Would Hughes winning in 1916 mean an independent Philippines by 1933?

Democratic Administrations in the 20s would have granted Filipino independence

  • yes

    Votes: 8 66.7%
  • no

    Votes: 4 33.3%

  • Total voters
    12

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
It's an alternate history common place that Charles Evans Hughes would not have been able to stay out of WWI, the US would have entered the war, and then the Democrats would have politically "owned" the 1920s White House as a result of postwar backlash.

With Democratic Administrations in the 1920s, and the historically lesser support for colonialism of the Democrats between the Civil War and the Great Depression, would this have fast-tracked Filipino independence in the 1920s?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
It's an alternate history common place that Charles Evans Hughes would not have been able to stay out of WWI, the US would have entered the war, and then the Democrats would have politically "owned" the 1920s White House as a result of postwar backlash.

With Democratic Administrations in the 1920s, and the historically lesser support for colonialism of the Democrats between the Civil War and the Great Depression, would this have fast-tracked Filipino independence in the 1920s?
Probably Yes, for the reasons that you listed above.
 
I doubt Hughes would have Nationalized the Railroads as a way to hold back Unions and a lot of the things Wilson did that resulted in that 1920 Recession being worse than it should have.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
I doubt Hughes would have Nationalized the Railroads as a way to hold back Unions and a lot of the things Wilson did that resulted in that 1920 Recession being worse than it should have.

Why would Hughes have been more Union-friendly?

And was Wilson's nationalization mainly motivated by anti-Unionism or just a statist and mobilization-oriented economic mindset.

...but I suppose this is a potential pathway for Hughes to win reelection and to successfully restore the GOP's reputation as a party of peace and prosperity.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Although there is some contrary opinion, the idea that 1920s Democrats would set the Philippines free seems more popular in the poll.

How would a Democratic administration's policy differ from OTL's, if at all, in terms of things like the Washington Naval Treaty, European debt and reparations issues, overall approach to naval and military spending and administrative status of Alaska and Hawaii, and intervention in the Caribbean, especially Nicaragua?
 
Why would Hughes have been more Union-friendly?

And was Wilson's nationalization mainly motivated by anti-Unionism or just a statist and mobilization-oriented economic mindset.

Bit of both. One of the reasons for the takeover was to void a Strike.

Hughes in some ways was just as progressive as Wilson, just would use different methods.
 
Top