[Infinite Worlds] US annexes North America

[Michael Thayne]

Here's an idea for an alternate worldline in Infinite Worlds, one I'm amazed hasn't been tried before. (Or has it? Not that I can find.)

At some point - either during the revolutionary war or in 1812 - the United States conquers Canada. Then, after the Mexican-American War, the idea of controlling almost all of North America was too tempting to pass up, and the US government decided it was going to annex all of Mexico, rather than just the northern part annexed in actual history.

Any history buffs here want to throw around ideas for where things could go from there? It certainly messes with the dynamics of the civil war. I vaguely remember hearing that northerners worried adding that much more south to the US would tip the political balance towards the south, but then IIRC Mexico had outlawed slavery by the time of the Mexican-American War. So I can imagine slavery remaining illegal in Mexico. Or it becoming legal for awhile, until non-slaveholding Mexican elites pushed back against it.

Either of those last two possibilities might lead to either (1) southern states being deterred from seceding, or (2) to the civil war being even more lopsided than it was in actual history, and therefore quicker. Both give you the US being better off in 1865. On the other hand, it could be that trying to integrate all of Mexico into the US would be a complete disaster, and I'd be happy to hear arguments for that being the more likely result.

But running with the "US is better off in 1865" possibility--I can see that leading to an earlier Spanish-American war (in the 70s, perhaps?), and with Cuba becoming a US state. From there, it's tempting to imagine the United States gradually gobbling up more and more little bits of the world. But I don't know enough about what was going on in other parts of the world at the time to know where opportunities for this would present themselves: South America? The Pacific? Africa? Or might there be a good reason for the US to stop after getting Cuba and the Philippines?

[trans]

Maybe the European powers would have got together to put a brake on US expansion, much like they did against Russia in the Crimean War.

[Blind Mapmaker]

You would probably need some reason why the US can actually control such a huge swath of land. They had enough trouble with the Indians post-Civil War and that was without adding large populations of their own TL to the mix. Heck, Mexicans had a lot of trouble controlling other Mexicans.

If nothing else, they would probably have to deal with foreign-backed insurgencies in Mexico, British Canada and Quebec. It would necessitate taking greater control of society and limiting civil liberties which would also annoy some of their own people, not to mention deter immigrants.

[SCAR]

The English and the French unite like never before in history to repel the US invasion of Canada.
(It's an alternate timeline, anythings possible, right?)

[Dammann]

I think it would allow America to gain strategic goals much earlier. The big weird thing since WWII has been the US Navy being everywhere. If that happened earlier, Europe might be more unified.

I have a hard time seeing it as plausible for a few reasons, but these are just things to change to make it all work. First, I don't think America was up to conquering Canada back in 1812; we should have gotten stomped worse than we did. If it weren't for Napoleon vs England, we would have. Would we have been in a position to buy the Louisiana Territory if Napoleon didn't want more money for his European campaign? Would an aggressive and expansionist early America have simply fought France for the territory (despite their aid in the Revolution), undermining Napoleon further? If we'd tried to seize Louisiana, would England have been as inclined to press American sailors or fight us in 1812?

When I think of America at the beginning of the 19th century, I think of a country with an untested form of government, with a serious labor shortage, no standing army, marginalized by vigorous European powers like England and France. I cannot imagine conquest of Canada as readily as I can see Canada joining New England in the revolution. I am not too savvy about what Canada was experiencing in the 1770s, though, so maybe that would be unlikely.

[LoneWolf23k]

A likely scenario for Canada joining the US would be for Revolutionary envoys successfully convincing the French population of Canada at the time to join the Revolution, something they didn't succeed in doing in our history.

You'd then end up with the Northern Canadian states having a french majority, and a different culture. Whether or not we (I'm Quebecois) would later go for Independence from the US or not would depend on how much control the central government would have.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Dammann

I think it would allow America to gain strategic goals much earlier. The big weird thing since WWII has been the US Navy being everywhere. If that happened earlier, Europe might be more unified.

Could the USA afford a worldwide navy any time before around 1900? If so, there's likely to be a US-British war as a result.

[Astromancer]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

At some point - either during the revolutionary war or in 1812 - the United States conquers Canada. Then, after the Mexican-American War, the idea of controlling almost all of North America was too tempting to pass up, and the US government decided it was going to annex all of Mexico, rather than just the northern part annexed in actual history.

For the US to take Canada early seems unlikely, however, the US victory in the Mexican war was overwhelming. But few outside of the Cotton Belt wanted to take all of Mexico. A more realistic set-up might have the US envoy deciding to split the difference between Polk's later demands (all of Mexico) and what he was originally told to take (what we got). And adding Sonora and the Baja to to the US take. Then have later wars with Mexico started by Santa Ana get the US everything above Gaudalajara.


Durring the Civil War the Union would be at war with France. The Prussians, who saw the Confederates as vile, would make trouble for France (whom the Prussians didn't like either). Britain would be in terror of a US grain embrago, so they wouldn't be aiding either the French or the CSA. Have the confederate agents in Canada stage the raid they made on Vermont in 1864 in the early part of the war. Canada was in a war panic through the early part of the ACW because they feared attack and conquest. Let the panic start early in the war and an unprepared Canada strike a prepared USA.

This would give you France, Britain, and the CSA attacking all at once. However, it would also give you Prussia attacking both France and Austria, paper tigers both at that time. Prussia would form Germany early and yank France out of the war. The USA would be galvanised by the British attack as it never was durring the actual ACW. The US would also be embargoing grain exports. The British Navy was fearsome, however with a conquered France behind them, and a pro-American Czarist Russia behind Prussia (yes Russia was very pro-Union in the 1860's), and the grain embargo smashing the economy, and the comon people of England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland in revolt (they were Pro-Union), I don't see Britain being able to do anything much. A galvanised USA would be in a position to gather in North America. Heck, having foriegn powers attack the USA would make the CSA even MORE unpopular than it was in the south (the CSA wasn't popular with southerners until Jubal Early wrote large amounts of Lost Cause propoganda after the war).

You'd have a unified North America by this senario, and one that was hostile to both England and France, while being friendly with Germany and Russia. Late 19th and early 20th century politics would be very different.



More later.