Max Sinister
Well-known member
- Location
- The Chaos Timeline
That book by that pro-IQ wannabe eugenicist Volkmar Weiss (years back on, you know which site) also was bad. Guy had the nerve to copy whole dialogues from 1984, only changing the subject.
"If you want a picture of the future of self-publishing, imagine a plagiarised boot stamping on a writer's face - forever."That book by that pro-IQ wannabe eugenicist Volkmar Weiss (years back on, you know which site) also was bad. Guy had the nerve to copy whole dialogues from 1984, only changing the subject.
But enough about Fifty Shades of Grey."If you want a picture of the future of self-publishing, imagine a plagiarised boot stamping on a writer's face - forever."
Well, that’s a hot take. I like this doesn’t assume that said two countries would likely have still practiced Imperialism because both had plans for expansion.
Well, that’s a hot take. I like this doesn’t assume that said two countries would likely have still practiced Imperialism because both had plans for expansion.
Hey, don't look at us to pick up your slack on the old imperialism. We had our hands full with that 1/3 of the globe's land (plus all of the oceans) we'd already swiped.I'm sure no other countries would have filled the void here, either. Look around. Nobody else was doing an imperialism back then, and nobody wanted to.
I mean, we kinda, you know, did do thieving and oppressing from day one, just not overseas. You think that Louisiana Purchase was just empty when we got it from France?Hey, don't look at us to pick up your slack on the old imperialism. We had our hands full with that 1/3 of the globe's land (plus all of the oceans) we'd already swiped.
It's not as if we didn't teach you how to do it before sending you out into the world all independent. You had the skill set but were too busy prick-teasing France to put in an honest day's thieving and oppressing.
Well, that’s a hot take. I like this doesn’t assume that said two countries would likely have still practiced Imperialism because both had plans for expansion.
But they still would try and gain an Empire though, which the post in questions guess probably won’t be the cause of America in this world because there split. Additionally the CSA would try and establish an Empire by hook or crook because it was a tiny nation built on an unstable slaveocracy foundation. If they wanted to survive, they would have try some Empire building as ghoulish as that sounds.To be fair, both the US and CSA would be weaker (in some ways) and less able to expand overseas. The UK got so much of the world because it had fewer concerns at home, unlike France or Germany.
Chris
Trying to make up for domestic dysfunction by expanding outwards is seldom a recipe for success.Additionally the CSA would try and establish an Empire by hook or crook because it was a tiny nation built on an unstable slaveocracy foundation. If they wanted to survive, they would have try some Empire building as ghoulish as that sounds.
Trying to make up for domestic dysfunction by expanding outwards is seldom a recipe for success.
It's probable that the rump Union would get back on its feet soon enough and complete its march to the Pacific, but in my opinion the CSA would be too unstable to engage in foreign adventurism. The planter elite would be too worried about slave revolts to go filibustering overseas.
There's certainly many scenarios where a balkanized United States would lead to a reduction in the power of imperialism, but I don't see how you get to that from a successful CSA. Maybe if a reconquered-in-two-generations south turns into an enormous Ulster like people speculated would happen in TL-191, but even that's a stretch honestly.
"If you want to avoid civil war, become an imperialist " Cecil RhodesTo be fair, both the US and CSA would be weaker (in some ways) and less able to expand overseas. The UK got so much of the world because it had fewer concerns at home, unlike France or Germany.
Chris
I could definitely see the kind of filibustering you got in the 1840s-50s continuing and expanding in the CSA. If there's been serious fighting in the ACW you've got a lot of poor white veterans in an economy which is doubling down on slave-worked plantations. Promising them a chance to become planters somewhere else might look very attractive, and it's not like the Union can hate the CSA any more than it already does. Whether any of the filibusters get anywhere is an entirely different question and I'd tend to lean towards "probably not".Trying to make up for domestic dysfunction by expanding outwards is seldom a recipe for success.
It's probable that the rump Union would get back on its feet soon enough and complete its march to the Pacific, but in my opinion the CSA would be too unstable to engage in foreign adventurism. The planter elite would be too worried about slave revolts to go filibustering overseas.
This is a traditional solution to the "poor white" problem.I could definitely see the kind of filibustering you got in the 1840s-50s continuing and expanding in the CSA. If there's been serious fighting in the ACW you've got a lot of poor white veterans in an economy which is doubling down on slave-worked plantations. Promising them a chance to become planters somewhere else might look very attractive, and it's not like the Union can hate the CSA any more than it already does. Whether any of the filibusters get anywhere is an entirely different question and I'd tend to lean towards "probably not".
Think Texas had more change and would be better to go as a single country then Virginia who would be crushed by the Union if they went alone.The Republic of Virginia
Charles Bateman unwisely attempts to write racism and slavery out of the history of Virginia.neverwasmag.com
Here's a rather abysmal work of AH I got as a review copy. The author is going to be mad at me but frankly he deserves it.