Sorry for the delay, new computer is fully operational. If you have any questions or want the music choices, leave a comment and I will answer as soon as I can.
What if the attempted night raid before the Battle of Culloden was successful? Could they have made it to London? Could the Stuarts have returned and what if they did?
In the United States it was a bit of an inconvenience trying to differentiate states as you made river borders almost the same color as the nation itself so it looks like Texas is Giant and I couldn’t tell until almost the end of the video. I still loved the Video
@@MatthewTheWanderermultilingual , a very decentralised central government states forming local trade leagues, autonomies inside autonomies local armies-militias, yep sounds like an north American version of the hre
@@VajaOzge well England as a country has been around since 927 AD and only because Great Britain in 1707 when Scotland Joined them or was forced to do so.
Even with a heavy American inclination towards acquiring more territories, Haiti was still controlled by France, which was said to be alternate America's closest European ally. The only way they could acquire it from France without trying to annex it militarily (bad idea to declare war on your friends) would be to purchase it. I don't see that being very likely, however, as Haiti was very highly profitable for France. Haiti could have still won their independence and maybe asked to join the USA, though I can't be entirely certain they would want to. It's possible, but not certain.
Millions of Americans were not lost in Korea and Vietnam. Looking at around 37K US deaths during Korean War with 103K wounded in action. Vietnam was 58K dead with 153K wounded in action.
When highlighting the dead and wounded between those 2 conflicts, its amazing to think that the Russian war in Ukraine has been deadlier than both combined in the last 2 and a half years.
Sure no Hawii, but the US has a large ass better developed Caribbean and South American stable neighbor as the tourist hot spot. Bigger question is what a US that is only interested in Asia as trade partners means for Japan. While France and British would still eventually seek to open ports beyond the foreign zone in Nagasaki it does raise the question of if the Meiji Restoration never happens from the Shogun having time to modernize Japan, without such lop sided trade deals, after seeing what happened with China.
@@NoVisionGuy it appears my comment was deleted idk why. But you’re wrong, so ignoring Hawaii for a moment. Alaska was sold to the USA because of 3 reasons, 1. Alaska at the time was unprofitable. 2. It was sold because they believed the British would take it. 3. They believed that the Americans would move into the territory overwhelmingly the Russians settlers and doing the same thing they did to Texas. That’s why in our real life they sold it to us for money the same way the French did to Louisiana. This would still take place in this timeline regardless if the British were present, Hawaii would not be a part of the equation. Now as for Hawaii, it is not just some vacation spot it is strategically important to national defense and security Hawaii is corridor to the mainland USA controlling Hawaii is vital for us defense and security as well as being vital for controlling the pacific it the USA did not control it then the USA would be under threat. Now here are the consequences of this timeline. 1. Us control of the pacific and its territory’s have been shattered. 2. Japanese control of the pacific is guaranteed because the Japanese would simply annex the island in the Russo Japanese War. 3. When WW2 would break out and it would Japanese victory is now much more likely as they would now be able to immediately and directly threaten the us west coast and the new pear harbor would be San Pedro and all US pacific territories are cut off from American and if Russia does keep it and retain it then now you have nuclear weapons on the doorstep of America. Bad move In addition this was never discussed in any form of agreement in us history nor would it so it’s basically just a OC treaty that has no basis in reality.
Yeah the Spanish American war would've still resulted in the US gaining the Philippines, only this time Americans would be less hesitant to assimilate them. We'd definitely make a stop over in Hawaii on our way to annex the Philippines.
If everything went right for America, it would be the strongest and most influential country in the world, with millions of people from Europe, Asia and South America trying to immigrate there every day. Oh wait...
@@edthebumblingfool Far more Western Europeans go to the US than Americans to Western Europe (take the UK, France, Germany for examples). You can look this up yourself. Eurocope comes from envy and resentment of American power. But the reality is that for the average person, and certainly if you're talented or ambitious, standards of living are considerably higher in the US than Western Europe.
Im glad Im not the only one with this vision. 🤩 The true America... of both North and South continents and the Artic and Antarctic seas. Complete control over an entire hemisphere and half of two others. Also... what if Australia/New Zealand and South Africa/Madagascar joined too? Unrestricted access to every ocean and global trade routes - land, air, and sea.
@@the_SolLoser that would be crazy, imagine the logistics of such a huge continent(s), communication and travel would be super difficult, there's a reason "empires" fall because of difficulty controlling the territory
@@danielzhang1916 far easier today than ever before actually. Instantaneous communications across the globe solves most of the problems that empires of the past had. Travel anywhere within half a day solves some more. This isn't the 1800s - territory like that would be easy to keep by comparison.
If everything went right for America, then that would mean the Foubdibg Fathers would've been able to abolish slavery earlier than in our timeline. The reason they didn't abolish it when they could was because they feared southern rebellion that could impact the war
I don't see how they could do it earlier, unless slavery became disrupted enough in some way, this is assuming that land expansion went right for America, not necessarily slavery or other social issues
it would be highly unlikely and farfetched, assuming a lot of factors come together, I could see a possible future with Canada and maybe half of Mexico, but going further out would be impossible even with everything right
We would still take Panama and Costa Rica because we would presume that the Darien Gap was our true Southern Border as it was far too expensive to develop anything in that area that could allow us to expand naturally beyond it. We would probably be closer to Brazil than Colombia and Brazil would probably absorb all of South America to guarantee a mutual lesser partner that was friendly and allow easy access to their resources in our markets. We might also had taken Haiti and when Jamaica and the Bahamas became independent of the UK, they would probably seek annexation into the Union as it would better secure their societies with the increase in economic development.
Panama never existed until Roosevelt (Teddy) fomented a rebellion there in what was then a province of Colombia, split it off from them and then essentially stole it daring the Colombians to do something about it. Americans may have been latecomers to colonialism but apparently they were quick studies.
I suspect the US would still be racist as hell and still lean towards monolingualism, just that American English in say Wisconsin or Ohio will be highly Germanized in effect.
I was hesitant, but if you look at it from a perspective of an American, everything that had happened to this land was super dumb and out of our own ignorance. It’s funny because Biblically speaking Israel did the same but to a more extreme degree. The United States is blessed regardless of what timeline
it is to all of north america for sure, it would not be a economical division as strong as it is today, having canada an mexico constantly fight for 1st trade partner and the security issues would not have been as strong or even significant like today is since its not a surprice for anyone but corruption leads to american weapons to end up in the cartel's hands since no one would believe they somehow sneak into military bases and leave no trace that they where there i wonder if the drug problem would exist at all in that universe since china didnt really had a reason to export drugs to mexico and the us that where the spark that started all of those problems
@Labu2312 actually the cartels would never be able to survive (if they form at all), at least, not the way we know them today. Such a violent and powerful organization would have been considered a total threat to national security and dealt with using every resource, and in this timeline the cartel could not simply run across the border.
The US uses previous names for many things including names from Spanish (Los Angeles and San Fransisco) and Native American languages (Massachusetts and Seattle).
The US would have never given up interest in Hawaii-- especially if it maintains its neutrality and focuses on industry and global trade. Its the most convenient halfway point in the Pacific between the Americas and Asia, and with Asia being the most populated continent on the planet, it would have likely insisted on annexing Hawaii to facilitate trade with the East.
There would have been no legitimate reason to even entertain allowing Russia to get hands on Hawaii. Russia wasn't already there like we were. If any foreign nation had any claim on Hawaii, it would have been Great Britain. But even at the time this creator claims this would have happened (1867?), the USA already had significant presence in Hawaii. Hawaii had great importance to the USA because America had already forced Japan to open up trade to the west in the 1850s (if that had still happened in this alternate timeline), and China had been opened up to trade with Great Britain and Germany (and other European nations) at about the same time, with America joining in soon thereafter. Hawaii would have been a necessary American stopover in shipping in the Pacific, assuming that America was still interested in global trade. Regarding Canadian ex-pats moving to Australia after the War of 1812, that was also an improbability, as that continent was nothing more than a newly organized penal colony to Great Britain at that time, with basically no infrastructure nor civilization to support such a migration. I doubt that such a large number of Canadian ex-pats would have been enticed to make that trip in 1815. A more realistic notion would be that most Canadians would simply remain and be assimilated into American culture and politics.
@@phoebecole6798 My main point other than all of the same things I mentioned was that we were already there, and Russia wasn't. Saying Russia having any interest in the Islands was sort of an out of the blue thing for this creator to bring up. Other than the US, England had much more of a historical claim in Hawaii than Russia did.
Would Haiti still be occupied at some point in this timeline? I could see it being incorporated, probably better than what has ended up happening there in real life.
Hati would be conquered there is 0 chance that the US takes one half of Hispaniola and not the other. Panama is also near certainly at least made into an American vassal state in all but name. To ensure that no other power is ever able to build a canal.
INTERESTINGLY a book I've been working on for a few years now has the same principal idea just done differently. Also THANKS for mentioning my area of Buffalo! ONE MORE thing, IF we had Canada that would mean USA would win Gold in hockey! ANOTHER reason to own Canada.
@@Videntis.History Its...coming back though. Just takes a while. There's a mixture of old and new architecture, which makes the city AND areas great. The food has NEVER been bad, plus we rank in the top 1% for wings.
I don't think the USA could control Mexico without serious concessions to legitimize the Spanish Language. Northern Mexico was very underpopulated as it was mostly dry highlands and desert, not suitable for large cities or large scale agriculture. If America wanted to "control" Mexico, meaning the populated central band of Mexican territory, it would have to become a bi-lingual nation like Canada is today. There's no way it stays peaceful if the USA tries to enforce English on such a large population in the mid 1800s.
You got a point. And also, I think that the "Racial Stuff" should have changed in order to Pacify Mexico. I can see Poles, Irish, and Italians going to Mexico and somehow intermarriage the locals (Specially the Irish and Italians) and by that "integrate" Mexico into the Union. But still, I don't see English dominating Mexico. But people would still speak it as second or third language. (Just like in Scandinavia or the Netherlands, where most people can speak English) Mexico would be more like another Quebec but people would still use English as an unifying language and would still be somehow oficial. But English will not be part of the dairy life everywhere in MX, Central America and the Caribbean. But in the way Mexico works, I can see the upper classes trying to "Americanize themselves". But Mexico will get the American government system which is fine Now, baseball and not soccer would be the most popular sport. And we will dominate it.
@@Yha1000itzThe racial stuff wouldn't be hard at all what would happen. Is that the Spanish descended white Hispanics. Would be recognized ad white and used to oppress the mixed and native populations. Until the analog of the civil rights movement happens.
small complaint because i AM that guy, at 1:27 you say we intervene in Korea and Vietnam losing millions of Americans, in Vietnam we suffered 58,220 casualties and in Korea we suffered 36,574 casualties, even if we add the number of wounded (korea:103,284 & Vietnam: more than 300,000) it comes up to less than one million (498,078 in total). i only did a few quick google searches so my numbers are probably off by a bit but there's still a large gape between those numbers. sorry to be the correct the teacher guy but either you misspoke or you have other sources and i wanna know if I'm wrong. also ignore the bad grammar I'm shit at writing and its 4 am
Even with a title "What If Everything Went Right for America?" I consider that a bit too optimistic. Even with an American victory in the War of 1812, I don't see the United States annexing ALL of Canada as Southern interests wouldn't have wanted that much free territory, Canadians were clearly Loyalists to the British crown, the Québeqois would have never accepted Union rule, nor would the British just completely abandon their loyal subjects. Same with the United States and Mexico following a victory in the Mexican-American War. Sure the United States would have taken more land, but Northern interests would have opposed so much slave supporting lands nor would many Americans want so many Spanish speaking Catholics in the United States.
You should do a sinarrio on what if gran Columbia united all of the Spanish speaking countries after they all gained independence it is a really interesting sinarrio that not a lot of people have covered that I think you’ll like
If the Federal Government didn't gain so much power, well as people were more loyal to their states many more immigrants will naturally flock to the US not just Europeans as wars for decolonization is happening globally by being secural and neutral thus even more economic diversity and development would happen for the people. Then Haiti would request join the Union as the Haitians seeing the economic benefits thus the same goes for Bahamas, Jamaica, Coasta Rica and Panama will follow as well thus uniting all of North and Central America and the Darien Gap would be the natural actual border between North and South America. Edit: Hawaii would probably be independent in this scenario with the collapse of the USSR but they'll be under the Russian rule for awhile.
honestly your videos have gotten extremely good , i thinki this is a point where no improvement can happen since preety much youre doing everything awsome !
I don't think he realizes mexicans consistent 1/3 of the population and with living standards going up and war going down, enforcing language and culture would be impossible thats not including the wave of catholics immigrating. Both Zack Taylor and Winfield Scott recognized that full occupation would be impossible. Even if full annexation happened, it would be done so conditionally and statehood would mean more free states with growing Catholic populations with CDMX vieing as a second capital long-term, especially if pan americanism/latinism takes place. On the bright side, this means American calling themselves Americans would make more sense since the northern half would be unified
I feel like this is pretty unrealistic, I don’t think America would have even wanted all of Mexico or Canada. But these kinds of videos are always fun so I’m not complaining
This is what the founding founders imagined what america would be, it's like a wet dream but in an alternative universe i would love to live in this 1000 year amereich.
@@eidoneverchoosen1171 probably a slave and free states thing. But at this point Mexico wasn't extremely populated like it is today so it might be more possible.
North Carolina only seceded because Virginia did. NC had more economic ties to the north than with their southern neighbors. They only seceded once they were surrounded. If VA was still in the Union, then NC would have no reason to secede.
Mexico would never be fully annexed by America the reason we didn't was that the Mexican people were mostly Catholics and were seen differently than Americans the only people who did call for all of Mexico were a small radical minority and Texas would still need to be smaller they lost colorado and Oklahoma panhandle because of the mason Dixon line and sold new Mexico to the us government to pay off their debt
As a Native of Hawai'i the idea of becoming Russian sound worse than being American it would be weird to think about that timeline but I myself would prefer a free nation instead of subjugation
in this alt timeline us would get more canida from the revolutionary war In The Battle for the Fourteenth Colony, author Mark R. Anderson explores the Quebec Campaign of 1775-1776 so the battle for the 14th colony would have been successful
I’m not saying I want the United States to be as big as this, but I want people to look at us as a country of hope where everyone can get. Like it once was.
Can you do a video that shows what would change in ww2 if great depression never occurred.Probably the war would last longer due to the betterment of the economy of the countries that were involved in ww2 but I'm pretty sure that you could explain and analyse the theory better.
Thank you for mentioning bleeding Kansas. I was raised in Kansas so we were taught it but I realized that a lot of other people raised in other states never heard of it. It was one of the biggest key events that started the civil war.
Honestly, if you were going to do a perfect timeline, you might as well have had the argument of Slavery settled back at the beginning. In our history, when the constitution was drafted, the argument was just kicked further down the road. You could have just had those in favor of abolition having a stronger position, and those opposed realized slavery would have to go if the nation was to survive and be recognized by other world powers.
@@randomlyentertaining8287IDK, having free healthcare, a livable wage, free college, strong labor unions, data privacy laws, walkable cities, functioning public transportation, news networks that are prohibited from lying to the public, and government mandated vacation time and parental leave-that all sure sounds like real freedom to me. Those things give you the freedom to live your life the way you really want to. Oh, and as a bonus, the homicide rate in the EU is 1/4th that of the US. I’ll take all that over being “free” in the US. The US version of freedom leaves us all overworked, underpaid, uncared for, and unhappy.
I have a question about the Austrian succession. What if the daughters of Joseph i had inherited the Habsburg dynasty would we have had a Habsburg-Wettin ?
Technically the dynasty would change based off who they married. For example the British royal family should technically be the house of Mount Batten because of Charles father, but they chose to keep the name Windsor.
Interesting the Italian question because I'm Italian, maybe today I coud be American. One request: what if Brazil became a democratic superpower after Cold War? A country without poverty and corruption.
