- Location
- Back in the 90s (In a very famous TV show)
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Ve/Ver
...I don't even think there are that many 2ACW modern TLs.
A City on a Hill: The United States's Second Republic
- Thread starter shadowofneptune
- Start date
- Timeline Maps & Graphics Future
-
- Tags
- politics
- Location
- Great Khanate of Scotland
- Pronouns
- She/Her
It's a subgenre to be sure. A reflection of the anxiety of our times, perhaps.
It's a genre I have read much of, hoped much of, feared much of, and yearn to be done with. There was a lot of it on alternatehistory.com that you have never even read. Not that you can even read it anymore.
Reds! is an example too, and one I went through the same cycle with.
I look actually at the national mood of August and it is much more hopeful than the mood of June when I started work on this TL.
We seem, as a people, to yearn to be done with the same old faces of our politics.
Last edited:
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, United States
Tbh no offense, but my biggest critique wrt Reds and Our Flag being escapist is that they see a world in which America's role is so fundamentally at odds with a romantic "progressive" view of it's national character (as some sort of melting pot, or prison house if you prefer, of nations, in which there is nevertheless a great beauty is in our diversity) that the authors still clearly hold some sentimental attachment to, even if they consciously reject such notions as muddying the waters of the USA's nature as an extractive settler colonialist hierarchy, and make up a scenario where those contradictions are resolved without them having to abandon the cosmopolitan liberal conception of America As an Ideal to Aspire To entirely. And frankly, I think your timeline falls into a very similar mold in this respect.
I don't really mean to be disrespectful towards you or dab master or aelita with this comment, because honestly, I'm not really sure how one would write a timeline regarding the future of America as a national identity without falling into these pitfalls, or going in the opposite direction and being overly pessimistic about the possibility of those it oppresses liberating themselves. Perhaps the grand narrative nature of alternate history as a genre is simply unsuited for the task, as one inevitably will find themselves crafting story arcs for things like "nations" and "identities" when the real actors in history are human beings who have complex and individualized understandings of the communities, real and imagined, they lives their lives within. But I think there is really only one thing that materially unites the people who call themselves "Americans" going into the 21st Century - the fact that "we" sit atop the biggest pile of stolen wealth in history, one "we" gained by spilling unspeakable amounts of blood. "We" will all eventually have to come to terms with the complex question of our personal complicity in this great crime, with what exactly is and isn't unfair for us to blame ourselves for (with this question being increasingly complicated the more one could say they are internally oppressed in the US for characteristics such as race, gender, sexuality, ability, immigration status, etc), and what "we" owe future generations and humanity as a whole. I think writing stories where the monsters which are most understood to be responsible for our nation's crimes are slain, and "we" as a people still get to feel like heroes because "the American people" did the slaying, is fundamentally a way for us to escape from the complicated and uncomfortable realities "we" have to come to terms with about who "we" really are.
TheInnerMoon
Anarchist, Author, All-Around Philosopher
- Pronouns
- They/Them
This was a neat little timeline, and fits right into a larger trend of "post-American" imaginations. I have the good fortune of being able to use scenarios like these in my academic work, and I'm eager to see whatever you or anyone else in this space writes next!
I am glad you raised these points. This critique is more or less I was thinking of in regards to Reds! when I started writing. I guess I should state clearly what I have put in this timeline, and what I left to implication.
The American National Congress is like the African National Conference or the Indian National Conference in that it was a good party... once. As of the 'present day' ITTL, the party still hasn't reached the stage where its sins catch up with it. It's starting to treat itself as the natural party of government, alienating its old allies.
It's true. The US benefits here, as before, in stolen wealth. Where do you see the big problem in-narrative? I, looking at the history of Spain, France, the Netherlands, see that colonies actually react in surprisingly varied ways to the chance of freedom. South America entered a giant conflict of independence during the Napoleonic Wars, while Mexico actually stayed loyal up until Spain liberalized! I would expect, ITTL, that America's IRL allies would be the countries most uncomfortable with the changes going on in the US.
Coming to terms with national crimes isn't necessary. You can come to terms, but not actually come to terms. When you look at the map of the US at the end, note that the most cessions back to natives are in the west, where population density is low. Tribes are again negotiating with the federal government instead of state governments, and the popular vote changes the dynamics there. I imagined AIM actually doing quite badly in the last election because they're still caucusing with the ANC.
I'd love to answer any more questions or dilemmas you have.
EDIT:
Ah, there is the problem. Historical materialism actually does a poor job of modelling human behavior. People have funny ideas. They get those sometimes from family, or more often the place they live. Natives like westerns. Women like exploitation films. I could go on and on, but another running thread in what I wrote is that education and the immaterial actually have quite a strong effect on how people see the world.
Last edited: