Year Without Summer

What if the Tambora eruption had influenced the weather a bit worse and virtually wiped out America's crops, instead of just reducing them. Would the young country have survived?
 
Man, you're on a roll today with the threads, Tom--war, famine, disease, floods and now fire from the sky. You know something we don't know? :p

The population of the U.S. in 1815-1816 was roughly 9 million. OTL famine killed 80 000 people worldwide according to this site:
http://mivo-sys.tripod.com/killers.html

Total crop failure (instead of highly reduced yields) will kill, I would guesstimate, about 10 times that amount. Let's be really mean and round that off to an even million and, just to continue the streak of sadism, let's say all of those are in the U.S.

So basically U.S. loses 10% of its population in one year. Bad? Yes. Total destruction? No. It will be weak and staggering and unable to defend themselves properly in the event of an invasion for a few years (but then again so will be everyone else) but they will eventually recover.

Basically, it will boil down to who can recover first....
 
tom said:
Basically, it will boil down to who can recover first....
Who would that be?

Ah--there's the rub--which country in the world will be in a better position to recover from massive crop failures and famine and the general chaos that results from this first? And what do you think their intentions will be once they realize that their allies and/or enemies aren't doing as well as them?

I'm a little fuzzy on who were the major powers/wannabe powers in 1815--anybody here know or have any ideas?
 

Straha

Banned
Doctor What said:
Ah--there's the rub--which country in the world will be in a better position to recover from massive crop failures and famine and the general chaos that results from this first? And what do you think their intentions will be once they realize that their allies and/or enemies aren't doing as well as them?

I'm a little fuzzy on who were the major powers/wannabe powers in 1815--anybody here know or have any ideas?

the brits would be too busy with famine so the weakened america would be able ot snap up canada,oregon,bermuda and their carribean lands, Spain would be "convinced" into giving up the texas area+Cuba to the USA. The USA would expand fast even though its a weaker nation than it was.
 
SurfNTurfStraha said:
the brits would be too busy with famine so the weakened america would be able ot snap up canada,oregon,bermuda and their carribean lands, Spain would be "convinced" into giving up the texas area+Cuba to the USA. The USA would expand fast even though its a weaker nation than it was.

Interesting but is this even plausible? The U.S. just lost 10% of their population, you've got Indians to the west, brits to the north, spanish to the south (not to mention that you've got a rather large population of black slaves looking around at the devastated white towns around them and going "Hmmmm..." )--all of whom will probably be having the same ideas as well.

Once one nation starts moving against their neighbours, everyone's going to go totally ape-shit--it will be a free for all....
 

Straha

Banned
Doctor What said:
Interesting but is this even plausible? The U.S. just lost 10% of their population, you've got Indians to the west, brits to the north, spanish to the south (not to mention that you've got a rather large population of black slaves looking around at the devastated white towns around them and going "Hmmmm..." )--all of whom will probably be having the same ideas as well.

Once one nation starts moving against their neighbours, everyone's going to go totally ape-shit--it will be a free for all....
it would most likely be william walker style people who get the main USA government to come in. Such an event that davestates americacwill cause hell for the brits,spanish and indians..
 
SurfNTurfStraha said:
it would most likely be william walker style people who get the main USA government to come in. Such an event that davestates americacwill cause hell for the brits,spanish and indians..

Which goes back to my original question--which country recovers first and why? Everyone is knocked down a peg or two and they'll be too busy getting their feet back up to waste precious time/resources/manpower to go to war right away. Is there something in particular about the geography/climate/population of mexico or canada or plains indians or whatever that might give them an advantage (or disadvantage) in recovering?

Northern parts of N.A. are used to having crappy winters/short summers, the west coast has the pacific ocean that can moderate the temperture somewhat, desert regions are, well, desert, so they might actually be better off with the temperture down a couple of degrees, and so forth. And don't forget--the brits and the spainards (among others) had pretty respectable sized empires at this time--this might offset the devastation somewhat (more resources/people/equipment). Any others come to mind?
 
SurfNTurfStraha said:
it would most likely be william walker style people who get the main USA government to come in. Such an event that davestates americacwill cause hell for the brits,spanish and indians..

I dunno. There was a good deal of rioting in Germany about the sale of grain abroad while the poor at home starved. Apparently, no matter how bad the situation, there is a market for grain (later in the century, both Ireland in the 1840s and Gujarat during the great famine of 1876 exported grain). Unless we posit a massive enterprise in rationing (highly unlikely, as there is simply no experience with organisation at that scale and a widespread belief in the free market), food is there for anyone with money to buy it, ships to carry it, warehouses to store it, and arms to defend it. Which would be Britain. I'm not saying it wouldn't be awful, but Britain stands a decent chance of coming out better than most other countries.

Other interesting aspect: if a massive famine in the early 19th century kills millions of people throughout the western world, what would that do to the emerging free markets ideology? In the face of such obvious failure, could Capitalism retain itas 'winner' image? Would voters not demand a welfare infrastructure on the ground to prevent such horrors in the future, and hang the cost? That might certainly bugger up the 'century of Liberalism' to follow.
 

Straha

Banned
carlton_bach said:
I dunno. There was a good deal of rioting in Germany about the sale of grain abroad while the poor at home starved. Apparently, no matter how bad the situation, there is a market for grain (later in the century, both Ireland in the 1840s and Gujarat during the great famine of 1876 exported grain). Unless we posit a massive enterprise in rationing (highly unlikely, as there is simply no experience with organisation at that scale and a widespread belief in the free market), food is there for anyone with money to buy it, ships to carry it, warehouses to store it, and arms to defend it. Which would be Britain. I'm not saying it wouldn't be awful, but Britain stands a decent chance of coming out better than most other countries.

Other interesting aspect: if a massive famine in the early 19th century kills millions of people throughout the western world, what would that do to the emerging free markets ideology? In the face of such obvious failure, could Capitalism retain itas 'winner' image? Would voters not demand a welfare infrastructure on the ground to prevent such horrors in the future, and hang the cost? That might certainly bugger up the 'century of Liberalism' to follow.

thats nice and all but i want you to post more of your saner gentler 20th century TL description
 
SurfNTurfStraha said:
thats nice and all but i want you to post more of your saner gentler 20th century TL description

Hey, I can't! The forum only let me post it once I shortened it to the length it has now (50,000 characters, IIRC). Anyway, most of the material I cut is roleplaying-related, so you have all the history there is.
 
Top