Miscellaneous >1900 (Alternate) History Thread

What If beating of Rodney King not just caused 1992 LA riots
But sparked the nationwide racial movement and protest like OTL 2020? (This is at the edge of current politics I know, so I asking for the impact of 1990s only, don't really bring 2020 events into the picture)
What would TTL 1990s looks like?
 
How would a socialist America (democratic or dictatorial like the USSR) screw it up?

Well, Communist countries (USSR, Maoist China, and so on) tend to turn around and contrive all sorts of reasons to brutalize minorities.

Not sure what a DemSoc USSA would do, exactly, but I bet a dictatorial USSA would mirror OTL Communists in that regard. Maybe we got lucky IOTL, having never had to leave it up to a coin toss between the first option and the second.
 
How would a socialist America (democratic or dictatorial like the USSR) screw it up?
If it is democratic, in theory they could do better.

In practice, we will probably see a rewrite of "Jim Crow in red paint" where the Communist Party of America talks about the existence of "progressive races" and "reactionary races" that "coincidentally" align very closely with the racial categories of the "pre-revolutionary capitalist regime".

Or they could go completely like a story I can't remember the name of... and create their own version of "martial races" where minorities are used as shock troops to "crush the reactionaries" and prove their loyalty to the regime.

"Russia" and "the Russian Empire" are not the same thing.
Considering that custom and international law establish that the Russian Empire is the predecessor of Russia, and that it was considered Russia during its time of existence, considering them to be the same is not just something the Russians have pulled out of their asses.
 
Last edited:
If it is democratic, in theory they could do better.

In practice, we will probably see a rewrite of "Jim Crow in red paint" where the Communist Party of America talks about the existence of "progressive races" and "reactionary races" that "coincidentally" align very closely with the racial categories of the "pre-revolutionary capitalist regime".

Or they could go completely like a story I can't remember the name of... and create their own version of "martial races" where minorities are used as shock troops to "crush the reactionaries" and prove their loyalty to the regime. .
Sounds almost like the reverse of The Turner Diaries. Races the author hated are used bybthe regime in the novel to oppress the white population.
 
Sounds almost like the reverse of The Turner Diaries. Races the author hated are used by the regime in the novel to oppress the white population.
Yes, I also found it quite unpleasant when I saw that part. The worst thing is that the commentators defended it as justice when what seemed like the regime was simply committing acts of random terrorist violence using minorities to avoid getting their hands dirty... and now that you mention it, yes, it does seem similar too much to that, ugh.
 
I was wondering if anybody knows any plausible PoDs to unite the lowlands, or at least most of it, under the Netherlands post-1910 in a world where WW1 doesn't come to pass?
 
Last edited:
I was wondering if anybody knows any plausible PoDs to unite the lowlands, or at least most of it, under the Netherlands post-1910 without a world war breaking out to worry about?
I found this interesting little tidbit on Wikipedia that is exactly what you are talking about.
In 1919 the Dutch military command made far-reaching preparations to invade Belgium. It was intended as a preventive attack because of Belgium's designs on Zeelandic Flandersand parts of Dutch Limburg. Brussels sought these territories to be able to better defend the country. After the allies - chiefly Great Britain and France - turned against the Belgian demands the direct military danger disappeared.[2]
The source for this is a Belgian article that is locked behind a pay wall so I only have this to work off of but still it is quite interesting that the Netherlands was planning to possibly invade Belgium back in 1919.
 
What if Hong Kong had compulsory military service? It seems to be a common practice in the East Asian tigers- South Korea and Taiwan both have it for self-explanatory reasons, but Singapore does as well. If there was this sort of martial tradition in HK, how would that affect the culture of the place up to and past 1997? Would there be less organized crime or would the Triads be militarized?
The Triads being more militarized would be the most noticeable impact.

Though ATL HK probably wouldn't be recognizable to OTL, since that would get rid of OLT HK's laissez faire economy (you'd have to spend a lot of money on defense, not to mention taking the entire, say 18-22 year old male population, out of economic circulation)

Also, I assume the conscripts are just being used for territorial defense?
 
Though ATL HK probably wouldn't be recognizable to OTL, since that would get rid of OLT HK's laissez faire economy (you'd have to spend a lot of money on defense, not to mention taking the entire, say 18-22 year old male population, out of economic circulation)
I sort of assumed that the British would foot the bill, somehow. At least partially. But maybe it would be a limited national service with very generous exceptions, like Taiwan's modern joke of conscription?
Also, I assume the conscripts are just being used for territorial defense?
I suppose so. I'm not sure why Singapore has compulsory service, for instance.
 
I found this interesting little tidbit on Wikipedia that is exactly what you are talking about.

The source for this is a Belgian article that is locked behind a pay wall so I only have this to work off of but still it is quite interesting that the Netherlands was planning to possibly invade Belgium back in 1919.
HILVERSUM, APRIL 15. The Dutch army was on the verge of invading Belgium in 1919. The army leadership, which had considerable power shortly after World War I (1914-1918), made far-reaching military preparations for this. Military historian H. Bijkerk, working on a dissertation on the introduction of a new army system in the Netherlands, concluded this in 1922. Bijkerk revealed his findings yesterday morning on the VPRO radio program OVT.
Bijkerk described the planned action as a "pre-emptive attack" on Belgium, which was itself preparing for military action. The Belgians, aiming to better defend their national borders, claimed Zeeuws-Vlaanderen and parts of Limburg, hoping the Allies would support their claims at the Versailles peace negotiations.
Minister Alting von Geusau (Defense) was informed of these attack plans, according to Bijkerk. The historian based his findings on secret correspondence discovered in the disorganized archives of the General Staff of the former Ministry of War. The documents highlighted the tensions between the Netherlands and Belgium immediately after the end of World War I on Nov. 11, 1918.
Among his findings, Bijkerk discovered a secret memorandum from the Commander of the Field Army, General Burger, addressed to the Acting Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, General Pop. Burger wrote that the army's full attention should be focused on the South, preparing to strike Belgium with maximum force and speed. In a written response, Pop agreed with Burger's plans.
The uncovered plans detailed deploying three of four divisions in Brabant along the border, with the objective of rapidly advancing as far as Antwerp and Brussels. The immediate military threat subsided only after the Allied powers, particularly France and Great Britain, openly opposed Belgium's territorial claims. Notably, after World War I, France regained Alsace-Lorraine from Germany, which Germany had seized in 1870.

From the article. Ignoring the fact there is a guy called Burger that's pretty interesting, looks like Belgium being the aggressor had some precedent on that wiki page, considering their King wanted to invade decades prior as well. Never knew there was that much beef, lol.
Belgian King Leopold II planned to invade the Netherlands in 1854. After consulting with the French Emperor Napoleon III, Leopold refrained from the invasion, according to documents that have surfaced in the Belgian Royal Archives.

The Netherlands had colonies, and King Leopold II of Belgium wanted them. That was the main reason for him to plot an attack on the Netherlands in 1854. Belgian journalist and researcher Kris Clerckx discovered the plans in the Belgian Royal Archives while researching for a book on Leopold II, reports the Nederlands Dagblad.

Belgian spies had already been sent ahead by Leopold. They reported that the Dutch army had only 1397 officers, also largely old men. The Belgians were able to field 2127 officers.

In addition, one-third of the Dutch Defense spending at the time went to the navy, an armed force component with which the Dutch would not be able to do anything at all in the event of an invasion by the Belgians.

If the attackers from the south also had the support of the Catholic Dutch population below the rivers, the attack could succeed, the spies believed.

Leopold II drew up a plan of attack. In a lightning attack, he would march all at once to Amsterdam "so that the news of the attack would come simultaneously with the news of the surrender," and then move to Utrecht via Weesp, Naarden and Blaukapel. The ultimate goal was the conquest of at least the Netherlands south of the great rivers.

He had the greatest fear of the Dutch defenses, which were in a well-maintained condition. Also because of their alleged patriotism, the Dutch could still prove to be a tough opponent.

In the end, the attack never went through. Leopold wanted to make sure that other European powers would not intervene in his attack. He therefore sent his top diplomat in France to see Emperor Napoleon III. After that conversation, Leopold decided to shelve his nefarious plan of attack.
From the article linked about the 1854 preparations which lost steam due to Napoleon not backing it.

Wonder if anything would've pushed Belgium to make a move on their claims without WW1 and if anything could've instigated a real conflict between the two that might see a Belgium annexation and partition?
 
Wonder if anything would've pushed Belgium to make a move on their claims without WW1 and if anything could've instigated a real conflict between the two that might see a Belgium annexation and partition?
Simple. Make the Belgian ultranationalists consider that getting Rwanda-Burundi is a small reward for everything they went through in the First World War.

As they begin to believe they "deserve" greater compensation, he adds that they believe Holland should have been punished for its neutrality ("They lived well while we starved and were murdered by the Germans").

The result of this is a Belgium that believes it deserves to possess the Dutch colonies and be compensated territorially at Holland's expense to "punish" Holland for her neutrality and "compensate" Belgium for the "mutilated victory" they gained.

Of course, I don't think this will end well if Belgium decides to attack the Netherlands...
 
Would a surviving Ottoman Empire be possible with a post-1900 POD, or were the problems that led to it's downfall already too far advanced by that point?

Kinda secondary and ignoring lots of butterflies - would the Ottomans be under the same decolonization pressure 1950s Europeans felt with Africa or was their relationship with sub-territories (Syria for example) too different to be reasonably compared?
 
On the campaign trail of the 1912 Presidential Election, John Schrank stalked and ultimately shot former President Theodore Roosevelt who was in the process of giving a speech. The only reason why Roosevelt wasn’t fatally injured was due to his glasses case and speech providing enough protection to stop the bullet from being fatal.

But… what if Schrank had been luckier and managed to kill the Bull Moose? What would the end result be on the campaign itself? What would the reactions be from both Taft and Wilson? Is there an emergency meeting with the Republicans and Progressives to try and hammer out a coalition putting Hiram Johnson on as Taft’s running mate?
 
Top