Wrapped in Flames: The Great American War and Beyond

I was checking on Western Alienation online and the result I got is that it is part of Canadian politics with various provinces deciding whether to secede or not. From what I understand, the US would have the same thing but it is going to be much more volatile given the increasing sentiment following the war, but wouldn't such sentiment for a Pacific Republic wax and wane over the years?

I am not sure if the Western US becomes independent or whether different national boundaries in North America equates to more nations appearing in North America, but given how this timeline has gone, I wouldn't be surprised if a Pacific Republic appears in the 20th century (Western alienation being a huge US political issue in the latter half of the 19th century suggests a Pacific Republic won't happen 50 years down the line) like the US losing another massive war down the line. But with the need to rebuild the US, it is likely the east would be prioritized over the west, further souring relations. If the west managed to rebuild without support from the east, it could embolden the independence movement in California, Oregon, and Washington state.

Edit:
Personally, I don't think Washington would allow an independent Pacific Republic after the Confederacy broke off, and it would further tarnish their international standing while empowering their enemies. I am not sure how the US would deal with this but it might relate to the different national borders. For all I know, a war of secession breaks out in the West and the US manages to defeat it to prevent another potentially hostile front and that is how General William Lincoln's career begins ITTL. And it would be even crazier if the sentiment for a Pacific Republic spread to Western Canada because they feel left out of the Kingdom of Canada and form an independent Republic of Cascadia with Alaska in it, but what are the odds of that happening?

But whatever happens later, I'm sure you will make it interesting.

Like the Canadian political term I based that off of, the desire for independence on the Pacific slope will indeed wax and wane over the years, its currently fermenting just under the surface, since the anger is primarily at Lincoln and his administration for how California and the other states/territories were left out to dry and got invaded by Britain - as well as some savage little Indian wars they have to deal with on their own - as well as having greenbacks imposed upon them.

In the medium term much will depend on how well McClellan's administration handles the economy. Part of that is managing the ballooning national debt, but also managing how the resources of California are taken care of. Railroad politics and the desire for a Pacific Republic are going to be huge bedfellows. However, down the line the knowledge that being displeased with Washington means you can secede will of course be a factor in the thinking of these states. I have a few actors of the movement in mind, and I'm hoping it will seem interesting as the tumultuous decades keep on rolling! The 1868 election is going to cause some contention I can assure you.

Canada's own trek to the Pacific is going to be interesting in some familiar and unfamiliar ways. In 1865 alone British Columbia and Vancouver colonies are going to have a rough year, but when Canada comes knocking they will still be desirous to sign up as Macdonald still has a deft touch in politics. The work of getting across the continent however, will be much more demanding.
 
Not all of Europe, just a lot of it. In fairness, some of that resentment will be directed right back at them. The Italians signed on to the motion because the US took two of the armored warships being constructed for them in New York and turned them into the USS Maine and USS New York, only one of which survived the Battle of Sandy Hook. While these nations don't mind tweaking America's nose, Prussia and Russia are more pro-US, but can't do a thing about it.

The most recent map of the front lines was put out here, and it hasn't changed too much. I'll be making an accurate map of the post-war world once I finish Chapters 111 and 112.
Still, this USA is gonna be extremely bitter towards the Brit’s and French primarily. If anything, I can see the Prussians and Russian’s leaning more towards the US later down the line, but that’s just my opinion.
 
Still, this USA is gonna be extremely bitter towards the Brit’s and French primarily. If anything, I can see the Prussians and Russian’s leaning more towards the US later down the line, but that’s just my opinion.

Certainly so. Something that has darkly amused me over the years is that in the early years of the Civil War (till about 1863) the US believed that France was more positive in its opinions about the Union winning than Britain. Then of course France tried to put a puppet emperor on the Mexican throne and...well... not so much.

Prussia and Russia are the only two European powers who had a positive attitude towards the US (well, OTL Italy did too, not so much here) throughout the whole war. Russia even leaned on France a bit when she talked about mediation, and Britain didn't feel a diplomatic spat with Russia was worth it over the Americas when the Poles were being subjugated.

In the future I can say that Russia for certain will maintain an overall positive view of US interests.
 
Certainly so. Something that has darkly amused me over the years is that in the early years of the Civil War (till about 1863) the US believed that France was more positive in its opinions about the Union winning than Britain. Then of course France tried to put a puppet emperor on the Mexican throne and...well... not so much.

Prussia and Russia are the only two European powers who had a positive attitude towards the US (well, OTL Italy did too, not so much here) throughout the whole war. Russia even leaned on France a bit when she talked about mediation, and Britain didn't feel a diplomatic spat with Russia was worth it over the Americas when the Poles were being subjugated.

In the future I can say that Russia for certain will maintain an overall positive view of US interests.
Up until the October revolution….if it stills happens that is. Same for Germany. I can say that WW1 will be very interesting with a US leaning Prussia and Russia.
 
Up until the October revolution….if it stills happens that is. Same for Germany. I can say that WW1 will be very interesting with a US leaning Prussia and Russia.
That's another interesting butterfly tbh, with Russia and Prussia most likely remaining allied here so Berlin would be supporting Russian influence in the Balkans which drags Austria Hungary to the side of the British and French plus whoever is aligned with them, something that means Italy will most likely be on the side of Russia and Prussia.
 
In the future I can say that Russia for certain will maintain an overall positive view of US interests.
So, they might sell Alaska to America?
Or a better idea that suddenly came to me:
Maybe make Alaska independent in a Texas way, but not that similar also?
Basically, after realizing the USA does not have enough money to buy Alaska, they can maybe make Alaska into an autonomous zone of sorts, under the protection of Russia and the USA, with everyone knowing that as soon as the USA gets enough money, Russia will dump Alaska to the USA.
I can even see Russia trying to use this time to get concessions. Making Orthodoxy enough of a force to force the USA to give them (or rather give the Russian Orthodox Church) some kind of intervention right-esque thing regarding Orthodox Alaskan matters, alongside dumping every kind of unwanted to the land they know will be gone in few years?
 
So, they might sell Alaska to America?
Or a better idea that suddenly came to me:
Maybe make Alaska independent in a Texas way, but not that similar also?
Basically, after realizing the USA does not have enough money to buy Alaska, they can maybe make Alaska into an autonomous zone of sorts, under the protection of Russia and the USA, with everyone knowing that as soon as the USA gets enough money, Russia will dump Alaska to the USA.
I can even see Russia trying to use this time to get concessions. Making Orthodoxy enough of a force to force the USA to give them (or rather give the Russian Orthodox Church) some kind of intervention right-esque thing regarding Orthodox Alaskan matters, alongside dumping every kind of unwanted to the land they know will be gone in few years?
On the other hand, empires really don't like just letting territories go independent, that sort of action just emboldened other independence movements among other downtrodden minorities, of which Russia has many.
 
Alaska cannot function independently, it doesn't have the population to do so without being over taken by either Americans or Canadians. Russia for the same reason cannot hold onto it nor could Japan.

Most likely Alaska will be bought buy an American state or Canada, the local company bosses were quite friendly with the Hudson Bay company but the Empire was not too fond of Britain....

I really like this timeline, it seems to me that being "American" is going to be much more generalized and that Yanks, Dixies and even Canadians in the future could all be considered "American" especially if even more states such as the Pacific breaks free.(Best possible timeline, as a Washingtonian)
 
Last edited:
Alaska cannot function independently, it doesn't have the population to do so without being over taken by either Americans or Canadians. Russia for the same reason cannot hold onto it nor could Japan.

Most likely Alaska will be bought buy an American state or Canada, the local company bosses were quite friendly with the Hudson Bay company but the Empire was not too fond of Britain....

I really like this timeline, it seems to me that being "American" is going to be much more generalized and that Yanks, Dixies and even Canadians in the future could all be considered "American" especially if even more states such as the Pacific breaks free.(Best possible timeline, as a Washingtonian)
The problem with the US buying Alaska is currently the Union's just straight up broke right now and is fixing a devasted country and will have to radically restructure its economy and trade what with it losing eleven (possibly twelve depending on what happened with Kentucky.) states, that's something that's going to take a long time, especially with a middling president like McClennan in charge. It could take a decade for America to recover but from what the Author told us, the new era is one of Hard Feelings, so the near future doesn't look too bright.
Russia's not gonna want to sell it for nothing and they certainly don't want the Brits to have it so they'll just sit on it and basically leave it to fend for itself, Britain for its own part isn't really gonna be interested in starting a war over Alaska so I can easily see Russia keeping Alaska well in to the 20th century depending on how WW1 turns out.
 
The issue is that Russia if it sits on the land it will lose it.
The problem with the US buying Alaska is currently the Union's just straight up broke right now and is fixing a devasted country and will have to radically restructure its economy and trade what with it losing eleven (possibly twelve depending on what happened with Kentucky.) states, that's something that's going to take a long time, especially with a middling president like McClennan in charge. It could take a decade for America to recover but from what the Author told us, the new era is one of Hard Feelings, so the near future doesn't look too bright.
Russia's not gonna want to sell it for nothing and they certainly don't want the Brits to have it so they'll just sit on it and basically leave it to fend for itself, Britain for its own part isn't really gonna be interested in starting a war over Alaska so I can easily see Russia keeping Alaska well in to the 20th century depending on how WW1 turns out.

Unfortunately Russia cannot just hold onto Alaska, soon there will be thousands of Americans and Canadians streaming into Alaska for another gold rush. They will easily out populate the local Russian population (unless there a huge demographic shift I missed). Canadians and American settlers won't obey Russian law/Orthodox Religion. Though I do see a longer lasting Russian influence in the area, I cannot see it lasting into 1900. Also, 7 million still isn't that much for any of the American states, and it could be a good poltical win for an embattled President.
 
The issue is that Russia if it sits on the land it will lose it.


Unfortunately Russia cannot just hold onto Alaska, soon there will be thousands of Americans and Canadians streaming into Alaska for another gold rush. They will easily out populate the local Russian population (unless there a huge demographic shift I missed). Canadians and American settlers won't obey Russian law/Orthodox Religion. Though I do see a longer lasting Russian influence in the area, I cannot see it lasting into 1900. Also, 7 million still isn't that much for any of the American states, and it could be a good poltical win for an embattled President.
We could actually see something like a Texas situation where the American population decides to join with the US... But are opposed by the Canadian population which turns the whole thing into a civil war of sorts with America and Canada supporting their own side and Russia being obviously Pro American. Regardless of how it goes, it would probably strengthen Russo American relationship and would have Washington invest more in the Russian Empire.


That reminds me of another factor: If the Russo Japanese War still goes like OTL, Russia might actually win given that Japan was this close to have their economy collapse due to how expensive the war was as well as Russian reinforcements coming in enough numbers that they could overwhelm the Japanese troops, IIRC, the calls for negotiation were mainly from the USA and Britain(the first because they didn't want too much disruption in their trade and the latter because they didn't like Russia gaining power) who managed the OTL deal that had several consequences for both countries, IITL the USA is actually likely to support Russia at least diplomatically which most likely means Russia can turn the tables in the Far East and get their much desired warm water port and influence in Manchuria and China expanded, something that would only frighten London over the idea of the Russian Far Eastern Squad roaming around in the Pacific Ocean and East Asian seas... Not that they will be able to do much about it unless they want war with Russia.
 
The issue is that Russia if it sits on the land it will lose it.


Unfortunately Russia cannot just hold onto Alaska, soon there will be thousands of Americans and Canadians streaming into Alaska for another gold rush. They will easily out populate the local Russian population (unless there a huge demographic shift I missed). Canadians and American settlers won't obey Russian law/Orthodox Religion. Though I do see a longer lasting Russian influence in the area, I cannot see it lasting into 1900. Also, 7 million still isn't that much for any of the American states, and it could be a good poltical win for an embattled President.
The reason Russia wanted to get rid of Alaska was because it was a worthless bit of land and they needed money after Crimea, a Russia that still has Alaska during it's gold rush, well that changes things drastically, suddenly they're not going to be too eager to get rid of Alaska, they'll want to send their own people over and get that gold for themselves. And the best way into Alaska even in the modern day is by boat, so they can send settlers and miners from Vladivostok to Alaska. Canada and the US would have to send people via boat as well so local authorities would have a better ability to control the flow of people. Trying a land route in to Alaska would not be a good idea, the Canadian and Alaskan wilderness is pretty inhospitable and sparsly populated, a large chunk of prospectors trying a land route would probably die to the elements, plus the Canadians would probably US prospectors trying that route.
And unlike Texas, is the US really going to want to start shit with one of the only European powers that's actually positively aligned with them?

Plus the Gold Rush IRL started in the 1890's there's a lot of changes that could change TTL, they might not even discover the gold at all.
 
Up until the October revolution….if it stills happens that is. Same for Germany. I can say that WW1 will be very interesting with a US leaning Prussia and Russia.

WWI as we know it is pretty firmly butterflied away, so the formation of the opposing sides is going to be a long march across the politics in Europe, America, Latin America, Asia and Africa.

North America will have its part to play.
 
A popular saying in this TL will surely be something along the lines of, "it took Mr. Lincoln three years to lose a war, it took Mr. McClellan five months".

I can imagine a sort of Lost Causeism/Dolchstoßlegende appearing in the North after the war focused on the Northern Democrats, especially if McClellan's cabinet starts leaking details about how peace was decided. Hard Feelings indeed!

Oh McClellan! He who prized his "honour" over 4 million in bondage!
 
A popular saying in this TL will surely be something along the lines of, "it took Mr. Lincoln three years to lose a war, it took Mr. McClellan five months".

I was thinking something similar for the 1868 slogans actually.

The blame for losing the war will be shifted around a lot. Lincoln technically went to war and lost with England, while McClellan lost the war with the south. His lackluster military career won't have an enormous number of defenders in WiF.

I can imagine a sort of Lost Causeism/Dolchstoßlegende appearing in the North after the war focused on the Northern Democrats, especially if McClellan's cabinet starts leaking details about how peace was decided. Hard Feelings indeed!

Both the Democrats and the Republicans are going to undergo major face-lift and reform processes as both sides figure how how to navigate the post war world. The election of 1868 will look more like 1860 and all the participants will bear varying levels of personal animosity towards one another.

Oh McClellan! He who prized his "honour" over 4 million in bondage!

Pretty spot on for his opinions in real life actually. Given his way the war never would have been about abolitionist politics and the slavery issue would "have been decided by the states" as it were.

One of many reasons I don't hold him in high esteem.
 
With Napoleon scoring some major diplomatic wins, glory in Mexico, and a share of positive press at home, he's going to be feeling very confident on the world stage. So 1866-67 in Europe will look very different in most respects. I can guarantee that the 1870 Franco-Prussian War is butterflied away. However, the Rhine War is very much a thing on the horizon in Europe...

That works out nicely for me because of events I have planned in North America in the late 1860s.
Looking forward to see where these butterflies takes us
 
I just have to say that I can't wait to see what a English Canuck written 20th century War looks like.

especially if it's us vs uk .that scenario somehow doesn't get enough attention on here IMO and when it does its bashing one of them
 
Top