For the Republic: A History of the Second American Civil War
- Thread starter The Angry Observer
- Start date
Patton is honestly a blast to write in this, especially because he’s politically very different than OTL, but still remains his very vulgar self.
He was, above all else, a warrior with convictions about duty to the government which he swore his oaths to, which essentially translates to him going with the flow on policy that doesn’t directly affect him and advocating for whatever policies gets him more men and more guns. Patton believed in the principle of going to war with the army you have, so he’ll take the girls, the gays, and anyone else able to pick up a gun and stack enemy bodies, he just needs permission to do so.
I personally attribute this to the habit of seeing in the rest of SACW TLs that it is assumed that, of course, the longing to be part of the same great country is so intense that all you need is to overthrow the rival government (in this case NatCorp ). And that, "as it should be," as soon as Washington DC falls, the rest of the NatCorp forces will throw down their weapons and Republicans and NatCorps will embrace each other like brothers and proclaim that America is united again... before deciding what they need to "show their strength" by attacking someone outsider (for example Germany). Basically a repeat of the end of the First American Civil War.
Yeaahhhh, not happening here. Oh, rest assured, America has its role to play in the coming Second World War, and it’s a big one (the largest industrial power on Earth can’t not have a big role in the largest conflict ever) but the US is not going to just pivot immediately out of a devastating civil war and into the global conflict like a HOI4 playthrough.
Oh I imagine the United States will have some role in WW2 and will make efforts to rebuild.
It is good to know that it will not be the usual thing in which they decide that from now on the new regime is going to adopt a foreign policy hostile to the rest of the world for "not supporting us", attacking a neighbor "to show that America is back"...
...and the less believable thing for me: the social tensions that caused the war have suddenly disappeared because each and every one of the survivors collectively agreed "let's hold hands as brothers and pretend that this enormous stupidity never happened, okay?"
Just read up to date with this timeline. Great! Really like the way you have made the struggle faced by the republicans and the internal battles of Smith's presidency. Other than the Soviets, Canadians and Axis are there any other foreign powers providing aid to either side? Scandinavian ore and industrial goods for the republicans? Whats mexico's position?
Overall a great read. Normally i read the personal stories in between the wider history and find them a bit lacking but with this timeline i read every personal story and anecdote .They really are well written and totally flesh out the world. Keep up the great work!
Overall a great read. Normally i read the personal stories in between the wider history and find them a bit lacking but with this timeline i read every personal story and anecdote .They really are well written and totally flesh out the world. Keep up the great work!
Thanks so much for reading. The powers we've mentioned are the main players, but a big part of the Republic's (the Smith Administration's) domestic strategy is removing tariff barriers to bolster its industry. The Scandinavian powers would be exporting to the Northeast, but to my understanding the Northeast has enough industrial power to provide for itself, generally. The trick is turning it from an industrial powerhouse into a war machine-- and manning that war machine while fighting the actual war. Mexico is neutral, but happy to collaborate with Long where it can be benefited. This should get an update soon.
Thanks! Thrilled to hear it!
Seems to me American women will be the new Amazon by war's end. That and the sucessful showing of LGBT+ soldiers will undoubtably improve their social standing in post-war America, although I doubt it'll be kumbaya. Perhaps we'll see them have a greater part in the future Civil Rights Movement.
Speaking about Civil Rights, what about the black situation up North? Undoubtably, I can see them sharing the same situation with the other two minorities.
Speaking about Civil Rights, what about the black situation up North? Undoubtably, I can see them sharing the same situation with the other two minorities.
The black experience in the war is something we agreed would warrant its own chapter entirely, and we’ll be covering all four parts of the US in it, so needless to say, complicated. What we have said thus far is that the Republican military is desegregated, and the Natcorps are instituting such a hardline version of Jim Crow that it’s more accurate to call it a form of Apartheid. We’ll elaborate more soon, especially on the situation in the South.
That is coming in our next visit to the Longist South, and for those who are curious, the Asian American situation in the Pacific states will also be touched upon when we next visit them
I can imagine that Asian Americans will have a complex situation where the Western States don't like them too much (because they didn't like them before the war) but the WS also don't want to be too aggressive with them because it might seem like they are aligning themselves with NatCorp segregationism, nor too nice so that it doesn't seem like they are too pro-Republic and that attracts a NatCorp attack.
The other thing to keep in mind is that Neutrality isn’t meaningfully conservative. Its standard-bearers in the Senate, like William Gibbs McAdoo and Hiram Johnson, are progressives and promoting expansive economic reforms in their states.
The point being that politically, the war has totally upended western politics. The Democratic and Republican Parties have been bisected into Republicanist and Neutrality alliances that are highly regional and demographic in nature, as well as frantically angling for power in an uncertain new environment.
Oh, and did I mention that the Secret Service and DOJ are both cheating to get outcomes that benefit them? Cuz they are. The west may be neutral, but it is certainly not peaceful.
I burst out laughing when I read that for the first time. Definitely something Patton would say.
So it seems that Natcorp America is returning to Gilded Age conditions.
Would that be an accurate description of normal/non-wealthy civilians living under the jackboot?
On a scale of "WWII Japanese American internment" to "Auschwitz Holocaust death sentence," how bad are the Natcorp prison camps?
Could we get an update on that?
Just wondering but what became of Alan Taft during the SACW, has he become an avid supporter of the NatCorp regime given his VERY reactionary views. Or has the war made him reevaluate his views given the war crimes committed by the NatCorp regime?
I agree in the question, because I have no idea who the hell "Alan Taft" is either. But usually what we see in these types of "the side that defends my political positions is committing heinous war crimes" cases is that one of two possibilities occurs.
A) "Alan Taft" (to use this character as an example) embraces the Nazi within him and aligns himself with NatCorp in the belief that "it is a necessary sacrifice to restore peace and social order."
B) "Alan Taft" will tell anyone who will listen that NatCorps are crazy people who are TOTALLY out of touch with their own political positions, and therefore there is NO conflict whatsoever between opposing NatCorp and continuing to hold his opinion the way he does it until now. Or that NatCorp are total hypocrites who are tarnishing the good name of their beliefs by using them as an excuse to commit crimes.
But what we never see is anyone deciding "Oh my god, everything I believed in is a load of lies and BS, how could I be so stupid, I'm going to renounce what I believe in and embrace the most diametrically opposed beliefs that exist." "
Robert Taft would not be a Natcorp ally, as far as I can tell. At this point, Taft is a former state legislator in Ohio, which is of course occupied. Taft was a staunch opponent of prohibition, supported secular education, and during his early career often clashed with the Klan of his state. So his agreements with Natcorpism would not go past economic matters. Even if they did, I don’t think he would join people like the Natcorps.
I don’t even think he’d support MacArthur’s economic “policies”. Taft actually was distrusted by his party’s Old Guard because he supported programs like housing for the poor. Taft heavily distrusted bureaucracy, which the Natcorps have in spades. There’s very little of Taft-ite small government conservatism in MacArthur’s regime, which rather predictably has embraced economic interventionism to win the war. Taft’s state is being brutalized by the Natcorps, and I don’t think he’d be complicit in it, which on its own means he was probably killed by Hoover early on.
Last edited:
In the sense that a small clique of tycoons own everything. Of course, it’s quite a bit worse, since Natcorp America is not a democracy. It’s a very brazen oligarchy where said clique just takes all the stuff they want. The Natcorp propaganda line of protecting the propertied order against socialism (and the Republican line of fighting for the common man against big business) thus becomes especially ironic, since MacArthur has probably done more to cajole, regulate, and even loot business— except the ones like Morgan, who he owes his power to. And even they have to pony up for the war.
This update certainly will come, and if all goes right it’ll be the next one we put out. The initial purpose of these camps is to provide free labor. They are work camps, and the regime’s main targets (organized labor, working-class people of all races) reflect this. They’re also a political weapon used to get rid of troublemakers. As time goes on, the misery of the camps becomes less about having factory fodder you don’t have to pay and more about inflicting suffering on the Glorious Leader’s enemies. This is heavily influenced by the personal neurosis of J. Edgar Hoover.
So, at this point, more like Soviet-style gulags rn?
And on that note, the likes of Rockefeller and co working for the Republicans makes this all the more ironic.