Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Divided America in 1860 (or so)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by holly6 View Post
    Janos, fun thread. "What ifs" can be fun if the responders take it seriously. Airsirgarnett hit a heck of a post. Don't know if I agree with all of it, but it was very well thought out.

    I know many of us here can handle this, but if it starts a "flame war" with "others" forget it.

    1. Given the vast area involved, and the possibility of immigration barriers from the East, could Deseret have maintained itself as a theocratic unit? Consider that many of the "Pacific" population would maintain the predjudices created during the events in the East. Could they be faced with exchanging Salt Lake City as their Capitol due to the difficulty projecting their power to the Western borders of Deseret? Does the question of poligamy still carry the same political/social barrier to involvement with the Pacific Gov?

    On other matters,

    2. Do the British move South into the PNW and re-establish their claim to the Columbia River?

    3. As the mineral, metals discoveries continue in the Rockies, do other regions attempt to control that area as a means of shoring up their currencies?

    Fun stuff. Any ideas?
    Thanks. Yes, I do have some ideas.

    1. Deseret, in fact the whole church as it was established then was theocratic as well as secular -- IOW, it functioned in both ways*. I think that could have continued for a while at least. Of course, that may change if Pacifica joins with Deseret, but I suspect it wouldn't -- I think the distances would protect them.

    2. Could be...or the Russians may come south from Alaska, which still belonged to them. I hadn't considered that.

    3. Could be...or they could find a new basis for money: cotton in the south, unbased dollars in the north, etc. Interesting question.

    *That's the real cause of the Mormon War, IMHO. Brigham Young was both prophet and governor. I don't doubt that this pattern would have continued.
    Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
    Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


    "Never pet a burning dog."

    RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
    http://www.mormon.org
    http://www.sca.org
    http://www.scv.org/
    http://www.scouting.org/

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Janos View Post
      Thanks. Yes, I do have some ideas.

      1. Deseret, in fact the whole church as it was established then was theocratic as well as secular -- IOW, it functioned in both ways*. I think that could have continued for a while at least. Of course, that may change if Pacifica joins with Deseret, but I suspect it wouldn't -- I think the distances would protect them.

      2. Could be...or the Russians may come south from Alaska, which still belonged to them. I hadn't considered that.

      3. Could be...or they could find a new basis for money: cotton in the south, unbased dollars in the north, etc. Interesting question.

      *That's the real cause of the Mormon War, IMHO. Brigham Young was both prophet and governor. I don't doubt that this pattern would have continued.
      *I wonder if the trend could continue. BY was a unique individual, the Lord would have to be work overtime to find a continuous line of his abilities.

      Something in the back of mind about the 60's-70's and the second Juarist movement in Mexico. Let me play with it.
      My Avatar: Ivan W. Henderson Gunner/navigator B-25-26. 117 combat missions. Both Theaters. 11 confirmed kills. DSC.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by holly6 View Post
        *I wonder if the trend could continue. BY was a unique individual, the Lord would have to be work overtime to find a continuous line of his abilities.
        Of course, a lot of us he has done exactly that.
        Something in the back of mind about the 60's-70's and the second Juarist movement in Mexico. Let me play with it.
        Yeah! That would be interesting. Would the CSA, Pacifica, or Deseret have expanded southward into Mexico?
        Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
        Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


        "Never pet a burning dog."

        RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
        http://www.mormon.org
        http://www.sca.org
        http://www.scv.org/
        http://www.scouting.org/

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Janos View Post
          Of course, a lot of us he has done exactly that.

          Yeah! That would be interesting. Would the CSA, Pacifica, or Deseret have expanded southward into Mexico?
          "Do not tempt the Lord thy God"

          On the contrary, when B. Juarez declared a 2 year mortorium on Mexico's forigen loans, Spain, France, England landed troops in Veracruz, 1862. Of course they did this knowing the US was involved with it's own troubles. Lot's of intrique here, but Spain and England left when they found out that France was trying to seat Maximillian in Mexico City.
          Query: With the rich Pacifica State isolated, do the Spanish, or the British (Pincher movement from the north) take advantage of the situation and move to secure the area for their own use?
          Anybody have a clue about British or Spanish capabilities during this epoch?
          (And we haven't even touched the 20th Cent).
          My Avatar: Ivan W. Henderson Gunner/navigator B-25-26. 117 combat missions. Both Theaters. 11 confirmed kills. DSC.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by holly6 View Post
            Query: With the rich Pacifica State isolated, do the Spanish, or the British (Pincher movement from the north) take advantage of the situation and move to secure the area for their own use?
            Could be. I doubt Pacifica would have been strong enough to stop them.
            Anybody have a clue about British or Spanish capabilities during this epoch?
            (And we haven't even touched the 20th Cent).
            I think the Spanish were hurting, having suffered through all those wars of independence in South/Central America. A Mexican Empire, with unchallenged French assistance, would have been the major threat to the western US while the Cossacks and Canadians fought it out over what is now Washington State.
            Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
            Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


            "Never pet a burning dog."

            RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
            http://www.mormon.org
            http://www.sca.org
            http://www.scv.org/
            http://www.scouting.org/

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Janos View Post
              Could be. I doubt Pacifica would have been strong enough to stop them.
              I think the Spanish were hurting, having suffered through all those wars of independence in South/Central America. A Mexican Empire, with unchallenged French assistance, would have been the major threat to the western US while the Cossacks and Canadians fought it out over what is now Washington State.
              And who protects Hawaii? I discount the Russian threat. Ft. Ross seems to be nothing more than a political statement. By this time, I believe the British are becoming involved with Southern Africa, but if they had a chance at the Pacific Coast? Interesting..
              My Avatar: Ivan W. Henderson Gunner/navigator B-25-26. 117 combat missions. Both Theaters. 11 confirmed kills. DSC.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by holly6 View Post
                And who protects Hawaii? I discount the Russian threat. Ft. Ross seems to be nothing more than a political statement. By this time, I believe the British are becoming involved with Southern Africa, but if they had a chance at the Pacific Coast? Interesting..
                I would think that Hawaii would remain a kingdom...one of many petty kingdoms scattered across the Pacific.
                Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
                Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


                "Never pet a burning dog."

                RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
                http://www.mormon.org
                http://www.sca.org
                http://www.scv.org/
                http://www.scouting.org/

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Janos View Post
                  I would think that Hawaii would remain a kingdom...one of many petty kingdoms scattered across the Pacific.
                  Both Britian & Germany had their eye on Hawaii. I'd put my money on the Brits.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by holly6 View Post
                    Janos, fun thread. "What ifs" can be fun if the responders take it seriously. Airsirgarnett hit a heck of a post. Don't know if I agree with all of it, but it was very well thought out.



                    1. Given the vast area involved, and the possibility of immigration barriers from the East, could Deseret have maintained itself as a theocratic unit? Consider that many of the "Pacific" population would maintain the predjudices created during the events in the East. Could they be faced with exchanging Salt Lake City as their Capitol due to the difficulty projecting their power to the Western borders of Deseret? Does the question of poligamy still carry the same political/social barrier to involvement with the Pacific Gov?


                    Fun stuff. Any ideas?
                    Given how far the Church settled the west and the Church structure itself, I think Polygamy though would probably be scrapped permanently by the 20th century, and a theocracy on the level of the middle east I don't think would happen, though Utah Valley would certainly try (as they seem to try now).

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Really interesting ideas...

                      1870...

                      Given the possible threats and political situation, I feel that Pacifica's and Desterta's shared history and blood ties would see them eventually combine for mutual safety. Each would also have very good economic, political and military reasons for doing so as far as future expansion and security reasons.

                      The Mountain Republic would then i feel be strong enough to deter and threats from either the north or south. Its also likely that economic and military alliances might form with both Mexico and Britain. If this happened if would benefit all three strategically, especially if it was along the lines of a triple 'American Entente'. All three could then combine to further their interests in both the Eastern Pacific and Middle America.

                      Comments?

                      Gary

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Naffenea View Post
                        Given how far the Church settled the west and the Church structure itself, I think Polygamy though would probably be scrapped permanently by the 20th century, and a theocracy on the level of the middle east I don't think would happen, though Utah Valley would certainly try (as they seem to try now).
                        I suspect you are right. My understanding is that plural marriage was never widespread and I agree it would have vanished, more or less, by 1900.
                        Originally posted by allsirgarnet View Post
                        1870...

                        Given the possible threats and political situation, I feel that Pacifica's and Desterta's shared history and blood ties would see them eventually combine for mutual safety. Each would also have very good economic, political and military reasons for doing so as far as future expansion and security reasons.

                        The Mountain Republic would then i feel be strong enough to deter and threats from either the north or south. Its also likely that economic and military alliances might form with both Mexico and Britain. If this happened if would benefit all three strategically, especially if it was along the lines of a triple 'American Entente'. All three could then combine to further their interests in both the Eastern Pacific and Middle America.
                        I agree with this as well. Keep in mind that there were a lot of LDS in California (a number of Mormon Battalion vets had settled in the Sutter's Mill area prior to gold being discovered there) so there were already ties.

                        I had not considered an alliance with Mexico or the Brits, but such a thing would not be inconcievable.

                        Good thoughts, all!
                        Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
                        Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


                        "Never pet a burning dog."

                        RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
                        http://www.mormon.org
                        http://www.sca.org
                        http://www.scv.org/
                        http://www.scouting.org/

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Janos View Post
                          • The United States (generally in what is now the northeast across to Minnesota and down to Kansas and Maryland)
                          • The Confederacy (11 or 13 states, as you prefer -- I don't see how it makes a difference here)
                          • The Pacific Nation* (California, Oregon, Washington) and
                          • Deseret (the Mormon State encompassing Utah, northern Arizona, Nevada, and Idaho)
                          Nah. Except the Confederacy everybody would have joined/stayed in the U.S. The economic realities are just like that. The Confederate states were the ones in a special situation to resist the total dominance of industry, but there's no reason the Pacific along with a great lakes/north chunk would stay away from the U.S. and richness. Jesusland might have stayed out, but I don't really think so.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Janos View Post
                            I suspect you are right. My understanding is that plural marriage was never widespread and I agree it would have vanished, more or less, by 1900.

                            I agree with this as well. Keep in mind that there were a lot of LDS in California (a number of Mormon Battalion vets had settled in the Sutter's Mill area prior to gold being discovered there) so there were already ties.

                            I had not considered an alliance with Mexico or the Brits, but such a thing would not be inconcievable.

                            Good thoughts, all!
                            To many intagibles, it's hard to develop a forcused stratagy. However, some thoughts.
                            1. As we all know, the American Military c.1860 was not a force. No succession, no need to build the army. Essentially, what we are speaking of here, is a type of "sucession" without the argument of tariff or slavery. What is the motovation for our 3 Rogue Regions? Distance? Self rule?
                            2. The economic necessities might dictate a shift in our borders. Pacifica, for our purpose, would have to include both WA (at the 49 Parellel) and CA. From San Francisco to Seattle there are almost no deep water ports. That's why they spend zillions dredging the Columbia Bar. I do not forsee the British allowing us to keep WA west of the Cascades, it was still sparsley settled and while perhaps not worth the risk of war with a major trading partner, war with a fledging Republic? Hmmm. Puget Sound is an incredible resource for naval trade. At the very least, a blockade of the Sound would be easy work indeed for the British Navy. This is what makes the Pacifica/Deserete connection seem viable.
                            Also, in 1860, the Native problems were far from solved in the "Mountain Region". Who provides the dedicated trained troops to subdue the tribe's to open up the mineral wealth there. Deserete? Pacifica? the British? and which of these would do so without an enormous price tag of control or soverignty?

                            At the start date of 1860, a split US/CSA, regional rather than national feelings, Britian could end up with WA, N.Id, MT Perhaps N-S. DAK. And I'm beginning to wonder if transportation (or lack of it) would be key. A little like the problems in the Old NW prior to the purchase of New Orleans.

                            Fun stuff.
                            My Avatar: Ivan W. Henderson Gunner/navigator B-25-26. 117 combat missions. Both Theaters. 11 confirmed kills. DSC.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Redwolf View Post
                              Nah. Except the Confederacy everybody would have joined/stayed in the U.S. The economic realities are just like that. The Confederate states were the ones in a special situation to resist the total dominance of industry, but there's no reason the Pacific along with a great lakes/north chunk would stay away from the U.S. and richness. Jesusland might have stayed out, but I don't really think so.
                              Jesusland, lol. It would have stayed since The Church's position is the Constitution is a divine document.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Naffenea View Post
                                Jesusland, lol. It would have stayed since The Church's position is the Constitution is a divine document.
                                You're to big a trout to rise to that poorly tied fly.

                                Consider, would the Eastern US, have use it's ability to dicate the Northern route of a Transcontental RR as leverage between Deserete and the Mountain Region?
                                My Avatar: Ivan W. Henderson Gunner/navigator B-25-26. 117 combat missions. Both Theaters. 11 confirmed kills. DSC.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X