Worst 19th Century Alternate History Cliches

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900' started by Kaiser Chris, Jun 16, 2017.

  1. Soverihn Proud Tribalist

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Location:
    Capitan Generalcy of Santo Domingo
    Honestly you could have Haiti as a first world country with a POD in the 1950s. Its absurdly easy to have the place be less bad than OTL.

    Frankly I'd argue the Kingdom of Haiti would have been much more prosperous than OTL Haiti for the first few decades since it managed to restart sugar and coffee production, earning it enough hard cash to modernize a military apparatus (see all the forts left over in modern day Haiti) alongside receiving diplomatic relations with Britain and the new Latin American states. If it were to take control of the Southern State of Haiti, then its in a position to recover from the Revolution in a few generations (albeit as a Russia style oligarchy). A Bokassa would be a dramatic outlier not consistent at all with Henri Christophe's personality.
     
  2. metalinvader665 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    Tennessee, North American Union
    True, but it isn't like a republican leader of Haiti couldn't have done it. But we don't see enough Haitian monarchies here, let alone successful ones. I've liked the idea of portraying Haiti's frequent military coups as generals holding the ear of the King of Haiti, rather than rulers of Haiti themselves.

    Come to think of it, we don't see a lot of divided Haitis either, and people assume that if Haiti has to suck, it has to suck as one country.
     
    CaliBoy1990 likes this.
  3. Soverihn Proud Tribalist

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Location:
    Capitan Generalcy of Santo Domingo
    The Republic is less likely IMO because Petion put forth Jeffersonian esque policies that more or less dismantled any remnant of the old planation system which hurt the states finances and forced it to gain most of the revenue through customs. Future leaders would go with that philosophy, and as Boyer continued them it became pretty much engrained, leading to this massive battle between the state and the people over control of land and forcing people onto plantations.
     
  4. Jonathan Edelstein Rooted Cosmopolitan

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Location:
    Kew Gardens, NY
    Ahem.
     
    Soverihn likes this.
  5. Gukpard The maps are wrong, I know

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Location:
    Somewhere in best america
    I don' think they have enought population neither the mobilization capacity to do that, the Russians would defeat them by sheer numbers

    Yes, but not all of it, you can plant grain everywhere and so as much of ukraine you control, the larger the population you can field

    My error :v still the personal union should be broken in muh TL project

    It can reach, but I like to slaughter butterflies :v if we went for a realistic scenario then I doubt that Poland would ally with Russia just to defeat Lithuania
     
  6. edgeworthy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Wait hang on a minute didn't the US have a brief period of internal instability in the 1860's.
    I'm sure I've heard something about that?

    (No precedent there at all)
     
  7. leopard9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2013
    Japan always modernizes, Africa is stagnant and if anything undergoes a worse Scramble for Africa, successful CSA, Native Americans get screwed, Korea remains a shrimp among whales.
     
  8. The Gunslinger NQLA agent

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Location:
    Saskatoon, SK
    Them not getting screwed probably requires a POD prior to the 19th century. There's such an overwhelming amount things against them (demographics, disease, technology) that their fate is pretty much sealed in 1801.
     
    Ciniad, cmakk1012 and Spelf like this.
  9. leopard9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2013
    I dunno. I feel like things could've gone differently, if a little less plausibly to give the Native Americans a Great Plains state with semi-autonomous to call their own. Or maybe large connected chunks of multiple Great Plains states.
     
    CaliBoy1990 likes this.
  10. The Gunslinger NQLA agent

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Location:
    Saskatoon, SK
    Once the buffalo were being killed it was all over. That was the backbone of their society and without it they basically starved. I could see them getting a better deal with different reservations and perhaps more autonomy, but they occupied such a massive amount of land that's infinitely more valuable as homesteads. Once that's realized, they'll just be conquered or drowned out demographically.
     
  11. Soverihn Proud Tribalist

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Location:
    Capitan Generalcy of Santo Domingo
    1 single civil war. Where's the coups, counter coups, foreign interference, low level insurgencies, brushfire wars, revolts, bankruptcies, and multi sided civil wars?
     
    Zhou Yu and CaliBoy1990 like this.
  12. galveston bay Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Location:
    Cabool, MO
    A failure of the Constitutional Convention could have done that, and I have seen at least one time line in this forum on that, so it isn't undiscovered country as far as a theme is concerned.
     
    Zhou Yu and Soverihn like this.
  13. TRH Tries Really Hard

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Indian wars probably count as brushfire wars/revolts. Race riots and labor strikes turned violent were also pretty common for a long while. Anyways, how much instability is normal? France is notorious for being unruly, but they haven't had a multi-sided civil war since 1453.
     
    CaliBoy1990 likes this.
  14. Soverihn Proud Tribalist

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Location:
    Capitan Generalcy of Santo Domingo
    It really depends. Presidential systems such as the US more or less naturally lead themselves to strongmen rule and centralism most of the time, so its possible to have a system ironically much like Mexico or Colombia with frequent coups and revolts from disappointed groups.

    Through in a stronger landed oligarchy like in the South and slow down industrialization for a bit and that's a recipe for a very unstable century.
     
  15. TRH Tries Really Hard

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    I mean, the problem with that is that we had a rather weak Presidency until the mid-20th Century, so calling it a Presidential system seems misleading. The real power was concentrated in Congress for basically this whole century. Throw in a deliberately weak military and the odds don't seem that great for dictatorship.
     
    Soverihn likes this.
  16. TC9078 Empire

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Location:
    Keystone State
    XD, who wouldn't enjoy that?
     
    Soverihn likes this.
  17. galveston bay Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Location:
    Cabool, MO
    aside from Lincoln and Jackson of course, but they were exceptions in the 19th Century. Teddy Roosevelt came along and changed things early in the 20th though
     
  18. TRH Tries Really Hard

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    I don't think even they would have been able to do much if Congress had been particularly interested in ruining them. And in the former's case because he had a rebellion to justify quite a bit of his actions.
     
  19. Kaiser Chris Emperor of the United States, Protector of Mexico

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2016
    Location:
    Republic of Texas
    In Lone Star Republic along with @drewmc2001 "Forget the Alamo", the Republic of Texas institutes a citizenship program for native tribes where Native Americans will received thousands of acres of territory for their entire tribe and citizenship of Texas in return for following all the laws that are created by Congress and no longer using a hunter-gatherer lifestyle unless its on public property. The reason this can happen successfully in an alterante Texas is due to the numerous treaty systems Texas had with them in their brief existence, and the need to coexist with Indian tribes with Texas' low established population. It's not a perfect utopia as the Comanche and the Apahce will usually cause trouble, but it's a good start. If you want the Native Americans to achieve success of any form, then you'll either need Andrew Jackson to never become President or have him impeached and removed for defying the Supreme Court in Worcester V Georgia, along with the Indian Removal Act having failed in the first place due to the close four votes in the House. Although from there their may be an early civil war from the Deep South or at least some sort of revolt.
     
    CaliBoy1990 likes this.
  20. Tocomocho My other car is a steam tank.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    And yet, for Russia to keep it, Russia only has to do absolutely nothing. Russia has no more reason to leave Alaska than to leave any other part of the Arctic.

    I'm rather more annoyed by the idea that any random up and comer can (and will have the intention to) buy Alaska, and always around the same time if not the same year. Granted, it wasn't seriously discussed but I remember at least a Mexican Alaska, a Confederate Alaska and a couple of WIs about a Japanese Alaska.