Would a world without the USA a worse world?

Would a world without the USA a worse world?

  • Yes

    Votes: 126 53.6%
  • No

    Votes: 109 46.4%

  • Total voters
    235
You've still not convinced me of your main point that liberalism is directly dependent on the ARW in order to better the world.
Okay, fine but you've shown that you're uninterested in any effort to explain how the two are linked.

I disagree and suggest if you want to discuss those points then perhaps discussing them in one od the previously linked French Revolution threads will be best.
That would take those threads off topic, no?
Your point as far as I understand it is that only the ARW will result in a better world and/or the lack of which will worsen the world.
You've not really backed any of that up causally. All you've really said is that the French Revolution is wholly dependent on the ARW without saying why and asking us to prove you wrong.
If you're not going to do that this this discussion is not worth my participation.
My point is that the ARW brought liberal ideas into practice far sooner than might have otherwise been the case, and that the world is better for it. People keep linking sources suggesting that the fiscal mismanagement exacerbated by the ARW contributed to the revolution. If that is true, which none of you have disputed, and which your sources have not disputed, then my point stands.
 
I don't think those sources say what you think they do. If they say what they appear to, then they all at least hint at the American Revolution as a contributing factor.

Key word: A. Not "The". "A" contributing factor, not "the" contributing factor. French Revolution causes can date to long before the ARW. The Age of Enlightment, to start.
 
Key word: A. Not "The". "A" contributing factor, not "the" contributing factor. French Revolution causes can date to long before the ARW. The Age of Enlightment, to start.
Right, so changing one thing effects everything else thereafter. You've produced ZERO evidence that the Enlightenment alone would have produced better outcomes sooner or even at all.
 
Right, so changing one thing effects everything else thereafter. You've produced ZERO evidence that the Enlightenment alone would have produced better outcomes sooner or even at all.

Because it wasn't the Enlightment alone. No one said that. It was one of the starting points. Read the articles I linked again. They mention lots of things. Again, just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

---

Alternatively, look at it from a different angle. The thread's condition is for no USA, not the ARW. ARW can still happen but the USA fails to form because X,Y,Z reasons caused the colonies to fail in uniting after gaining independence. Meanwhile, France is left as OTL to pave the way into their own revolution.
 
Last edited:
My point is that the ARW brought liberal ideas into practice far sooner than might have otherwise been the case, and that the world is better for it. People keep linking sources suggesting that the fiscal mismanagement exacerbated by the ARW contributed to the revolution. If that is true, which none of you have disputed, and which your sources have not disputed, then my point stands.
Good to know that you have now gone from only a successful US brought liberal ideas into practice to "ARW brought liberal ideas into practice far sooner than might have otherwise been the case". Which was MY point. The absence of the ARW or US does not mean liberal ideas would not be brought into practice and the French Revolution was one such attempt. Said revolution not WHOLLY DEPENDENT on the ARW as others have already shown.

Now, you have specifically said "sooner", can you state roughly how much sooner and why? And why this would make the ATL today (240 years later) worse globally than OTL?
 
Top