What would have been the long-term consequences of annexing Mexico entirely in 1848?
emperorharry86 said:What would have been the long-term consequences of annexing Mexico entirely in 1848?
Redbeard said:Who annexing Mexico?
Regards
Steffen Redbeard
David S Poepoe said:Take a look in the Archives, thats what we have the archives for. This WI has been discussed before.
robertp6165 said:You know, I really don't understand why some of us insist on saying things like this to someone who is posting a thread on the board. Let's face it...just about every major historical "what if" there is has been discussed in some form at some point in the past on this board. Unless we want to get down to things like "What if mint flavored toothpaste had never been invented", some historical events will likely be discussed more than once. If you don't feel like discussing it again, then don't chide the person who took the initiative to post the thread...go look at another topic that you find interesting. Some of us might find it interesting to discuss it again.
Chris said:Several things come to mind:
The US would gain a state or three with larger non-white populations. That would force some kind of equality legislation through america, at least in those three states.
Chris said:The US would be closer to the small states of central america and more able to push them inot US patterns. US might annex them as well, one by one.
Chris said:Mexico would probabuly lose a generation of cruoppt landlords/prists.
Chris said:France would have to find somewhere else to meddle with in 1864. Might avert the franco-prussian war entirly.
Chris said:CSA would lose the war sooner with union supporters to the east, not to mention possible mexican populations in Texas.
Anthony Appleyard said:The previous thread on this subject said that in 1848 the north of Mexico was thinly populated and would have been quickly swamped with Americans and that the most trouble from resisting Mexicans would be in the old Aztec heartland.
emperorharry86 said:What would have been the long-term consequences of annexing Mexico entirely in 1848?
David S Poepoe said:Also there is no guarantee that Southern secession wouldn't also cause Mexican secession.
tetsu-katana said:How much of the former Mexico would likely secede? Would California and New Mexico go, or just the ones south of the OTL border? If they got their independance, would Mexico later be angry with the CSA for taking Texas?
tetsu-katana said:On a different note, what would the powers of Europe do if the USA did something so imperialistic?
Admiral Matt said:The US becomes substantially poorer trying to raise the living standards of Mexicans, building roads and railroads, providing education to all the illiterate peasants (in English, of course), and brutally suppressing rebellion by the above-mentioned peasants.
In the meantime, we develop a viscious and despicable secret-police, initially to nip Mexican revolts in the bud. Of course, it's only a matter of time before it is also used on English speakers - communists or anarchists, I'd bet.
The southern states probably manage to use the never-ending violence in Mexico to their advantage, and extend slave states slowly down the east coast. A literacy test may be a requirement for voting in these states. It will, of course, be in English.
I doubt the southern states would need to secede for a while. Slavery is no longer the nation's big issue. Certainly no-one like Lincoln would be elected since he would be calling for giving rights to the Mexicans, or letting them go, which no-one would support.