What if the American Revolution was Crushed?
video description
It's a fascinating story and if they have an English translation I'd recommend you read it and if possible might make a video about it.
Date: 2022-07-15
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 9
JHAYKHAY25
This all depends on two factors, the French being reasonable and having bloodless change to their political system and if the British actually did oppress the local population after the war. The British were broke, thirty years occupation would be expensive. American ego's aside the colonies were not the cash cows of the empire, they were the Carribbean and India. Wars over long distances were and are eye wateringly expensive. They have to pay and the colonies didn't at this time. What is the cheapest solution to these problems? Here's your parliament, keep the union jack on the flag, we'll have bases in Boston and Halifax, we're out of here, you're pretty much on your own which is more or less what they did in Canada.
reply
This all depends on two factors, the French being reasonable and having bloodless change to their political system and if the British actually did oppress the local population after the war. The British were broke, thirty years occupation would be expensive. American ego's aside the colonies were not the cash cows of the empire, they were the Carribbean and India. Wars over long distances were and are eye wateringly expensive. They have to pay and the colonies didn't at this time. What is the cheapest solution to these problems? Here's your parliament, keep the union jack on the flag, we'll have bases in Boston and Halifax, we're out of here, you're pretty much on your own which is more or less what they did in Canada.
reply
James
Whatifalthist - - -
Alright, now that you have done that interesting 'what-if, ' how about IF the Federalist traitors and their planned second revolution had been violently co-opted, hanged by their patriot necks 'till good and dead for treason, with the intact-still CUSA (Confederacy of the United States of America) having continued as the direct and inevitable extension, and perfect exemplar of the Declaration of Independence, and the won-Revolution? How about that one for a thought-experiment try? Or, might ye be fearful that the traitors' successors, tenders of our present horrifying mess that we endure compliantly, might wanna getcha?
(The blue Zinn declaration was right-on-target and interesting)
. :.
reply
Whatifalthist - - -
Alright, now that you have done that interesting 'what-if, ' how about IF the Federalist traitors and their planned second revolution had been violently co-opted, hanged by their patriot necks 'till good and dead for treason, with the intact-still CUSA (Confederacy of the United States of America) having continued as the direct and inevitable extension, and perfect exemplar of the Declaration of Independence, and the won-Revolution? How about that one for a thought-experiment try? Or, might ye be fearful that the traitors' successors, tenders of our present horrifying mess that we endure compliantly, might wanna getcha?
(The blue Zinn declaration was right-on-target and interesting)
. :.
reply
education
Too much mythology. Look at what happened when the British lost/nearly lost in other parts of the empire. If the rebellion had been contained, and it nearly was, the FFs would have gone to the gallows (they had conspired with the French) BUT for strategic reasons the British would have had to compromise with the cause of reform. My bet is that the Dominion status given to Canada in the mid 19th Century would have been created a couple of generations earlier. Independence yes, but with British style financial, legal and political institutions. This would allow trading with the the Empire as before, giving the FFs everything they wanted from the start.
reply
Too much mythology. Look at what happened when the British lost/nearly lost in other parts of the empire. If the rebellion had been contained, and it nearly was, the FFs would have gone to the gallows (they had conspired with the French) BUT for strategic reasons the British would have had to compromise with the cause of reform. My bet is that the Dominion status given to Canada in the mid 19th Century would have been created a couple of generations earlier. Independence yes, but with British style financial, legal and political institutions. This would allow trading with the the Empire as before, giving the FFs everything they wanted from the start.
reply
education
Britain would have wanted to consolidate her post war hold on the colonies so would have (after hanging Washington & Co for treason) found some legislative way of acknowledging the rebel's point. The Dominion status that we see in the second half of the 19th Cent. in Can/Aus/NZ would have emerged 50/60 years earlier. The empire wasn't about glory but trade and power. It didn't matter in the end, because all 50 US states use western democracy, liberal economics, Common law and speak the English. The irony is the loss of the revolution might arguably have entrenched British style institutions in N. America better than the British beating a revolution.
reply
Britain would have wanted to consolidate her post war hold on the colonies so would have (after hanging Washington & Co for treason) found some legislative way of acknowledging the rebel's point. The Dominion status that we see in the second half of the 19th Cent. in Can/Aus/NZ would have emerged 50/60 years earlier. The empire wasn't about glory but trade and power. It didn't matter in the end, because all 50 US states use western democracy, liberal economics, Common law and speak the English. The irony is the loss of the revolution might arguably have entrenched British style institutions in N. America better than the British beating a revolution.
reply
Judith
Give me a break: when everybody votes that doesn't mean that a tyrannical oligarchy is not in charge: great masses are far easier to control mentally than a meritocracy like China's. Real American history was a competition between Northern industrialists and Southern planters and commodity traders and at no point the common people's preferences intervened in any way, it just resulted very rapidly into a general disdain for politics and public life unequated in the world. The people would have preferred La Follette and Henry George but the oligarchy would never allow such an orientation to be taken.
reply
Give me a break: when everybody votes that doesn't mean that a tyrannical oligarchy is not in charge: great masses are far easier to control mentally than a meritocracy like China's. Real American history was a competition between Northern industrialists and Southern planters and commodity traders and at no point the common people's preferences intervened in any way, it just resulted very rapidly into a general disdain for politics and public life unequated in the world. The people would have preferred La Follette and Henry George but the oligarchy would never allow such an orientation to be taken.
reply
Morgan
while it's true the brisih were quite oppressive in ireland since their religious professions diverged, famines were never caused on purpose, the big potato famine everyone knows about was intensified by a fetishisation of free market economics. the scottish famines were intensified by similar means. that the Highland clearances were an english action isn't true, the worst landowner was english, but it was by far the scottish landowners themselves who were to blame
reply
while it's true the brisih were quite oppressive in ireland since their religious professions diverged, famines were never caused on purpose, the big potato famine everyone knows about was intensified by a fetishisation of free market economics. the scottish famines were intensified by similar means. that the Highland clearances were an english action isn't true, the worst landowner was english, but it was by far the scottish landowners themselves who were to blame
reply
Ren
these are all fantastic from Whatifalthist, but BIG gaps in this one about: 1) Westward Expansion, 2) the Spanish Empire (and their French backers, as portrayed early on) and 3) Plains Native Americans, backed by European powers. dont all the Europeans drool for a big slice west of the Mississippi around 1825-1850 (after all, no Napoleonic Wars to distract them? would love to hear him do North American 1800s in Crown defeats Colonists
reply
these are all fantastic from Whatifalthist, but BIG gaps in this one about: 1) Westward Expansion, 2) the Spanish Empire (and their French backers, as portrayed early on) and 3) Plains Native Americans, backed by European powers. dont all the Europeans drool for a big slice west of the Mississippi around 1825-1850 (after all, no Napoleonic Wars to distract them? would love to hear him do North American 1800s in Crown defeats Colonists
reply
Yog-Sothothery
Wouldn't Germany and Italy not unite and wouldn't all those wars happening across the 19th-century butterfly ww1 out of existence and the British empire would have a harder time growing its empire because France remains a great power in this timeline. The industrial revolution would never happen thus no scramble for Africa and slavery continues. The greek plan would be enacted thus no Crimean war.
reply
Wouldn't Germany and Italy not unite and wouldn't all those wars happening across the 19th-century butterfly ww1 out of existence and the British empire would have a harder time growing its empire because France remains a great power in this timeline. The industrial revolution would never happen thus no scramble for Africa and slavery continues. The greek plan would be enacted thus no Crimean war.
reply
Farhan
Americans, of whichever class, had no qualms whatsoever about colonising the lands of others, Whatifalthist, you just confuse territories beyond the current U. S. borders as those lands for possible colonisation, as the only options, whilst not counting the colinisation of the other 37 States' lands by the first 13. Colonisation is colonisation, recognise that simple fact.
reply
Americans, of whichever class, had no qualms whatsoever about colonising the lands of others, Whatifalthist, you just confuse territories beyond the current U. S. borders as those lands for possible colonisation, as the only options, whilst not counting the colinisation of the other 37 States' lands by the first 13. Colonisation is colonisation, recognise that simple fact.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
