Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

[WolfBear]

No, they were puppet regimes that at least in Iraq the people tried to overthrow in 1941, but the British reinstalled their puppet regime with British forces.
I'm not sure when decolonization would happen without WW2, perhaps never.
The actual LoN mandate never specified an end date and was left deliberately vague:

Mandate for Palestine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Decolonization never ending sounds rather harsh, no? Are liberal egalitarian ideas never going to spread without World War II? Are the United States and Soviet Union never going to support decolonization without World War II?

 

[sillygoose]

Decolonization never ending sounds rather harsh, no? Are liberal egalitarian ideas never going to spread without World War II? Are the United States and Soviet Union never going to support decolonization without World War II?

Technically it wasn't a colony, but rather a Mandate from the first version of the UN. Yes it would be harsh, but then colonial powers generally were. You should see some of things US personnel said about the British racial hierarchy in India during WW2.

Racial egalitarian views would take a long time to build up without WW2 and racism becoming pretty socially unacceptable.

The US and USSR did support decolonization, but planned their own new version of colonialism instead.

 

[WolfBear]

Technically it wasn't a colony, but rather a Mandate from the first version of the UN. Yes it would be harsh, but then colonial powers generally were. You should see some of things US personnel said about the British racial hierarchy in India during WW2.

Racial egalitarian views would take a long time to build up without WW2 and racism becoming pretty socially unacceptable.

The US and USSR did support decolonization, but planned their own new version of colonialism instead.

The US's version of colonialism was the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine? Because it got repudiated in the 1930s under FDR. Obviously the USSR was colonialist, no doubt about that.

Interestingly enough, some progressives were already coming around to racial egalitarianism even before World War II:

Being a Progressive, Yesterday: Race

Progressive-era labor unions were a mighty white affair Slate ran a series a few years back, ' Liberal Creationism ,' after the...

thosewhocansee.blogspot.com

But of course there were also white supremacists who were in favor of decolonization even back then because they already feared a "rising tide of color":

The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[sillygoose]

The US's version of colonialism was the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine? Because it got repudiated in the 1930s under FDR. Obviously the USSR was colonialist, no doubt about that.

Ha, no the US planned global financial domination. It was dictated at the Bretton Woods Conference:

Bretton Woods Conference - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Harry Dexter White - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

White was the senior American official at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference, and reportedly dominated the conference and imposed his vision over the objections of John Maynard Keynes, the British representative.[14][18]
...
Eric Helleiner, in 2014, argued that the main goal of the United States was to promote international development as an investment in peace, to open the world for cheap imports, and to create new markets for American exports. He argues that policy-makers and analysts from the Southern hemisphere increasingly denounced the Bretton Woods system as "a Northern-dominated arrangement that was ill-suited to their state-led development strategies."[20][21][22] After the war, White was closely involved with setting up what were called the Bretton Woods institutions—the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

John Maynard Keynes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The USA's greater negotiating strength, however, meant that the outcomes accorded more closely to the more conservative plans of Harry Dexter White. According to US economist J. Bradford DeLong, on almost every point where he was overruled by the Americans, Keynes was later proven correct by events.[57]

The process basically killed him:

Helping to set up the Bretton Woods system, he worked to institute an international monetary system that would be beneficial for the world economy. In 1946, Keynes suffered a series of heart attacks, which ultimately proved fatal. They began during negotiations for the Anglo-American loan in Savannah, Georgia, where he was trying to secure favourable terms for the United Kingdom from the United States, a process he described as "absolute hell".[40][199] A few weeks after returning from the United States, Keynes died of a heart attack at Tilton, his farmhouse home near Firle, East Sussex, England, on 21 April 1946, at the age of 62.[14][200]

BTW Henry Dexter White was a Soviet spy and was indirectly responsible for China going communist by blocking loans to the KMT for ChiCom benefit.

Interestingly enough, some progressives were already coming around to racial egalitarianism even before World War II:

Being a Progressive, Yesterday: Race

Progressive-era labor unions were a mighty white affair Slate ran a series a few years back, ' Liberal Creationism ,' after the...

thosewhocansee.blogspot.com

But of course there were also white supremacists who were in favor of decolonization even back then because they already feared a "rising tide of color":

The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They were the outliers:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/12/20/greatest-generation-survey-race-sex/

Turns out the WW2 generation was pretty racist.

 

[WolfBear]

Ha, no the US planned global financial domination. It was dictated at the Bretton Woods Conference:

Bretton Woods Conference - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Harry Dexter White - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

John Maynard Keynes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The process basically killed him:


BTW Henry Dexter White was a Soviet spy and was indirectly responsible for China going communist by blocking loans to the KMT for ChiCom benefit.


They were the outliers:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/12/20/greatest-generation-survey-race-sex/

Turns out the WW2 generation was pretty racist.

Killed Keynes?

Anyway, would the BWC have still occurred without WWII?

And Yes, I know that a lot of US WWII soldiers were white nationalists, if not outright white supremacists. I've actually seen some polling in regards to this in the past on Twitter, but I can't find it right now, unfortunately. There was absolutely nothing incompatible about feeling very sad for both white countries and white people who were victims of Nazi aggression while also being a white nationalist or even white supremacist, unfortunately.

 

[Skallagrim]

Killing Keynes is always a good idea. Someone should ideally have done it when he was still in diapers.

 

[sillygoose]

Killed Keynes?

He described the conference as 'pure hell' and virtually had no say and the results were dictated by HDW.

Anyway, would the BWC have still occurred without WWII?

No way. It was dictated by the US and only possible in the context of the war, which at least one scholar said was the intention of the US:

Patrick J. Hearden - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Although President Roosevelt repeatedly claimed in public speeches that Hitler was bent upon world conquest, the question of strategic defense was not the primary factor underlying the American decision to enter the war. Moreover, despite the genuine concern of Roosevelt and his advisors for the plight of the Jews inside the Third Reich, this ethical question was even less important than the issue of national security in prompting the preparation for war. The American decision to enter the war, Hearden argues, was actually based much more upon economic considerations and ideological commitments than on either moral aspirations or military apprehensions.

Roosevelt, his advisors, and influential business leaders were primarily concerned about the menace that triumphant Germany would present the free enterprise system in the United States. If Hitler and the Axis powers succeeded in dividing the world into exclusive trade zones, the New Deal planners would have to regulate the American economy to create an internal balance between supply and demand. Convinced that capitalism could not function within the framework of only one country, they chose to fight to keep foreign markets open for surplus American commodities and thereby to preserve entrepreneurial freedom in the United States.

The US ruling class believed that 'Capitalism in One Country' couldn't survive, so they had to 'export the revolution' to ensure the US didn't have to actually redistribute wealth and power in the country.

There is a LOT of evidence quotes to support the thesis, which is built on everything the FDR admin was saying internally and publicly in the 1930s. The Polish ambassador also talked about how the US was creating a war scare as early as 1938 to support a military build up once it was clear the New Deal failed:

New Deal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Roosevelt administration was under assault during Roosevelt's second term, which presided over a new dip in the Great Depression in the fall of 1937 that continued through most of 1938. Production and profits declined sharply. Unemployment jumped from 14.3% in May 1937 to 19.0% in June 1938. The downturn was perhaps due to nothing more than the familiar rhythms of the business cycle, but until 1937 Roosevelt had claimed responsibility for the excellent economic performance. That backfired in the recession and the heated political atmosphere of 1937.[101]

Keynes did not think that the New Deal under Roosevelt ended the Great Depression: "It is, it seems, politically impossible for a capitalistic democracy to organize expenditure on the scale necessary to make the grand experiments which would prove my case — except in war conditions."[102]

World War II and full employment
Under the special circumstances of war mobilization, massive war spending doubled the gross national product (GNP).[103]

WW2 saved the US economy; war was the means to rescue the US economic system and global dominance and imposition of a 'free trade system', which really was a US favorable trade system, locked in the existing US internal power system. Which is why the US has been addicted to war ever since. The Korean War saved the US economy from the 1948-49 recession:

Recession of 1949 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Cold War helped drive the US economy from 1950 onwards and it ending probably helped lead to the 2000 recession and subsequent 'Forever Wars' the US has sought out.

And Yes, I know that a lot of US WWII soldiers were white nationalists, if not outright white supremacists. I've actually seen some polling in regards to this in the past on Twitter, but I can't find it right now, unfortunately.

US WW2 soldiers were a cross section of the country as there was conscription that applied to everyone, i.e. no college exceptions. So US soldiers were largely the representatives of the average American's opinion on these issues.

 

[sillygoose]

Killing Keynes is always a good idea. Someone should ideally have done it when he was still in diapers.

Why? Few if any of his ideas have ever really been put into actual practice. Governments like the spending part of what he said, not the taxation part in good times to pay down the debt from spending in bad times, which is the critical part of his program.

 

[WolfBear]

He described the conference as 'pure hell' and virtually had no say and the results were dictated by HDW.


No way. It was dictated by the US and only possible in the context of the war, which at least one scholar said was the intention of the US:

Patrick J. Hearden - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The US ruling class believed that 'Capitalism in One Country' couldn't survive, so they had to 'export the revolution' to ensure the US didn't have to actually redistribute wealth and power in the country.

There is a LOT of evidence quotes to support the thesis, which is built on everything the FDR admin was saying internally and publicly in the 1930s. The Polish ambassador also talked about how the US was creating a war scare as early as 1938 to support a military build up once it was clear the New Deal failed:

New Deal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

WW2 saved the US economy; war was the means to rescue the US economic system and global dominance and imposition of a 'free trade system', which really was a US favorable trade system, locked in the existing US internal power system. Which is why the US has been addicted to war ever since. The Korean War saved the US economy from the 1948-49 recession:

Recession of 1949 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Cold War helped drive the US economy from 1950 onwards and it ending probably helped lead to the 2000 recession and subsequent 'Forever Wars' the US has sought out.


US WW2 soldiers were a cross section of the country as there was conscription that applied to everyone, i.e. no college exceptions. So US soldiers were largely the representatives of the average American's opinion on these issues.

AFAIK, the late 1930s US recession was due to FDR cutting government spending rather than due to the New Deal failing.

The military buildup from 1938 onwards was originally meant to help the Anglo-French while the US remains neutral but provides a lot of jobs in the armaments industry to its own unemployed population, right?

Also, do you think that HDW provoked Pearl Harbor? :

Harry Dexter White - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In November 1941, White sent a memorandum to Morgenthau that was widely circulated and influenced State Department planning. White called for a comprehensive peaceful solution of rapidly escalating tensions between the United States and Japan, calling for major concessions on both sides. Langer and Gleason report that White's proposals were totally rewritten by the State Department and that the American key demand had been formulated long before White. It was an insistence on Japanese withdrawal from China, which Japan totally refused to consider.[8] The complex negotiations at the top ranks of the US government, and its key allies of Britain and China, took place in late November 1941 with no further input from White or Morgenthau. White's proposals were never presented to Japan.[9] Some historians have argued, however, that White manipulated Morgenthau and Roosevelt to provoke war with Japan in order to protect Stalin's Far Eastern front.[10][11][12]

 

[Skallagrim]

Why? Few if any of his ideas have ever really been put into actual practice. Governments like the spending part of what he said, not the taxation part in good times to pay down the debt from spending in bad times, which is the critical part of his program.

"That's not real Keynesianism!" is just as poor an excuse as "That's not real Marxism!"

If it always fails because fallible mortals just aren't incorruptible enough to do it right, then it's a shit system because it's not suitable for human nature.

(Of course, even if humans were all saints, Keynes would still be wrong. Almost every fallacy he espoused had been dispelled by Bastiat a good three decades before Keynes was even born. One only has to read Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas to understand why Keynesianism is bunk.)

 

[sillygoose]

AFAIK, the late 1930s US recession was due to FDR cutting government spending rather than due to the New Deal failing.

You're misunderstanding then. The failure of the New Deal was that it was supposed to have restarted the economy, so that it was safe to cut spending and let the economy function on its own. However as soon as spending was cut the economy collapsed and 19% unemployment happ. ned.

The military buildup from 1938 onwards was originally meant to help the Anglo-French while the US remains neutral but provides a lot of jobs in the armaments industry to its own unemployed population, right?

It was meant to prop up the economy after the 1937 recession with the excuse that it was supposed to help ward off the rapacious Germans who were "already infiltrating Latin American":

CQ Researcher - American Rearmament

If it were about helping the French and British alone they could have just sold them war materials rather than building up the US military.

The Nazis even were making fun of the reasoning:

NAZIS HIT U. S. ARMS PLAN; Voelkischer Beobachter sees 'War Hysteria' at Highest Point (Published 1938)

Reich press charges he has been asked by N Y Jewish pub to write book against Chamberlain's policies

www.nytimes.com

Under the caption "Roosevelt's Fantastic Armament Plans," the Voelkischer Beobachter this morning states that it would not be surprising if President Roosevelt should attempt to justify his plans by alleging that they are necessary to protect the United States and Canada from threats by the totalitarian States.

Also, do you think that HDW provoked Pearl Harbor? :

Harry Dexter White - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yes, but at FDR's request so the US could enter the war finally; he had been promising US support to Britain in the event of war since at least 1938, the quote being similar to: "The US won't be in at the start, but it will finish it".

 

[WolfBear]

You're misunderstanding then. The failure of the New Deal was that it was supposed to have restarted the economy, so that it was safe to cut spending and let the economy function on its own. However as soon as spending was cut the economy collapsed and 19% unemployment happ. ned.


It was meant to prop up the economy after the 1937 recession with the excuse that it was supposed to help ward off the rapacious Germans who were "already infiltrating Latin American":

CQ Researcher - American Rearmament

If it were about helping the French and British alone they could have just sold them war materials rather than building up the US military.

The Nazis even were making fun of the reasoning:

NAZIS HIT U. S. ARMS PLAN; Voelkischer Beobachter sees 'War Hysteria' at Highest Point (Published 1938)

Reich press charges he has been asked by N Y Jewish pub to write book against Chamberlain's policies

www.nytimes.com

Yes, but at FDR's request so the US could enter the war finally; he had been promising US support to Britain in the event of war since at least 1938, the quote being similar to: "The US won't be in at the start, but it will finish it".

Spending should have only been cut once unemployment reached normal levels, which wasn't going to occur until the 1940s even if the New Deal would have continued.

Someone needs to make war materials before they can be sold, no?

Interesting analysis on the last part, considering that @History Learner previously wrote about how the US anticipated Japan being neutral in World War II as late as 1940.

 

[sillygoose]

Spending should have only been cut once unemployment reached normal levels, which wasn't going to occur until the 1940s even if the New Deal would have continued.

They thought they were there in 1937, but realized that the economy was dependent on continual government spending once the Recession hit immediately. Deficit spending on social program was no longer considered tolerable by congress and the rich refused to be taxed more, so they needed a way out of the budget problem of spending, so a war scare would shake loose spending on war materials, which just so happened to be good for the economy.

Someone needs to make war materials before they can be sold, no?

Usually it is the other way around: contracts are placed, usually with some down payment, and then the material is manufactured. Things usually aren't produced first and then businesses look for people to buy them.

Interesting analysis on the last part, considering that @History Learner previously wrote about how the US anticipated Japan being neutral in World War II as late as 1940.

1941 changed things, especially once the incidents in the Atlantic didn't produce the war that the FDR admin wanted.

 

[WolfBear]

They thought they were there in 1937, but realized that the economy was dependent on continual government spending once the Recession hit immediately. Deficit spending on social program was no longer considered tolerable by congress and the rich refused to be taxed more, so they needed a way out of the budget problem of spending, so a war scare would shake loose spending on war materials, which just so happened to be good for the economy.


Usually it is the other way around: contracts are placed, usually with some down payment, and then the material is manufactured. Things usually aren't produced first and then businesses look for people to buy them.


1941 changed things, especially once the incidents in the Atlantic didn't produce the war that the FDR admin wanted.

Did accurate unemployment data exist in the US in 1937 like it does nowadays?

And Yeah, fair point. So, it made sense for the US to first wait for the Anglo-French to make orders and then for the US to actually filfill these orders.

Was FDR sure that Hitler would declare war on the US if Japan attacked the US?

Also, off-topic, but can you please respond to my Axis Lithuania thread? Thank you.

 

[sillygoose]

Did accurate unemployment data exist in the US in 1937 like it does nowadays?

That assumes the stats are accurate today...
But yes I think so, since both currently and back then relied on statistic sampling based on surveys.

And Yeah, fair point. So, it made sense for the US to first wait for the Anglo-French to make orders and then for the US to actually filfill these orders.

Was FDR sure that Hitler would declare war on the US if Japan attacked the US?

No, but once he has war powers he can shut down the isolationist movement (which happened IOTL right after Pearl Harbor), censor the press, and more freely engineer 'incidents' to create war. Hitler realized that too and instead of waiting for FDR to strike when he were ready Hitler declared war first so he could get the military jump on the US; that resulted in the '2nd happy time' of the uboat campaign.

Also, off-topic, but can you please respond to my Axis Lithuania thread? Thank you.

I'll get to that a bit later.

 

[WolfBear]

That assumes the stats are accurate today...
But yes I think so, since both currently and back then relied on statistic sampling based on surveys.


No, but once he has war powers he can shut down the isolationist movement (which happened IOTL right after Pearl Harbor), censor the press, and more freely engineer 'incidents' to create war. Hitler realized that too and instead of waiting for FDR to strike when he were ready Hitler declared war first so he could get the military jump on the US; that resulted in the '2nd happy time' of the uboat campaign.


I'll get to that a bit later.

Thanks. Anyway, what was the first happy time of the U-boat campaign?

 

[sillygoose]

Thanks. Anyway, what was the first happy time of the U-boat campaign?

In mid 1940 IIRC, it is on wikipedia under the battle of the Atlantic article.

 

[WolfBear]

@Zyobot 'AHC: Have a terrorist group successfully create a proto-state that lasts for at least a couple of years just like ISIS successfully managed to do in real life with the creation and 3.5-year-survival of the ISIS Caliphate'

Terrible AHC, I know, which is why I hope that it never actually occurs again in real life.

 

[sillygoose]

@Zyobot 'AHC: Have a terrorist group successfully create a proto-state that lasts for at least a couple of years just like ISIS successfully managed to do in real life with the creation and 3.5-year-survival of the ISIS Caliphate'

Terrible AHC, I know, which is why I hope that it never actually occurs again in real life.

Taliban in Afghanistan in the 1990s?

 

[WolfBear]

Taliban in Afghanistan in the 1990s?

Yeah, I was thinking of them, but I'm not sure if the US ever actually recognized them as a terrorist group. Still, they did engage in suicide bombings in their war against the US after the US invaded Afghanistan, so Yeah, they probably would be considered a terrorist group.

Anyway, who else? Boko Haram creating a proto-state in northern Nigeria?

Having this state survive and be taken over by fundamentalist religious terrorist lunatics at some point in time? :

Mahdist State - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org