WI: The State of Liberia

[TFSoup]

Liberia in our timeline was a nation that essentially served as an exodus location for african-americans in the 1800's, and a nation that replicated a lot of America's founding values.

But what if it was bought as a State instead of set up to be it's own nation? How would the State of Liberia interact with the world, and the rest of the USA? What would it look lik in modern times?

 

[Mildtryth]

The most likely option i can see is Liberia going the way of Porto Rico - being kept as a territory indefinitely. Except that it'll be far more obvious that such a status is in purpose.

 

[TFSoup]

The most likely option i can see is Liberia going the way of Porto Rico - being kept as a territory indefinitely. Except that it'll be far more obvious that such a status is in purpose.

You're right, that is more realistic, but this is alternate history, so do we need to constrain ourselves?

 

[Philip]

You're right, that is more realistic, but this is alternate history, so do we need to constrain ourselves?

When do you propose Liberia would achieve statehood? Given that its raison d'etre was to remove free Blacks from the US, why would it be incorporated into the US?

 

[Don Corleone]

When do you propose Liberia would achieve statehood? Given that its raison d'etre was to remove free Blacks from the US, why would it be incorporated into the US?

Agree. It would mean two black Senators and however many Representatives. We'd have to get well into the 20th century before that would be acceptable.

Other problem is that Amero-Liberians are a very small fraction of the population. Most of the country is people whose ancestors have been in Africa all along.

 

[Concerned Brazilian]

Liberia would likely still be a territory as of 2023, due the distance and the race factor.

 

[Mildtryth]

You're right, that is more realistic, but this is alternate history, so do we need to constrain ourselves?

The thing is that you'd need race relationships in 19th century USA to be totally different for that premise to work - so different it might end up butterflying the existence of Liberia itself.

As far as early 19th century American society was concerned, free blacks were a problem - the prevailing opinion in both north and south was that blacks were inherently inferior to whites and could never be true American citizens. Then there was also the problem of freedmen aiding slave rebellions - the colonization effort was supposed to put a stop to that by throwing the "problem" elsewhere.

As things stood OTL, a Liberia as part of the USA was contradictory to the very reason for its existence. It's very doubtful that the idea of repatriating the freedmen would have come about in a more "harmonious" environment: it wasn't going to come from the blacks themselves - most of the free blacks in the USA then didn't want to go there. Marcus Garvey was still a century and many changed circumstances away.

And what happened in Liberia was a bunch of independent settlements (Monrovia, Maryland, Mississippi-in-Africa, Kentucky-in-Africa) coming together over time - the unification proccess wasn't really complete until at least 1857.

 

[Captain Jack]

My understanding is that Liberia’s status prior to declaring independence was a bit confused since it was a private colony governed by the American Colonization Society. I could see a scenario where Liberia runs into problems early on and the region is formally annexed by the US and governed as a territory. The President could simply appoint the Colonization Society’s local agent as the governor and otherwise leave them to run it independently as with OTL. Maybe the Colonization Society runs into financial trouble and goes bankrupt early on and needs government money to not abandon the colony. Alternatively we could imagine that another country shows interest in the region and causes trouble for the early settlements so annexation is a way to protect it and reserve the area for US colonization efforts.

Either way, I think the key is for Liberia to be treated as a territory held at arms length. It would assuage the fears of settlers or native Africans returning to the US since the government could control movement and it would fit with the paternalistic outlook of the colonization movement. The problem is the whole point of Liberia was to move free black people out of the US and create an independent state. If the US is governing the colony it defeats the purpose. That said, I can see a situation like I posited above (US appoints a governor from the Colonization Society and Liberia otherwise governs itself) becoming basically a status quo that people are discontented with but don’t have a good solution for. This situation muddles along until the civil war makes the situation unacceptable and Liberia chooses statehood over independence. This could be in the run up to the 1864 election when anti-slavery is more firmly wedded to the Union cause and the Republicans really want extra votes in the electoral college. More likely, I think, would be admission during the radical phase of Reconstruction when there was genuine support in Congress for equal civil rights and black senators and representatives were seated. If that window is missed I think Liberia stays a territory and basically parallels Puerto Rico’s trajectory.

 

[Evil Crusader]

You're right, that is more realistic, but this is alternate history, so do we need to constrain ourselves?

If we don't, then anything is possible and discussion shifts from why things went this way (and how those factors could instead lead to different outcomes) to let us make things go another way (regardless of plausibility).
Such discussion tends to be inherently poor because we either backtrack a lot to change stuff before the events and allow for the desired change, which can be a devil of its own (would a less racist USA, able to incorporate Liberia, actually create it in the first place? chances are it would not) or we're making things happen despite the changes (butterfly net) which quickly turns out very poor as different events poorly mash with leaving everything else running 'as expected' (the State of Liberia partaking in the Civil War that happens regardless, on the same timeframe, despite race relations necessarily evolving differently from the prerequisites, let alone the consequences, of the proposed change).
It sounds like a constraint only if you want to forcibly make X happen, otherwise it's more akin to a fun puzzle where you have ingredients, but attempt to reorder or swap them or, where possible, change them to come up with a different historical recipe.