent state under communist protectorates.

 

[Johnrankins]

I wouldn't rule out the US conquering Canada and Mexico and making SSRs out of their various provinces and states. Given the power differential between the US and Latin America and the fact that Communists are not shy about shooting people left and right if they revolt , I wouldn't rule out the US outright conquering the Western Hemisphere in the name of "World-wide Communist Revolution."

 

[Johnrankins]

I can see an African-American majority state being set up in the South to “destroy” the heart of Southern conservatism if there is an uprising against communist rule. Probably the Micronesian territories and Hawaii will be set up as independent state under communist protectorates.

Unless you use ASB mind control technology the US will be as racist after the revolution as before it. After all the same people are living there.

 

[Imperial Advocate]

Unless you use ASB mind control technology the US will be as racist after the revolution as before it. After all the same people are living there.

In my TL “Spector and Spirit” the future communist USA is pretty racist against Filipinos and African-Americans and I forced segregation still, claiming that white Americans are intelligent enough to build communism. Native Americans on the other hand are given de facto autonomy.

 

[Johnrankins]

In my TL “Spector and Spirit” the future communist USA is pretty racist against Filipinos and African-Americans and I forced segregation still, claiming that white Americans are intelligent enough to build communism. Native Americans on the other hand are given de facto autonomy.

That makes sense.

 

[Workable Goblin]

Unless you use ASB mind control technology the US will be as racist after the revolution as before it. After all the same people are living there.

Who said anything about not being racist? If anything, it's pure divide et impera that takes advantage of racism: Create a black-majority state who will cling to you for protection because otherwise they will be destroyed by racist Southerners. Especially given OTL attitudes towards Communism in both communities (black intellectuals were, shall we say, significantly more Communist than white Southerners) this makes tons of sense.

In any case, Communism ideologically rejects racism, so at the very least a Communist United States won't be overtly racist and will make some kind of show of how anti-racist it is. This may, as in the case of the Soviet Union, not have much to do with actual population attitudes, but that is precisely why doing things like creating "autonomous regions" for minorities that in practice have no real autonomy makes sense. It's quite possible, as well, that the revolutionaries who are actually running things are significantly more anti-racist than the general population; you can look at roughly the first decade to decade and a half of the Soviet Union to see how the revolutionaries of the time were rather more active in fostering "national cultures" and the like than the average "man on the street" would have been.

 

[CountDVB]

In my TL “Spector and Spirit” the future communist USA is pretty racist against Filipinos and African-Americans and I forced segregation still, claiming that white Americans are intelligent enough to build communism. Native Americans on the other hand are given de facto autonomy.

Ummm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_USA_and_African_Americans

 

[Johnrankins]

Ummm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_USA_and_African_Americans

You mean OTL where the Communist Party USA was so small it might as well have not existed? To take over it has to become a mass movement , to become a mass movement it has to have a very large percentage of the population a part of it which will take its racist ideas with it. At best it is like USSR which mainly gave lip service to anti-racism.