A question for the Brits in particular, and the rest What if America loses the War for Independence

Got a question for the British in particular, and the rest, and let us try and




What if America loses the War for Independence? After all how often even after 200 years after a war does the losing nation, celebrate the winning country's declarations of any sort much less their independence?



We can laugh about it now, and be eternally grateful we don't have that issue on the world's proverbial plate

or would our little spat simmer and boiled over later leading to potential problems?

Would we all still be together? was it always to be that the rebellious few had to leave the oppressive monarchy for true freedom and independence? Were we destined for this instead...

Tricky. You'd be Canada, basically, or a Western version of Australia? The thing is that I can't see France or Spain selling Louisiana to the UK. I might see the UK & whatever Colonial Governments that might have been created from something like the Galloway Plan taking New Orleans if the French Revolutionary wars broke out but then that might be butterflied away or delayed a bit by no US War of Independence.
People tend to forget that the French Revolution broke out more than partly because the French bankrupted themselves to fund the army that fought with Washington and the Fleet that carried it there. So, no US War of Independence means a delayed French Revolution at the very least.
I love alternate history.

a reply to: putnam6

Well seems the US has started down the road of banana republic, no Governor General to sack the pres, no one able to reign in a rogue government or security system, no royalty to call the people around
Having said that, the Brits don’t seem to be coping to well either

Just be grateful that England was at war with France, kinda helped a little bit

Congrats on your special day, hope you can avoid any potential conflicts ahead

I've read the Declaration 2-3 times, but I've never listened like this in whole, together at once. Comes across a bit differently not better or worst just different.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: putnam6

Well seems the US has started down the road of banana republic, no Governor General to sack the pres, no one able to reign in a rogue government or security system, no royalty to call the people around
Having said that, the Brits don’t seem to be coping to well either

Just be grateful that England was at war with France, kinda helped a little bit

Congrats on your special day, hope you can avoid any potential conflicts ahead

Here we go England had one hand tied behind their back, is that your angle?

How developed and advanced was England compared to the US?

NSFW

On a personal note, my family lineage is mostly English from the 17th century or earlier with a touch of Sicilian.Makes me wonder what ran them off.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Tricky. You'd be Canada, basically, or a Western version of Australia? The thing is that I can't see France or Spain selling Louisiana to the UK. I might see the UK & whatever Colonial Governments that might have been created from something like the Galloway Plan taking New Orleans if the French Revolutionary wars broke out but then that might be butterflied away or delayed a bit by no US War of Independence.
People tend to forget that the French Revolution broke out more than partly because the French bankrupted themselves to fund the army that fought with Washington and the Fleet that carried it there. So, no US War of Independence means a delayed French Revolution at the very least.
I love alternate history.

Exactly the what-if education I was looking for, is this Harry Turtledove? I dig alternate history too, especially when you realize how narrow the margins were going one way or another. IIRC pretty sure Jefferson and Franklin spent lots of time convincing the French, it was a sure thing.

Even then there are possible differences, in a timeline where there was no Revolution compared to a Revolution where the US lost.

I can see colonies full of angry colonists, and a wounded England ready to smite them down at any provocation.

Interesting speculation about this here:

science.howstuffworks.com...#:~:text=If%20the%20colonists%20had%20lost%20the%20war%2C %20there%20probably%20wouldn,is%20now%20the%20U.S.%20Midwest.

"But if the 13 colonies had not won independence, the map of the continent might have been altered in other ways as well. Without a powerful federal government, the interior of North America and the western coast might be separate nations today. Additionally, there wouldn't have been a U.S. war with Mexico in the 1840s, either. So that nation might have retained Texas, Arizona and other parts of the Southwest, and become vastly richer and more influential as a world power."





"And without a rapid westward expansion in the 19th century, another beneficiary might have been the Comanche Empire that dominated the Great Plains in the early 1800s by developing cavalry and using firearms, which some historians say actually eclipsed some European nations in power and prestige. Had they not been conquered in the 1870s by the United States, it's conceivable that they might have grown even more formidable and might even have their own sovereign nation today ["

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Interesting speculation about this here:

science.howstuffworks.com...#:~:text=If%20the%20colonists%20had%20lost%20the%20war%2C %20there%20probably%20wouldn,is%20now%20the%20U.S.%20Midwest.

"But if the 13 colonies had not won independence, the map of the continent might have been altered in other ways as well. Without a powerful federal government, the interior of North America and the western coast might be separate nations today. Additionally, there wouldn't have been a U.S. war with Mexico in the 1840s, either. So that nation might have retained Texas, Arizona and other parts of the Southwest, and become vastly richer and more influential as a world power."



"And without a rapid westward expansion in the 19th century, another beneficiary might have been the Comanche Empire that dominated the Great Plains in the early 1800s by developing cavalry and using firearms, which some historians say actually eclipsed some European nations in power and prestige. Had they not been conquered in the 1870s by the United States, it's conceivable that they might have grown even more formidable and might even have their own sovereign nation today ["

fascinating stuff Carp thanks for sharing.
I suspect that Texas and the northern part of Mexico would have rebelled and formed their own country.
The Louisiana Purchase part might have themselves formed their own country. I'm sure the Native Americans would have been much better off, especially the Cherokee.

maybe even the Pacific NW.
somebody years ago wrote a book called 'The Nine Nations of North America'. could it have worked out that way?

if they had lost the Revolution I suspect the colonies would have revolted again down the road.
maybe a Confederate revolt? imagine trying to fight that war from London.

a reply to: ElGoobero

You're welcome, I just did a quick Google.

I love Alternative History stuff.

Recommend John Birmingham WW2.2 books.

That site calls it "Counterfactual History".



www.fantasticfiction.com...

a reply to: putnam6

I've read a lot of Turtledove, and he did a good alternate history with (oddly enough) Richard Dreyfuss called The Two Georges, where the American Revolution was butterflied away by a political settlement before the war could start and the lines in the sand hardened.
I think that you have to remember that the British Empire evolved a lot and there was a lot of learning of lessons on both sides. Look at Canada - London treated the French colonists there well and made it clear that they would not have to convert from Catholicism, which won their loyalty (some of the anti-Catholicism of the Founding Fathers, such as John Adams, was stunningly nasty at times) and which eventually ended up in the Dominion System.

a reply to: ElGoobero

Good alternate / counterfactual history can be great. The bad stuff can be execrable. I was incredibly disappointed in Harry Harrisons US Civil War trilogy, which was just 'oh my god, my brain just oozed out of ears trying to escape' horrifically bad. He didn't just put a thumb on the scales of reality in those books, he used a dumpster truck of handwavium.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It's definitely a fickle genre in literature, Turtledove got me started even though some of his works are too bizarre.

Who knows...but once we get past the revolution and the 1800s what happens in Europe in WWI and WWII with a multi-nation North America? Is it a loose coalition or are we warring against each other?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: ElGoobero

You're welcome, I just did a quick Google.

I love Alternative History stuff.

Recommend John Birmingham WW2.2 books.

That site calls it "Counterfactual History".

www.fantasticfiction.com...

I'm checking this out, cool stuff

a reply to: putnam6

Commanche Nation Vs Nazis? Hmmmmm..

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Interesting speculation about this here:

science.howstuffworks.com...#:~:text=If%20the%20colonists%20had%20lost%20the%20war%2C %20there%20probably%20wouldn,is%20now%20the%20U.S.%20Midwest.

"But if the 13 colonies had not won independence, the map of the continent might have been altered in other ways as well. Without a powerful federal government, the interior of North America and the western coast might be separate nations today. Additionally, there wouldn't have been a U.S. war with Mexico in the 1840s, either. So that nation might have retained Texas, Arizona and other parts of the Southwest, and become vastly richer and more influential as a world power."

"And without a rapid westward expansion in the 19th century, another beneficiary might have been the Comanche Empire that dominated the Great Plains in the early 1800s by developing cavalry and using firearms, which some historians say actually eclipsed some European nations in power and prestige. Had they not been conquered in the 1870s by the United States, it's conceivable that they might have grown even more formidable and might even have their own sovereign nation today ["

Sounds like that's a timeline without an American Civil War... that's fascinating in itself.

Thanks for the thoughts and the links, exactly why I asked I can get lost in this stuff for hours

a reply to: putnam6

Well. Slavery would have ended sooner. Americans like to think that war of independence was all abour freedom. But what really drove American Independence was the North American entrepreneurs and upper middle class who wanted

1.) To keep slavery
2.) Expand on Native American land. (Why buy a house when you can get a build one far cheaper?)

England had already looked at its laws in 1772 that found slavery was always illegal due to English common law. And the British crown signed treaties with the natives not to expand west.

The American colonies were very expensive to run. Most of North America would be speaking Spanish. And maybe the British Empire wouldn't expand exponentially like it did.

Independence was actually good for both British Empire and United States. But not for the Native Americans, and slavery, which was delayed in the rest of the Empire for another 50 years.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: putnam6

Commanche Nation Vs Nazis? Hmmmmm..

Well, and we would have to wonder actually how industrialized we all would have become, how fast and if at all.

Would we have had such an influx of Europeans with the West still being wild and untamed?

Would there even be Nazis without the impetus of WWI?

All of this made me remember Leo Frankowski's Conrad Stargard, The Crosstime Engineer and The High Tech Knight etc.

Accidentally plunged back in time to Poland in the year 1231, Conrad Schwartz is determined to build up the country before the Mongol invasion that will come ten years later

a reply to: putnam6

I love all the alternative history stuff.
My personal favourite is The Tales of Alvin Maker, obviously more of a fantasy themed Alternative History but a great read.

Back to reality though mate; don't worry, when the US decides to rejoin the family fold again just like The Prodigal Son we will welcome you back with open arms.

a reply to: Freeborn

Speak for yourself.

😊

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: putnam6

I love all the alternative history stuff.
My personal favourite is The Tales of Alvin Maker, obviously more of a fantasy themed Alternative History but a great read.

Back to reality though mate; don't worry, when the US decides to rejoin the family fold again just like The Prodigal Son we will welcome you back with open arms.

I'll have to check that out too, even though my fantasy interests are fickle as hell.

Hmmm Im not so sure besides you have all your EU pals that would love to have you back every night at the pub on the one hand and the dysfunctional, domineering, and abusive relationship with your former colonial children on the other. We know who gets the short end of your hangover.

Good thing the 13 Colonies left early cause as for our siblings, it seems the Hindus are having a problem with missing items since your previous visits. Not to mention re-arranging the furniture and assigning where everybody sleeps before you left

While, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are still attached to London's teat for the most part. Not sure if Britain has enough teats for a 330 million pound spoiled adult with psychological, drug, alcohol, and violence problems.

We haven't even mentioned Britain's stepchildren in Asia and the Middle East.

If Britain was our Papa, then our Papa was a rolling stone, and where ever they laid their hat was his home.

After reading more about the partition of India, have no doubt America got away scot-free in comparison

No wonder Modi is chumming up with Putin...which is seriously ironic now Britain has a Hindu PM