Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

[Zyobot]

I finished a TL where Dewey actually defeats Truman several months ago, it's in my sig. However, his victory there was a pretty narrow one. Having him win by a bigger margin than he did in my TL wouldn't be too difficult, given Truman's unpopularity going into the election - a combination of Dewey campaigning aggressively even earlier (IOTL a mix of overconfidence and learning the wrong lessons from his 1944 run against FDR led him to run an anemic, substance-free campaign that was drowning in platitudes) and delaying the economic recovery from the post-WW2 recession until after the election's done should make '48 into the proper Republican blowout everyone not named Harry S. Truman initially expected.

I've seen that before and have read some of the corresponding entries, yes. It did, however, get me thinking about what a much more lopsided election would've looked like, given how Dewey only won in the Electoral College (and by the skin of his teeth, at that!). Pair that with OTL Truman's better, but still-modest victory in actual 1948, and it was only a matter of time before someone asked what a landslide for either candidate might look like.

To that end, I'd have heartily suggested having Eisenhower run on the GOP ticket four years early, but have also heard multiple claims about him being wishy-washy until 1952 (courtesy of Douglas MacArthur scaring the daylights out of everyone else). As such, I wonder if convincing him to challenge Truman early and swipe the Republican nomination from a jealous Dewey would be enough? At the very least, I think he'd be able to a) hit Dewey on losing the first time around and b) frame him as a civilian unprepared to face the various martial challenges of the post-war world (Ike would probably emphasize his experience in handling the latter, at least). Of course, even if Ike '48 is too unlikely, having him off against Truman in '52 is practically guaranteed to hand him a landslide on a silver platter (if only after a four-year wait).

 

[Circle of Willis]

I've seen that before and have read some of the corresponding entries, yes. It did, however, get me thinking about what a much more lopsided election would've looked like, given how Dewey only won in the Electoral College (and by the skin of his teeth, at that!). Pair that with OTL Truman's better, but still-modest victory in actual 1948, and it was only a matter of time before someone asked what a landslide for either candidate might look like.

To that end, I'd have heartily suggested having Eisenhower run on the GOP ticket four years early, but have also heard multiple claims about him being wishy-washy until 1952 (courtesy of Douglas MacArthur scaring the daylights out of everyone else). As such, I wonder if convincing him to challenge Truman early and swipe the Republican nomination from a jealous Dewey would be enough? At the very least, I think he'd be able to a) hit Dewey on losing the first time around and b) frame him as a civilian unprepared to face the various martial challenges of the post-war world (Ike would probably emphasize his experience in handling the latter, at least). Of course, even if Ike '48 is too unlikely, having him off against Truman in '52 is practically guaranteed to hand him a landslide on a silver platter (if only after a four-year wait).

I think Eisenhower would only enter the race if it looked like MacArthur or Robert Taft (a staunch conservative isolationist) were going to get the Republican nomination. Stopping Taft, who was an early opponent of NATO, was what motivated Eisenhower to fight for the nomination in 1952 after all. In '48 Taft was Dewey's main competitor; have Harold Stassen not enter this particular primary season, so that Taft isn't forced into a fight for his life in his own home state of Ohio, or still enter but then agree to throw in behind Taft to stop Dewey later on (that could be hard, Stassen was an interventionist and fairly economically liberal while Taft was the leader of the isolationist faction and a staunch economic conservative) and his chances might well look good enough, while Dewey's sink enough, that Eisenhower agrees to being drafted by his supporters in the GOP instead of refusing them that year (as he did historically).

 

[Zyobot]

I think Eisenhower would only enter the race if it looked like MacArthur or Robert Taft (a staunch conservative isolationist) were going to get the Republican nomination. Stopping Taft, who was an early opponent of NATO, was what motivated Eisenhower to fight for the nomination in 1952 after all. In '48 Taft was Dewey's main competitor; have Harold Stassen not enter this particular primary season, so that Taft isn't forced into a fight for his life in his own home state of Ohio, or still enter but then agree to throw in behind Taft to stop Dewey later on (that could be hard, Stassen was an interventionist and fairly economically liberal while Taft was the leader of the isolationist faction and a staunch economic conservative) and his chances might well look good enough, while Dewey's sink enough, that Eisenhower agrees to being drafted by his supporters in the GOP instead of refusing them that year (as he did historically).

I see. Thanks for narrowing down the PoD to a more specific cause, as opposed to just shoeing in Ike for whatever reason.

As such, maybe dissuading Stassen from entering the race is the best bet, leaving Dewey and Taft to fight it out in the primaries, only for both of them to be swatted aside by Eisenhower and forced to endorse him in the spirit of maintaining in-party loyalty (though Taft may decline to do so). With "I like Ike!" becoming his trademark campaign slogan four years early and the already-unpopular Truman facing Democratic disunity over his civil rights platform, the GOP blowout that was erroneously predicted for OTL 1948 becomes a reality ITTL.

What might such an election map look like, I wonder? I'd have suggested something akin to the OTL 1952 (or even '56) election results, but then a) I don't know enough about individual states' turnout demographics and general political climates to predict which ones would lean into which columns and b) Ike's opponent being the unpopular underdog himself may make the map look more like a Red reflection of 1932 than his OTL victories ever did.

 

[Circle of Willis]

The 1952 map, plus MO/TX/OK but minus LA, AL, MS and SC (taken by Thurmond, as they were historically) sounds about right to me. If nothing else, unless he falls deathly ill or something we can expect Truman to fight back ferociously given that that's part of how he managed to turn '48 around historically, and while it wouldn't be enough to save him against Eisenhower his efforts it (as well as his high popularity in Missouri, his homestate, plus Texas and Oklahoma where he performed best historically) will likely cushion the devastating blow for him somewhat.

 

[Zyobot]

The 1952 map, plus MO/TX/OK but minus LA, AL, MS and SC (taken by Thurmond, as they were historically) sounds about right to me. If nothing else, unless he falls deathly ill or something we can expect Truman to fight back ferociously given that that's part of how he managed to turn '48 around historically, and while it wouldn't be enough to save him against Eisenhower his efforts it (as well as his high popularity in Missouri, his homestate, plus Texas and Oklahoma where he performed best historically) will likely cushion the devastating blow for him somewhat.

Having done some math, Eisenhower losing those four states subtracts 38 electoral votes, while his gains in the other three counterbalances this by adding 48 to his tally. Which gives him a net gain of 10 electoral votes, bringing his total to 452-79 (assuming the electors vote correspondingly, anyway). Even if a few defect from Ike's side, though, it's still a smashing victory against Truman and soundly shows that he can win where Dewey can't (and ITTL, has no chance to).

For a proper rerun of first-time FDR's blowout, I wonder if tweaking the 1952 election by having Truman hang on by a thread through primary season before facing Eisenhower in the general would give The General his landslide? If that's not enough to effectuate a Red reflection of the 1932 election results (if not necessarily with corresponding GOP wins in down-ballot races), then I don't know what is.

 

[TheRomanSlayer]

An unusual WI: Ahmet Pasha, who IOTL became the self-declared Sultan of Egypt because he didn’t become Grand Vizier as Pargalı Ibrahim Pasha was appointed that position instead, becomes the Grand Vizier instead. While Ibrahim Pasha does not rise as quickly as possible, that might also allow him to survive a bit longer. Presumably, Ahmet Pasha would have become an ally of Hürrem Sultan.

 

[Zyobot]

'No French Academy'.

As I understand it, the French language has long been centrally regulated by this body. In addition to streamlining grammar and "proper usage" of the language, it also seems to be known for railing against loanwords and other foreign expressions that have made inroads into the speech patterns of everyday Francophones. Given its distaste for Anglicisms, I imagine that there's quite a contrast with the open, laissez-faire lexical hodgepodge that is English (though I personally wonder if there's considerable "enrichment" it missed out on, by discouraging the incorporation of foreign vocabulary). Hence, this proposed PoD.

 

[Bassoe]

The vikings are very unlikely to replicate Cortez's success, as the tech difference is lesser.

Depends, do they still have god on their side, specifically Papa Nurgle?

 

[raharris1973]

An interesting single divergence for a Central America story might be Europeans having a more accurate estimate of the Earth's diameter. If the Atlantic and Pacific were one vast hemisphere spanning ocean they could not attempt to sail it unless the people interested in spices talked to the people interested in fish who knew about Newfoundland and if they did they would start exploring in the north where they knew there was land to resupply at not at the latitude they expected to find China on. Nor if they knew they'd have to build up a waypoint colony for resupply would they have likely started as early since it would cost more.

This would give the Nuhuatl peoples more time to advance and the Mexica were not as I understand things at the forefront of developing bronze. I forget which neighbor had started producing bronze very recently in archeological terms at the time of the Spanish conquest, but one of them had. Instead of the Spanish showing up in the early 16th century it could have been the English or Dutch or French showing up in the late 16th or early 17th century to find a bronze age federation fresh off liberating themselves instead of a stone age empire. Or maybe the Aztecs would have clamped down before their neighbors figured out you could use bronze for weapons or it just takes longer than they have and it's just different Europeans showing up into the same situation.

Would *love* to see this one developed. As for "Europeans having a more accurate estimate of the Earth's diameter." Most of those who contemplated the question, probably did have more accurate estimates than Columbus. The PoD is just no on ever patronizing a voyage direct to the alleged latitudes of Japan/Cipangu based on Colombus's gross underestimate or any similar one.

 

[Buba]

I'm fairly sure that the Earth's diametre was correctly estimated by 1492, it being surmised that Cristoforo Colombo either:
- made a personal boo-boo, bringing shame to his tutors
or
- was lying to the Catholic Kings' face in order to obtain funding (a practice known to scholars since the dawn of time)

 

[Zyobot]

'No French Academy'.

As I understand it, the French language has long been centrally regulated by this body. In addition to streamlining grammar and "proper usage" of the language, it also seems to be known for railing against loanwords and other foreign expressions that have made inroads into the speech patterns of everyday Francophones. Given its distaste for Anglicisms, I imagine that there's quite a contrast with the open, laissez-faire lexical hodgepodge that is English (though I personally wonder if there's considerable "enrichment" it missed out on, by discouraging the incorporation of foreign vocabulary). Hence, this proposed PoD.

Doing the opposite with a universal Germanic language now, how about a 'State-Sponsored English Academy'?

Checking Wiki, there seems to have been a number of possible, widely dispersed PoDs that might allow for this if done right. The most recent of these serious proposals, it seems, emerged in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. John Adams, for example, once penned a letter to the Second Continental Congress that floated the idea of a federally backed English Academy once the war was won. Judging by the wording of the corresponding transcript I found, I've a feeling that its blatant support for Anglophone centralism may have contributed to their liberty-minded OTL decision to reject Adams' proposal. As such, I wonder if having him word it with much less proud Federalist appraisal, as well as acquiesce to official protection of minority languages--and, perhaps, (reluctantly) agree that such an academy merely set "guidelines" rather than hard-and-fast rules, in possible follow-up discussions--would make the PoD more likely. There's a risk of it fading over time before being dissolved completely, of course, but an English Academy that exists briefly before dissipating is still more influential than an English Academy that doesn't exist at all.

If not that, then maybe the AH scenario sketched out by @Circle of Willis in response to my 'More Germanic English Language' proposal could lead to England establishing a central language authority fairly early on. Indeed, remaining proudly Anglo-Saxon after beating back repeated foreign incursions may make linguistic purism more fashionable, giving nationalists more momentum to keep it Germanic for a good while longer. Whether ATL English (which I refer to as "Anglish" to distinguish it from its thoroughly Latinized OTL counterpart) will eventually shed this purism, courtesy of possible British imperialism also leading to mass-borrowing from other languages down the line, is too far outside of my wheelhouse to answer.

 

[Atarlost]

I'm fairly sure that the Earth's diametre was correctly estimate by 1492, it beng surmised that Cristoforo Colombo either:
- made a personal boo-boo, bringing shame to his tutors
- was lying to the Catholic Kings' face in order to obtain funding (a practice known to scholars since the dawn of time)

The correct estimate wasn't generally enough known for the Catholic King to know better. I've been under the impression there were both correct and incorrect estimates going around with most people lacking the mathematical education to guess which was which.

If Columbus didn't believe his own estimate he would have taken the money and scarpered to somewhere it could be spent like a proper scam artist, not sailed west with too little food and water to reach the land he expected.

 

[Zyobot]

'Blue Dog Dubya'.

In less pithy terms, what if George Bush Jr. became a conservative Democrat? Ideologically, he'd be cut from the same cloth as OTL Bill Clinton, eventually becoming a prominent member of an emergent Blue Dog Coalition or some ATL equivalent. Maybe he'd even become president ITTL, just to see what his attempts to promote Third-Way centrism look like on the national level.

 

[raharris1973]

If Columbus didn't believe his own estimate he would have taken the money and scarpered to somewhere it could be spent like a proper scam artist, not sailed west with too little food and water to reach the land he expected.

You gotta admit Buba, he's got you cold with this logic.

 

[Atarlost]

'Blue Dog Dubya'.

In less pithy terms, what if George Bush Jr. became a conservative Democrat? Ideologically, he'd be cut from the same cloth as OTL Bill Clinton, eventually becoming a prominent member of an emergent Blue Dog Coalition or some ATL equivalent. Maybe he'd even become president ITTL, just to see what his attempts to promote Third-Way centrism look like on the national level.

I think this would require other changes. For him to be a Democrat being an oil man would have to not be an unforgivable sin. I think the climate change lobby would have had to be publicly excoriated when they switched from global cooling to global warming or after the hockey stick model was shown to make hockey sticks out of random noise.

 

[stevep]

I think this would require other changes. For him to be a Democrat being an oil man would have to not be an unforgivable sin. I think the climate change lobby would have had to be publicly excoriated when they switched from global cooling to global warming or after the hockey stick model was shown to make hockey sticks out of random noise.

I don't know as at times the Democrats have been very conservative themselves. Possibly if for whatever reason they had never broken with most of the old south you could have a basis for a conservative Democratic candidate, albeit you would probably need to go back before he himself was born.

Or he could simply have a Paulian conversion, albeit that's likely to make him unpopular with many in both parties, the Republicans as he's seen as a traitor the Democrats as an untrustworthy incomer.

 

[Zyobot]

I don't know as at times the Democrats have been very conservative themselves. Possibly if for whatever reason they had never broken with most of the old south you could have a basis for a conservative Democratic candidate, albeit you would probably need to go back before he himself was born.

Or he could simply have a Paulian conversion, albeit that's likely to make him unpopular with many in both parties, the Republicans as he's seen as a traitor the Democrats as an untrustworthy incomer.

Definitely aware that the Southern Democrats were the conservative wing of the party, though little of what I read really tells of their economic views? According to some Wiki reading I've been doing (which is more about economic development than actual policy), the post-war South tended to ignore commercial interests, and any fiscally non-conservative stances this might've engendered would've likely been buttressed by the outpouring of federal aid via the New Deal.

Having said that, I'd think that having a less agrarian and more pro-business South would make at least the Democrats' southern base more in line with OTL Republicans as of the last few decades, though I was more thinking that the party as a whole would still remain left-wing (with Bush embodying a particularly conservative bloc of it, similar to Clinton and the Blue Dog Coalition IOTL).

 

[stevep]

Definitely aware that the Southern Democrats were the conservative wing of the party, though little of what I read really tells of their economic views? According to some Wiki reading I've been doing (which is more about economic development than actual policy), the post-war South tended to ignore commercial interests, and any fiscally non-conservative stances this might've engendered would've likely been buttressed by the outpouring of federal aid via the New Deal.

Having said that, I'd think that having a less agrarian and more pro-business South would make at least the Democrats' southern base more in line with OTL Republicans as of the last few decades, though I was more thinking that the party as a whole would still remain left-wing (with Bush embodying a particularly conservative bloc of it, similar to Clinton and the Blue Dog Coalition IOTL).

Yes once FDR's linked up with the urban workers of the north to check at least elements of big business and then Johnson has started fighting Jim Crow its difficult seeing the party staying on the right of the political spectrum. However a moderate party and slightly right of centre Bush could be a good combination to counter the rightward swing of the Republicans under Reagan and his successors.

Mind you unless his father's had a different life for George Jr. to join the Democrats would mean a clear break with his father and probably a good bit of his family.

 

[Zyobot]

Yes once FDR's linked up with the urban workers of the north to check at least elements of big business and then Johnson has started fighting Jim Crow its difficult seeing the party staying on the right of the political spectrum. However a moderate party and slightly right of centre Bush could be a good combination to counter the rightward swing of the Republicans under Reagan and his successors.

Mind you unless his father's had a different life for George Jr. to join the Democrats would mean a clear break with his father and probably a good bit of his family.

His personal development is a niggling problem here, yes. I'm not sure what'd cause him to break from Bush Sr., other than actually serving in Vietnam and coming back a changed man (as I once saw someone else suggest). Maybe this would make him more anti-war than his OTL self ultimately proved to be, depending on the conclusions he draws from his experiences?

If he survives and develops those views accordingly, he may join up with the Democrats once he returns home. However, the rightward swing of the country and seeing the Democrats lose big-time to Reagan may convince him that the best way forward for his party is Third-Way centrism, similar to the kind espoused by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair.

 

[Zyobot]

'Communist Joseph Goebbels'.

IOTL, he was an ardent Nazi who nonetheless had more "socialistic" economic leanings, unlike the pro-business elements of the party who ultimately won out. In this case, those leanings would metastasize early to the extent he becomes a card-carrying Red active in Weimar Germany (though he may retain his anti-Semitism, albeit via more of a "greedy, born-capitalist Jews!" framework).