You replace George Washington in 1787. What do you do now?

Rhymehouse

Rhymehouse

It is no secret that a lot of things considered abhorrent nowadays were very commonplace centuries ago or even decades ago. Unfortunately, some things considered abhorrent in Western societies are still commonplace elsewhere right now.

I'm writing a series where a modern and educated progressive from modern times mentally replaces a significant figure from the past (an SI story). After adjusting to the new setting, the SI protagonist has a complex job ahead of them. They want to use their knowledge and power in society to enshrine human rights, but too radical of a change will lead to them losing power and might even cause a conservative backlash. The SI will also have to handle personal problems of the person they replace and can try and advance science and technology as well.

My first story should be a really notable example. George Washington was the 1st president of the United States. He signed the constitution and Declaration of Independence and he was a key general in the Revolutionary War along with other conflicts. Many historians see George Washington as a great man. There is of course the darker side of him by modern standards where he was not only a major slave owner who did nothing to phase out the practice or prevent the American Civil War; but he was also a major proponent of violently taking land from the Native Americans and forcibly assimilating them if possible.

So the issue is this, let's say that you replace George Washington's mind in May 1, 1787. You magically know how to speak in contemporary English and you heavily researched early US history before this change happens. The first constitutional convention is in 24 days. Knowing what you know about the future and your own morals, what will you do that George Washington didn't do? What will you propose to put in the constitution? What will you do as 1st president of the United States? While trying to get everyone to adopt 21st Century morals would be ideal, trying to force it on people will just lead to the southern states never joining the USA and non-American colonists claiming the lands west of the 13 colonies anyway. What can you change or do that will lead to the best possible timeline by 2023?
 
Last edited:
Rhymehouse said:
It is no secret, that a lot of things considered abhorrent nowadays were very commonplace centuries ago or even decades ago. Unfortunately, some things considered abhorrent in Western societies are still commonplace elsewhere right now.

I'm writing a series where a modern and educated progressive from modern times mentally replaces a significant figure from the past (an SI story). After adjusting to the new setting, the SI protagonist has a complex job ahead of them. They want to use their knowledge and power in society to enshrine human rights, but too radical of a change will lead to them losing power and might even cause a conservative backlash. The SI will also have to handle personal problems of the person they replace and can try and advance science and technology as well.

My first story should be a really notable example. George Washington was the 1st president of the United States. He signed the constitution and Declaration of Independence and he was a key general in the Revolutionary War along with other conflicts. Many historians see George Washington as a great man. There is of course the darker side of him by modern standards where he was not only a major slave owner who did nothing to phase out the practice or prevent the American Civil War; but he was also a major proponent of violently taking land from the Native Americans and forcibly assimilating them if possible.

So the issue is this, let's say that you replace George Washington's mind in May 1, 1787. You magically know how to speak in contemporary English and you heavily researched early US history before this change happens. The first constitutional convention is in 24 days. Knowing what you know about the future and your own morals, what will you do that George Washington didn't do? What will you propose to put in the constitution? What will you do as 1st president of the United States? While trying to get everyone to adopt 21st Century morals would be ideal, trying to force it on people will just lead to the southern states never joining the USA and non-American colonists claiming the lands west of the 13 colonies anyway. What can you change or do that will lead to the best possible timeline by 2023?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is an interesting spot to be in. As George Washington we have significant military and therefore political influence. At the Constitutional Convention that doesn't give us a blank check, but we do have a defacto veto since this is a state that just came out of a civil war and doesn't want to immediately collapse.

I think we could probably hammer through more proportional representation and get past the 'political parties don't exist' idiocy, but, not much more than that. We're restricted by the regular misogynist and capitalist nonsense of the era, and of course anything anti-slavery runs into the brick wall of the South.

Which means... war will be necessary to end slavery.

The question is what's the best way to prepare for a war with the South?

Well, with us being from the future, we'll need time to prepare, which means we'll need to at least have the Constitutional Convention come to a conclusion.

So, we have to push for a well-funded professional army with ourselves at the head, and make sure we squeeze out as much budget independent as we can so we can fund research and implement technologies as fast as we can make them.

Then once we're prepared in a few years, we attack the South to end slavery, this time making sure to remove the Southern owner class entirely this time instead of letting them fester as OTL.
 
Last edited:
Cloak&Dagger said:
This is an interesting spot to be in. As George Washington we have significant military and therefore political influence. At the Constitutional Convention that doesn't give us a blank check, but we do have a defacto veto since this is a state that just came out of a civil war and doesn't want to immediately collapse.

I think we could probably hammer through more proportional representation and get past the 'political parties don't exist' idiocy, but, not much more than that. We're restricted by the regular misogynist and capitalist nonsense of the era, and of course anything anti-slavery runs into the brick wall of the South.

Which means... war will be necessary to end slavery.

The question is what's the best way to prepare for a war with the South?

Well, with us being from the future, we'll need time to prepare, which means we'll need to at least have the Constitutional Convention come to a conclusion.

So, we have to push for a well-funded professional army with ourselves at the head, and make sure we squeeze out as much budget independent as we can so we can fund research and implement technologies as fast as we can make them.

Then once we're prepared in a few years, we attack the South to end slavery, this time making sure to remove the Southern owner class entirely this time instead of letting them fester as OTL.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Invading the South would be a bad idea. Roughly half of the founding fathers (including George Washington) were slaveowners so there would be major opposition not just in the southern states to oppose the invasion. There could even be a potential mutiny. Even if G. Washington wins, he would be seen as a tyrant and it would ruin the nascent republic.

What I would do instead is just change some ill-conceived parts of the US constitution. Replace the Electoral College with a popular vote. Be aware that political parties will form. Remove the Fugitive Slave Act from the constitution and include the Bill of Rights from the get go. I would also change the population recording for the census so that only people eligible to vote would count for proportional representation in Congress. Not only would this do away with the 3/5th compromise but it would also make future Black Codes and voter suppression efforts more ineffectual. Female suffrage might be a bit too radical but I would instead have it that each household would have a single vote. That way women who own their households can vote. It would also mean that you don't need significant land to be a voter.

As for the slavery issue, banning it immediately would be a complete non-starter. What I would do instead is just implement my constitutional changes at first. When I got elected in 1789, I would pass a law in 1790 that would phase out slave importations by 1800. I would then pass a law in 1796 that would implement a Free Womb Law in 1806. The Free Womb Law would have all children born to slave mothers to be born free. I will have to trust future politicians to ban it outright; hopefully without that criminal clause that allows for for-profit prisons.

As for Native Americans, I would put a major precedent of treating Natives as sovereign nations instead of savages to be swept aside. I would be openly against putting them on reservations or implementing boarding schools or funding missionary activity for Natives. I would still approve of the Louisiana Purchase since that is open French territory anyway but I would make it clear that the USA shouldn't expand west of the Mississippi. The USA taking Florida and West Florida would also be fine in my book since that is just Spanish territory as well.

I would leave behind writings about all the major scientific and historical events that will probably happen in the 19th and 20th Century. Towards the end, I write in some events that didn't happen in real life but I want to happen.
 
Last edited:
Rhymehouse said:
Invading the south would be a bad idea. Roughly half of the founding fathers (including George Washington) were slaveowners so there would be major opposition not just in the southern states to oppose the invasion. There could even be a potential mutiny. Even if G. Washington wins, he would be seen as a tyrant and it would ruin the nascent republic.

What I would do instead is just change some ill-conceived parts of the US constitution. Replace the Electoral College with a popular vote. Be aware that political parties will form. Remove the Fugitive Slave Act from the constitution and include the Bill of Rights from the get go. I would also change the population recording for the census so that only people eligible to vote would count for proportional representation in Congress. Not only would this do away with the 3/5th compromise but it would also make future Black Codes and voter suppression efforts more ineffectual. Female suffrage might be a bit too radical but I would instead have it that each household would have a single vote. That way women who won their households can vote. It would also mean that you don't need significant land to be a voter.

As for the slavery issue, banning it immediately would be a complete non-starter. What I would do instead is just implement my constitutional changes at first. When I got elected in 1789, I would pass a law in 1790 that would phase out slave importations by 1800. I would then pass a law in 1796 that would implement a Golden Law in 1806. The Golden Law would have all children born to slave mothers to be born free. I will have to trust future politicians to ban it outright; hopefully without that criminal clause that allows for for-profit prisons.

As for Native Americans, I would put a major precedent of treating Natives as sovereign nations instead of savages to be swept aside. I would be openly against putting them on reservations or implementing boarding schools or funding missionary activity for Natives. I would still approve of the Louisiana Purchase since that is open French territory anyway but I would make it clear that the USA shouldn't expand west of the Mississippi. The USA taking Florida and West Florida would also be fine in my book since that is just Spanish territory as well.

I would leave behind writings about all the major scientific and historical events that will probably happen in the 19th and 20th Century. Towards the end, I write in some events that didn't happen in real life but I want to happen.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Invading the South will be a pain in the ass to be sure, but definitely worth it.

Anyone who thinks it's tyranny to abolish slavery is someone I'm happy to give the pointy end of my bayonet. More importantly, proper reforms cannot be made within the context of the American Revolution. The Second Revolution is where the real progress will be made.

Banning or even restricting slavery in the Conference isn't going to happen. The South won't allow it, and the more you push, they more they'll oppose anything that might threaten it on principle, including proportional representation.

Native Americans similarly won't just get a blanket ban from colonizing. Everyone wants a piece of the mostly empty lands, and the Natives will defend it. There is no law you can put into place to prevent that, and even if you did, independent colonies like Texas would still spring up.
 
Last edited:
Try to negotiate an eventual end to or limiting of slavery, and implement a prohibition on "rotten boroughs" in apportioning districts (I believe this was a known term about some corrupt Parliamentary districts).

Maybe also try to make a parliamentary system instead of a Presidential one.

Maybe those two changes would be enough to change America's course without being so radical that the US never forms.
 
Probably die horribly from some variant of influenza that I have no resistance to.

Of course on the other hand, while I'm doing that, I'm meeting enough people that I spread the flu I'm currently dealing with to everybody around me. Since that's a variant nobody in the past has resistance to, it catches and spreads like wildfire.

So what do I do? I probably kill off a large chunk of the Americas. And if the timing is bad enough, it might even spread to England and Europe...

The most extreme end result is an AU where European colonization is choked off by a wave if death at the trail end if the 18th century, probably accompanied by a general social collapse, civil wars, etc.. It's anyone's guess what arises from that.
 
RoseEmbolism said:
Probably die horribly from some variant of influenza that I have no resistance to.

Of course on the other hand, while I'm doing that, I'm meeting enough people that I spread the flu I'm currently dealing with to everybody around me. Since that's a variant nobody in the past has resistance to, it catches and spreads like wildfire.

So what do I do? I probably kill off a large chunk of the Americas. And if the timing is bad enough, it might even spread to England and Europe...

The most extreme end result is an AU where European colonization is choked off by a wave if death at the trail end if the 18th century, probably accompanied by a general social collapse, civil wars, etc.. It's anyone's guess what arises from that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You replace George Washington's mind, not his mind and body. There will be no diseases introduced. You have a really bad habit of only reading the thread title and not the OP.
 
Gather all the other founding fathers (sans Thomas Paine) and as many politically influential people in colonial America as possible in one room and then have soldiers kill every single one before killing myself.
 
I would pre-empt the Louisiana Purchase made by Thomas Jefferson by making that constitutionally allowed
I would also codify the rule that the Vice President replaces the President in case of the President being unable to discharge the duties of his office and the Vice President would also replace the President if the President dies by natural causes or by gunshot wounds
And I would also ensure the Bill of Rights was incorporated into the United States Constitution.
 
Rhymehouse said:
Invading the South would be a bad idea. Roughly half of the founding fathers (including George Washington) were slaveowners so there would be major opposition not just in the southern states to oppose the invasion. There could even be a potential mutiny. Even if G. Washington wins, he would be seen as a tyrant and it would ruin the nascent republic.

What I would do instead is just change some ill-conceived parts of the US constitution. Replace the Electoral College with a popular vote. Be aware that political parties will form. Remove the Fugitive Slave Act from the constitution and include the Bill of Rights from the get go. I would also change the population recording for the census so that only people eligible to vote would count for proportional representation in Congress. Not only would this do away with the 3/5th compromise but it would also make future Black Codes and voter suppression efforts more ineffectual. Female suffrage might be a bit too radical but I would instead have it that each household would have a single vote. That way women who own their households can vote. It would also mean that you don't need significant land to be a voter.

As for the slavery issue, banning it immediately would be a complete non-starter. What I would do instead is just implement my constitutional changes at first. When I got elected in 1789, I would pass a law in 1790 that would phase out slave importations by 1800. I would then pass a law in 1796 that would implement a Free Womb Law in 1806. The Free Womb Law would have all children born to slave mothers to be born free. I will have to trust future politicians to ban it outright; hopefully without that criminal clause that allows for for-profit prisons.

As for Native Americans, I would put a major precedent of treating Natives as sovereign nations instead of savages to be swept aside. I would be openly against putting them on reservations or implementing boarding schools or funding missionary activity for Natives. I would still approve of the Louisiana Purchase since that is open French territory anyway but I would make it clear that the USA shouldn't expand west of the Mississippi. The USA taking Florida and West Florida would also be fine in my book since that is just Spanish territory as well.

I would leave behind writings about all the major scientific and historical events that will probably happen in the 19th and 20th Century. Towards the end, I write in some events that didn't happen in real life but I want to happen.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Fugitive Slave Act was never in the US Constitution, and in fact was arguably unconstitutional. Not to mention it was passed in 1850, long after good old GW was dead in his grave.
 
Last edited:
I'd try to change representation into votes cast, if need be do a compromise that allows for slaves to count as 3/5ths of a vote for x number of years.

Add something about "rotten boroughs" to the Constitution , and make the Republican form of government provision in the Constitution define what a Republic is- with fair elections being part of it.
 
Parzival said:
The Fugitive Slave Act was never in the US Constitution, and in fact was arguably unconstitutional. Not to mention it was passed in 1850, long after good old GW was dead in his grave.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You bumped a year old thread with a false statement. Read this:
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
1. Argue for not adopting First Past the Post, but instead requiring a runoff election between the top two candidates if the winner has less than 50% of the vote. As the winner will always have a majority, this has greater democratic legitimacy and does not favor two parties to nearly the extent that the present system does, as people will be freer to "waste their vote" in the general election, especially if a runoff is likely.

2. All Federal offices shall be on four-year terms, and elections should be held on Leap Day, which will be a Federal holiday for the purpose - employers will be recommended to close or reduce hours. Any required runoffs are to be held on April 1, giving the entire month of March for states and localities to prepare for another election, and because politicians deserve April Fools Day. April Fools Day will also be a Federal holiday on all years, because people need to take themselves less seriously. New terms of office will begin on July 4, giving the winners over three months to travel from their home states to the Capitol, and make all appropriate preparations.

3. To be added to the Bill of Rights, an Amendment that creates a national ballot initiative process that can dismiss any part of, or the entire Federal government and call for new elections immediately. Voters voting "No Confidence" will have the additional option to forbid all incumbents from running again for this cycle, to have them tarred and feathered, or investigated for corruption. If the people rule, they need the proper tools.
 
Cloak&Dagger said:
This is an interesting spot to be in. As George Washington, we have significant military and therefore political influence. At the Constitutional Convention that doesn't give us a blank check, but we do have a defacto veto since this is a state that just came out of a civil war and doesn't want to immediately collapse.

I think we could probably hammer through more proportional representation and get past the 'political parties don't exist' idiocy, but, not much more than that. We're restricted by the regular misogynist and capitalist nonsense of the era, and of course, anything anti-slavery runs into the brick wall of the South.

Which means... war will be necessary to end slavery.

The question is what's the best way to prepare for a war with the South?

Well, with us being from the future, we'll need time to prepare, which means we'll need to at least have the Constitutional Convention come to a conclusion.

So, we have to push for a well-funded professional army with ourselves at the head, and make sure we squeeze out as much budget independent as we can so we can fund research and implement technologies as fast as we can make them.

Then once we're prepared in a few years, we attack the South to end slavery, this time making sure to remove the Southern owner class entirely this time instead of letting them fester as OTL.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It is my understanding that slavery was on the way out before the invention of the cotton gin in the 1790s allowed slave owners to make a profit. So the way I see it as long as you start phasing out slavery before it is made I don't see the cotton gin saving the evil institution past keeping it on life support for a few years. If slavery is still a thing by 1800 I would be more than a little surprised.

I'm also not a big fan on going to war with the South. Not only would it be a bloodbath but even if you win George Washington is remembered as a tyrant who waged war with the southern states. Better to just make it so the social-economic consequences of maintaining the institution are unviable and so we just do away with it as soon as possible.

The Civil War only happened because we just kept kicking it down the road for later generations and allowing it to take root. If we start ripping it apart in the 1780-1790s slavery likely dies out by the 1810s at the latest.
 
SpaceOrbis said:
It is my understanding that slavery was on the way out before the invention of the cotton gin in the 1790s allowed slave owners to make a profit. So the way I see it as long as you start phasing out slavery before it is made I don't see the cotton gin saving the evil institution past keeping it on life support for a few years. If slavery is still a thing by 1800 I would be more than a little surprised.

I'm also not a big fan on going to war with the South. Not only would it be a bloodbath but even if you win George Washington is remembered as a tyrant who waged war with the southern states. Better to just make it so the social-economic consequences of maintaining the institution are unviable and so we just do away with it as soon as possible.

The Civil War only happened because we just kept kicking it down the road for later generations and allowing it to take root. If we start ripping it apart in the 1780-1790s slavery likely dies out by the 1810s at the latest.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

There is no magic wand to wave to make slavery get abolished at the start of the United States. It was an obvious festering wound from the birth of the nation that the Founders deliberately IGNORED because they knew with absolute certainty that the fragile Union would immediately implode if the issue was pressed.

Hence, a bloodbath is the only way to end slavery ASAP.
 
Cloak&Dagger said:
There is no magic wand to wave to make slavery get abolished at the start of the United States. It was an obvious festering wound from the birth of the nation that the Founders deliberately IGNORED because they knew with absolute certainty that the fragile Union would immediately implode if the issue was pressed.

Hence, a bloodbath is the only way to end slavery ASAP.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Again I don't agree with this viewpoint. Nations ended slavery without needing to wage war with themselves around this time. You just start by making it so it can't move into new lands and allow it to die on its own. The cotton gin didn't appear until the 1790s if I remember right. So you have around a few years to start to move away from the institution. The best way is to have it sunset at 1800 or at worst have it so children born after 1787 are born free. This way slavery exists by technicality but everybody in power knows it will not exist for much longer.
 
Last edited:
SpaceOrbis said:
Again I don't agree with this viewpoint. Nations ended slavery without needing to wage war with themselves around this time. You just start by making it so it can't move into new lands and allow it to die on its own. The cotton gin didn't appear until the 1790s if I remember right. So you have around a few years to start to move away from the institution. The best way is to have it sunset at 1800 or at worst have it so children born after 1787 are born free. This way slavery exists by technicality but everybody in power knows it will not exist for much longer.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If you make a rule that it can't move into new lands, the Constitution doesn't get ratified/the South kicks you out of office and burns all your policies out of spite.

Slavery was absolutely a dealbreaker which is why a gag rule was deliberately placed on it for decades. Literally so the country wouldn't immediately implode.
 
Cloak&Dagger said:
If you make a rule that it can't move into new lands, the Constitution doesn't get ratified/the South kicks you out of office and burns all your policies out of spite.

Slavery was absolutely a dealbreaker which is why a gag rule was deliberately placed on it for decades. Literally so the country wouldn't immediately implode.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm not saying it'll be an easy sale but this is before the cotton gin makes it economically viable to do in mass. Slavery was seen as a dying institution by this time. The cotton gin made it possible to make money with a lower number of slaves. If the nation is already well on its way to ending the use of slaves the few slaveholders will be powerless to do much but rant and rave.

This is the 1780s we don't have generations of Americans born and raised in a nation where a few hundred slaves are economically viable. So the way I see it as long as we push for the new nation to be closer to the idea that all men are equal the cotton gin shouldn't be enough to keep it alive much past the 1800s. If slavery survives into the 1810s or 1820s I would be surprised.

As I said we could just make it so children born after 1787 are born free and if that is too much too soon then have them be freed upon turning 18 or 21 based on sex. This should be a nice middle ground.
 
Cloak&Dagger said:
Again, we literally cannot. The South will tell us to fuck off.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So the South is upset that the United States will be closer to what it was meant to be far sooner. The war is over. Them being upset isn't as big a deal as if this was in 1776-1783. Besides, until the cotton gin happens in the 1790s slavery was dying anyway and they have no way of knowing that in a few years, it would make enough to stay around.

If they break off the most likely outcome is they rejoin the mother nation or try to form a new nation that we would more than likely roll over in the 1800s when slavery is seen as a backward economic system way more than it would be viewed here in 1787. So we may as well just deal with it now before it becomes something worse. Remember that we are replacing George Washington. We know what the south can do in the 1780s. We know how well slavery was in terms of economic output vs the cost of production per slave.

But fine let's say we don't sunset slavery yet we are still going to want to improve things. The US Navy should exist at this point so maybe just ship them back. We had an African colony in the 1800s. Could we just start that in the 1780s to remove what would've been the slave population?
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Back
Top