Jump to content

If the Japanese won World War 2 how would the United States be changed?


Mark Rand

Recommended Posts

Hm.  Something I'd not considered.

 

The British Empire still falls apart;  that's a given.  It can't survive.  OK, so...what happens with Canada and US/Canada relations?  There's no NATO.  There's no history of bailing out the Empire by the US.   They are still neighbors, but without as much joint history.

 

HECK...ya know, we could argue that Canada industrializes to a higher degree, as *they* have to intervene to help the Old Country more.  So the big iron mines in and around the Great Lakes feed Canadian growth to a higher degree.  The US steel industry was rebuilt for/by WW II, as I recall;  it was in need of modernization.  Well, now that takes place more in Canada, and...ok, perhaps they're not the dominant industrial power on the continent, but the gap is much smaller.  I'm thinking US/Canada relations are largely.....testy.  Perhaps cautious, from the Canadian perspective, might be a better word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

Hm.  Something I'd not considered.

 

The British Empire still falls apart;  that's a given.  It can't survive.  OK, so...what happens with Canada and US/Canada relations?  There's no NATO.  There's no history of bailing out the Empire by the US.   They are still neighbors, but without as much joint history.

 

HECK...ya know, we could argue that Canada industrializes to a higher degree, as *they* have to intervene to help the Old Country more.  So the big iron mines in and around the Great Lakes feed Canadian growth to a higher degree.  The US steel industry was rebuilt for/by WW II, as I recall;  it was in need of modernization.  Well, now that takes place more in Canada, and...ok, perhaps they're not the dominant industrial power on the continent, but the gap is much smaller.  I'm thinking US/Canada relations are largely.....testy.  Perhaps cautious, from the Canadian perspective, might be a better word.

 

In a "Broken America" I could see the North East industrial corridor would likely ally with Canada. The neo-Confederacy would be looking for allies... would they or the Union be more likely to ally with a collapsing British empire? It is a fascinating world, a post war America that is not the center of post-war rebuilding makes everything more interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RDU Neil said:

 

In a "Broken America" I could see the North East industrial corridor would likely ally with Canada. The neo-Confederacy would be looking for allies... would they or the Union be more likely to ally with a collapsing British empire? It is a fascinating world, a post war America that is not the center of post-war rebuilding makes everything more interesting. 

 

Whichever way floats your boat.  Alliance is plausible, but so is revulsion on the Canadian part, and jealousy on the US part.  Canada can undercut Pittsburgh;  Birmingham's a mess.  Quite plausible that Canada treats the US like the little brother.  But yours is fine too.  

 

And thank you.  I think this would be an excellent superheroes environment, and an *awesome* street-level game setting.  We never once really got into powers once we started on the Sino-Japan alliance path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real problem with Canada becoming the big brother is that Canada's population was so small compared to the US during the WWII era.

 

You could fix part of that problem by making Canada the most popular destination for refugees from Europe and Britain. Canada has a large French-speaking population already and plenty of land. The new refugees would probably be the elite and the most skilled since there wouldn't be shipping available to evacuate everyone. Most of the refugees from the Asian theater would probably go to Australia while most of the refugees from the European and Middle East theater would go to Canada. After Germany invades South America, Canada would probably even get refugees from that part of the world.

 

Also in the original timeline, the US occupied Greenland, which was owned by Denmark, in order to keep the Germans from claiming it (the US also offered to outright purchase Greenland in 1946, which would have been very interesting if the sale had gone through). In your timeline, you'd need to have Canada occupy it instead and claim permanent ownership.

 

Iceland was also part of Denmark at the beginning of WWII and didn't claim independence until 1944 even though Denmark was invaded by Germany in 1940. I could see the Allies taking full control of Iceland as the war started to go badly then Canada inheriting it as the last standing Allied power in that part of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, archer said:

Most of the refugees from the Asian theater would probably go to Australia

 

The probable effect of this would be to reduce Australia's population below it's Real World(tm) levels. There weren't all that many white settlers in the Asian colonies. The biggest influx would be from India (including Pakistan and Bangladesh).

 

There would also be a narrowing of the source of immigrants. The British would probably be even more strongly represented than in reality, while the Dutch, French and Portuguese might be more prominent too. In theory, there might even be some Americans, migrating from the Philippines! But the mass immigration that occurred from other parts of Europe would be cut off. It would be harder to get a decent cup of coffee in this version of Australia.

 

There's a good chance that the White Australia Policy would still be in place, although there might be exceptions for Japanese business people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, archer said:

The real problem with Canada becoming the big brother is that Canada's population was so small compared to the US during the WWII era.

 

You could fix part of that problem by making Canada the most popular destination for refugees from Europe and Britain. Canada has a large French-speaking population already and plenty of land. The new refugees would probably be the elite and the most skilled since there wouldn't be shipping available to evacuate everyone. Most of the refugees from the Asian theater would probably go to Australia while most of the refugees from the European and Middle East theater would go to Canada. After Germany invades South America, Canada would probably even get refugees from that part of the world.

 

Also in the original timeline, the US occupied Greenland, which was owned by Denmark, in order to keep the Germans from claiming it (the US also offered to outright purchase Greenland in 1946, which would have been very interesting if the sale had gone through). In your timeline, you'd need to have Canada occupy it instead and claim permanent ownership.

 

Iceland was also part of Denmark at the beginning of WWII and didn't claim independence until 1944 even though Denmark was invaded by Germany in 1940. I could see the Allies taking full control of Iceland as the war started to go badly then Canada inheriting it as the last standing Allied power in that part of the world.

 

 

Greenland and Iceland...makes sense, altho Iceland might go to Germany as well.  Their westernmost base, useful as an advance warning post.  EDIT:  also a staging base for North Atlantic subs to operate from.

Why would Germany bother with South America?  At least military intervention.  Political influence, puppet states...sure.  But what'll be much more important...and EASIER...is the Middle East, once the oil fields are discovered.  Germany's got a lot on their plate as is, trying to retain much of central Europe and the eastern Mediterranean (and possibly north Africa), and retain forces on the eastern border to keep a way eye on Russia.  Military occupation across an ocean is hard to pull off, if the native populace of the occupied lands are at all feisty.  In South America...they'd be feisty, and I think, better organized than, say, India vs. the British.

I'm also figuring that long term stability is largely inversely proportional to the degree of military action.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...