Culture of British America with no ARW?

Otto Kretschmer

Banned
What might be different in British America (US + Canada) if American Revolution never happened and it gained independence peacefully instead?

It would be a part of the Commonwealth for sure and the English monarch would be the head of state. The parliamentary system would look more like the British one.
 
N7Buck

N7Buck

Banned
Well when discussing the culture of America/British America it gets very technical. Because the OTL US has British culture even today, however it is a significant evolution, such as Anglo American culture, this is also true for the Dominions but they have had less cultural variation.

So it gets hard to determine "Britishness". Well what Britishness did America lack?
Parliamentary system (although Congress/Senate is based on Commons/Lords), Crowned Monarchy, British identity (rather than "Anglo" identity), Anglicanism (rather than Episcopalianism) & state church, rigid class system (although weak in Dominions),

Commonwealth would be butterflied. I think if the ARW was averted, Colonialism in British America would evolve into Nation Building, what we saw happening with Dominions growing up, but on a massive scale, as British America is large and populous.
 
Last edited:

The Tai-Pan

One thing to consider about this. Many people often look to Canada for signs of how the USA may develop or act. This is fair enough but is over-looking one big difference. The USA is, odds are, going to be huge and well populated. Simply compare raw numbers.

By 1860, the United Kingdom had roughly 27 million people living in it. Numbers for Canada are tricky (since this is before Canada was, well, Canada) but it was probably around, what, 4 million. Maybe 3?

The USA already had 31 million people. By 1860 it had surpassed the UK. Even if a colonial USA would be smaller then OTL it is going to out-pace and out grow the home country in a way that no white dominion ever did in OTL.
 

Hugh Third of Five

That's going to depend on region. Culture of (Anglophone) British America is probably roughly divided into two forms with the "border" being the Mason-Dixon line and Ohio River. You can hear this difference today in people's accents. The "northern" accent from the northern United States and Anglophone Canada vs the accent of the southern United States. Yes, there are regional variations of these but if you had to divide the accents of Anglophone North America into two categories, those are the ones you'd pick. Aside from that it's hard to tell because the butterflies would affect immigration, and even though immigrants to both the US and Canada tend to assimilate they also bring parts of their own culture, which become part of the mainstream: for example the American love of pizza is the result of Italian immigration. If you say "American food" to an American, most of us would think of things like hamburgers and hot dogs which have their roots in German immigrants. Country music would probably still exist because that came from a blending of Celtic folk music with west African folk music.

Also there's the issue of whether or not the lands the USA gained after independence are also part of British America. I can see the Louisiana Purchase and the territory from the Mexican-American War and Gadsen Purchase becoming part of British America along with Alaska. Having Hawaii become part of the British Empire seems likely but having it become part of British America does not seem likely.
PrinceofApathy said:
I do, but Americans don't as a collective.
Click to expand...
Heavily sweetened iced tea is very popular in the south.
 

jycee

Hugh Third of Five said:
Also there's the issue of whether or not the lands the USA gained after independence are also part of British America. I can see the Louisiana Purchase and the territory from the Mexican-American War and Gadsen Purchase becoming part of British America along with Alaska. Having Hawaii become part of the British Empire seems likely but having it become part of British America does not seem likely.
Heavily sweetened iced tea is very popular in the south.
Click to expand...

While the Lousiana territory is likely, everything else might be unecessary as BNA will also have all of present day Canada. There is little excuse to gain a Pacific coastline and add additional non-British subjects to the colonies. Texas, New Mexico, and Alta California might just be left to their own devices.
 

Claudius

Would the influx of immigrants from Germany, Scandinavia, etc. even take place ITTL? Perhaps North America will be used for unwanted Home Islands citizens such as the Irish, Scots and the poor and/or criminal rather than Australia.
 

Analytical Engine

The Tai-Pan said:
One thing to consider about this. Many people often look to Canada for signs of how the USA may develop or act. This is fair enough but is over-looking one big difference. The USA is, odds are, going to be huge and well populated. Simply compare raw numbers.

By 1860, the United Kingdom had roughly 27 million people living in it. Numbers for Canada are tricky (since this is before Canada was, well, Canada) but it was probably around, what, 4 million. Maybe 3?

The USA already had 31 million people. By 1860 it had surpassed the UK. Even if a colonial USA would be smaller then OTL it is going to out-pace and out grow the home country in a way that no white dominion ever did in OTL.
Click to expand...
Except this hypothetical "British America" most probably wouldn't be one unit.
 
Gabingston

Gabingston

Analytical Engine said:
Except this hypothetical "British America" most probably wouldn't be one unit.
Click to expand...
Fair point, instead of one British Dominion of America (or Commonwealth of America as I called it in my TL), they might separate Canada, New England, The Mid-Atlantic and The South into separate, more easily manageable dominions.
 
N7Buck

N7Buck

Banned
The Tai-Pan said:
Do you think so?
Click to expand...
Why would it be one unit. Then the dynamic would be British vs American interests, which Britain wouldn't want, nor would colonies want to lose their independence. Whereas Britain vs New England vs Virginia vs Quebec is in Britain's interests.

Claudius said:
Would the influx of immigrants from Germany, Scandinavia, etc. even take place ITTL? Perhaps North America will be used for unwanted Home Islands citizens such as the Irish, Scots and the poor and/or criminal rather than Australia.
Click to expand...
British America had preferential immigration laws for Protestants and a large German population in Pennsylvannia. So Northwestern Protestant immigration is similar to otl, other than the amount of migration and which colonies they go to. As a small colony is unlikely to accept as much migration as otl, and had various views on migration, New England colonies preferring British migrants.

jycee said:
While the Lousiana territory is likely, everything else might be unecessary as BNA will also have all of present day Canada. There is little excuse to gain a Pacific coastline and add additional non-British subjects to the colonies. Texas, New Mexico, and Alta California might just be left to their own devices.
Click to expand...
Well what if the settlers move to these sparsely populated regions of their own accord, and then push for separatism and annexation. When gold is discovered in California there would be a Americans settling there.

The Tai-Pan said:
The USA already had 31 million people. By 1860 it had surpassed the UK. Even if a colonial USA would be smaller then OTL it is going to out-pace and out grow the home country in a way that no white dominion ever did in OTL.
Click to expand...
I think this would change the fundamental nature of British colonialism, these "colonies" are going to see themselves as part of the core, and will want equal status.
 
SnolTwig

SnolTwig

Didn't the British ban colonization of the land west of the Appalachia and were the great lakes and Canada French speaking Catholics because IIRC Ontario only became anglicize because of the the British loyalist leaving the newly-independent US
 

Socrates

Claudius said:
Would the influx of immigrants from Germany, Scandinavia, etc. even take place ITTL? Perhaps North America will be used for unwanted Home Islands citizens such as the Irish, Scots and the poor and/or criminal rather than Australia.
Click to expand...
Almost certainly. Its the Catholic migration that might be slowed down.
 

Socrates

Sol was taken said:
Didn't the British ban colonization of the land west of the Appalachia and were the great lakes and Canada French speaking Catholics because IIRC Ontario only became anglicize because of the the British loyalist leaving the newly-independent US
Click to expand...
No, they had a temporary requirement that the land west of Appalachia be purchased off the natives in a consensual way. The main purpose was to instead encourage settlement along the coasts to prevent other countries getting a foothold. They absolutely would have been supportive of settlement of the interior in time.

And you are confusing News Brunswick and Ontario.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top