What if...? #4

What if the American Revolution failed? How would the world be different today without a U.S. of A.? Please try to keep personal bias to a minimum.

Not much would be different.  We would've gained our independence anyway, whether through another revolution or by Britain granting it, probably well before the 1900's.  India, Canada and Australia are all their own countries now.  Our government would probably be pretty similar to what it's evolved into today, and we'd still be a superpower.  We have too many resources not to be.

While I appreciate your answer, I think you might be missing the point of the question.

Absolutely . Most of Europe and North Africa would be speaking German.

Maybe, but read my comment, on what happend if South won the secession war Thread. But maybe not, cause the north america would be an allied to Great Britain, or a member of the Common Wealth, like Canada, and this would be a way to give Great Britain the strenght to win world war I, and maybe even World War II. (If they win WWI, it has to be a WWII. It's a sorrowful statement, but almost indeniable.)
Slavery maybe not endure so long as it has, cause I don't think the english would tolerate that very long in their own colony, even if it could lead in the south to an internal politics appartheid-like like south africa. In fact, the victorian empire could be one f the more powerful power in europe. Maybe it could endure between 10 and 50 year more, due to the access the brits will have to the ressource of the america.    

Oh, and yeah, I like these question.
It make me think.
A lot.

If the American Revolution failed I do not think that the U.S.A. as we know it will ever have been formed. If the Revolution was never successful then it would have missed out on it's chance to buy the Louisiana territory and would be confined mostly to the thirteen colonies. Who then, would France sell the Louisiana Territory to? Anyone? Would Spain eventually take it and therefore make Mexico the powerhouse North America? Sure, eventually the thirteen colonies could eventually break free of Britain's control but by then many of it's greatest minds and leaders like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, all of these and more would be dead and would have missed their chance to make any kind of Constitution or anything. The U.S., if it ever formed, would be very different and I do not think that it would have anywhere near the importance it has in the world today. If the U.S. was never formed (or at least formed into a weak nation) then many things would go different and in order to go in-depth I would have to write a whole essay on the thing. Of course, great big events where our presence was made known like the World Wars come to mind. With as little bias as I can muster, I believe that the U.S. was a crucial component in the allied victory of both World Wars. However, if Britain never lost it's American colonies, wouldn't it be a more powerful nation? Would it have been able to pull out an allied victory in WW1 by itself? If it didn't and the German alliance won then I think the world might have actually been better off. No allied victory means no Treaty of Marseilles, no Treaty or Marseilles means, basically, no Nazis since Hitler would have had nothing to rally his countrymen against and no Nazis means no WWII, no WWII means whole lot of things. If there is no U.S., then who would stand up to Russia as we did in the Cold War? Would Britain become the other super power and play the part we played in keeping Communism from spreading? Would it be successful? Would any nation be strong enough to resist the Easter Bloc? Man, I could go on typing forever.

Yeah, I understand, but you've got to think that Stalin was an isolationnist. He has made this pact with Hitler, but that was rather to let adolf have the europe and dominate his country, rather than dominate the rest of he world. Sure, he has take all the eastern Europe when he had the chance, but i was only becuse he had the chance. Like you said, no WW2 mean that he hasn't any change to make this move cause the german kicked the ass of the Russian in WW1, so if the German won, they won't be any eastern bloc, like you said. The german would prove only contested by the rise of nationalism in europe. In fact, after-thought and affaire Dreyfuss, it could be the french that play the role of the nazi in a hypothethic and twisted WWII in case of a unequal treaty.
I understand you're interest, but, you know, you should keep this thing on the level of mindplay, or who know ? Write a book ? Even if Philip K. Dick has written a book on this kind of story. (Except that it stated the victory of the nazi in WWII) 

  

"Yeah, I understand, but you've got to think that Stalin was an isolationnist. He has made this pact with Hitler, but that was rather to let adolf have the europe and dominate his country, rather than dominate the rest of he world. Sure, he has take all the eastern Europe when he had the chance, but i was only becuse he had the chance. Like you said, no WW2 mean that he hasn't any change to make this move cause the german kicked the ass of the Russian in WW1, so if the German won, they won't be any eastern bloc, like you said. The german would prove only contested by the rise of nationalism in europe. In fact, after-thought and affaire Dreyfuss, it could be the french that play the role of the nazi in a hypothethic and twisted WWII in case of a unequal treaty.
I understand you're interest, but, you know, you should keep this thing on the level of mindplay, or who know ? Write a book ? Even if Philip K. Dick has written a book on this kind of story. (Except that it stated the victory of the nazi in WWII) 

  "