Would America Be Better Off Staying As A British Colony?

[Makko Oko]

Here's a unique question, would the US have been better off in the modern world (2022) if they had never declared independence and had stayed as a British colony, as land of the UK. A more intriguing question is, would the UK have forced American independence up to the 20th century if we had stayed as a colony?

[Sundiata]

America would be better off staying as a British colony.

[American Legionaries]

Here's a unique question, would the US have been better off in the modern world (2022) if they had never declared independence and had stayed as a British colony, as land of the UK. A more intriguing question is, would the UK have forced American independence up to the 20th century if we had stayed as a colony?

No, we wouldn't. As for the UK forcing independence. I really can't say.

[Makko Oko]

America would be better off staying as a British colony.

Care to share why you think this? I'm genuinely curious as to your thoughts on this. Maybe the current political situation polarized that thought (not a negative comment, just a thought)?

[Prima Scriptura]

America would be better off staying as a British colony.

This means little to no religious rights for Catholics and a Protestant monarch

[Sauros]

Extremely tough question. Either history goes the same as OTL and the British colonial empire still falls, or the failure of the American Revolution empowers the British Empire so much so that it remains intact into the modern day.

If it's the former, I actually think 'America' (under whatever name it has ITTL) could have ended up better than it has, only that's a could and not a would. However, in the case of the latter, I can only see it either ending up just as bad or worse than the OTL U.S.

So in a sense, it's really a gamble; and despite being rather anti-US, I prefer 'America' ending up the same way as OTL rather than going an unknown, alternate route that could have very bad implications for the rest of the world.

[Makko Oko]

Extremely tough question. Either history goes the same as OTL and the British colonial empire still falls, or the failure of the American Revolution empowers the British Empire so much so that it remains intact into the modern day.

If it's the former, I actually think 'America' (under whatever name it has ITTL) could have ended up better than it has, only that's a could and not a would. However, in the case of the latter, I can only see it either ending up just as bad or worse than the OTL U.S.

So in a sense, it's really a gamble; and despite being rather anti-US, I prefer 'America' ending up the same way as OTL rather than going an unknown, alternate route that could have very bad implications for the rest of the world.

That's a fair viewpoint, and I can agree with that. I don't know what ITTL and OTL mean though, I only know IRL, but anyways, other than that, I actually imagined the British Empire still falling and becoming the UK, and America would be forced to be heat-only, no A/C, just like the rest of Britain, so much so that a lot of people die from heat stroke. Either that, or the UK, due to the ownership of America, actually ends up implementing A/C globally, much like the IRL US has, and many other countries.

I haven't given much thought to the actual empire potentially surviving if America were to stay in its clutches, but that raises more questions than it answers. For one, what would happen during World War 2, would the Nazi's actually win due to this, because America may have not managed to develop the atomic bomb against Japan?

[Shrillland]

America would be better off staying as a British colony.

This means little to no religious rights for Catholics and a Protestant monarch

Not at all, Catholic rights in America were growing considerably at that time via the Quebec Act. In truth, we would likely be part of Canada now if we had lost the Revolution in the 1770s.

[Great Britain and Ulster]

Yes

[Makko Oko]

This means little to no religious rights for Catholics and a Protestant monarch

Not at all, Catholic rights in America were growing considerably at that time via the Quebec Act. In truth, we would likely be part of Canada now if we had lost the Revolution in the 1770s.

What, Canada attacks the US? I don't see what would provoke them to do such. Realistically, in this scenario, only America's history would be modified, but we can look at it in other angles too if need be, such as Canada also staying as a British colony, but technically speaking, Canada still is IRL. The reason why I say technically, is because Canada does respect the position of the Queen/King Of Britain, in Canada's case, being named the Queen/King Of Canada, and I do believe that in Canada, Queen Elizabeth II is the Head Of State of Canada and is entitled to state protection while in the country.

[Shrillland]

Not at all, Catholic rights in America were growing considerably at that time via the Quebec Act. In truth, we would likely be part of Canada now if we had lost the Revolution in the 1770s.

What, Canada attacks the US? I don't see what would provoke them to do such. Realistically, in this scenario, only America's history would be modified, but we can look at it in other angles too if need be, such as Canada also staying as a British colony, but technically speaking, Canada still is IRL. The reason why I say technically, is because Canada does respect the position of the Queen/King Of Britain, in Canada's case, being named the Queen/King Of Canada, and I do believe that in Canada, Queen Elizabeth II is the Head Of State of Canada and is entitled to state protection while in the country.

No, Canada wouldn't attack the US, most of the colonies would just become Canadian Provinces coming, as they do, from a common mother country come Confederation rather than their own separate country. My area of Illinois would actually be part of Upper Quebec, just like it was when the British annexed it to Lower Canada in 1774.

[Roylvanione]

They might have been a bit better instead of paid healthcare, and some of the issues of guns and other issues. Though, it would be hard to maintain control of both countries at the same time probably.

[Makko Oko]

What, Canada attacks the US? I don't see what would provoke them to do such. Realistically, in this scenario, only America's history would be modified, but we can look at it in other angles too if need be, such as Canada also staying as a British colony, but technically speaking, Canada still is IRL. The reason why I say technically, is because Canada does respect the position of the Queen/King Of Britain, in Canada's case, being named the Queen/King Of Canada, and I do believe that in Canada, Queen Elizabeth II is the Head Of State of Canada and is entitled to state protection while in the country.

No, Canada wouldn't attack the US, most of the colonies would just become Canadian Provinces coming, as they do, from a common mother country come Confederation rather than their own separate country. My area of Illinois would actually be part of Upper Quebec, just like it was when the British annexed it to Lower Canada in 1774.

Well hey! Universal healthcare? Bring it on! /j

[Soca Cobis]

If the US lost the Revolutionary War, and stayed as British colonies, it would’ve butterflied a lot of stuff everywhere around the world that could make it better or worse, both the US and the world

I think the most major thing in the US is how US gun laws would probably be significantly different and likely much more regulated and strict than they are now

[Refuge Isle]

America would be better off staying as a British colony.

"Indeed, Northern Ireland has turned out wonderfully"

[Makko Oko]

America would be better off staying as a British colony.

"Indeed, Northern Ireland has turned out wonderfully"

Oh don't get started on that huge shitfest. Honestly, NI is deserving of its own thread. NI has a major history, it's been its own country and a dependent of Britain multiple times, because Britain couldn't make up their damn minds (my interpretation, but not actually what happened, I believe a treaty got violated if I'm remembering correctly).

[Risottia]

America would be better off staying as a British colony.

Are you sure? They would have had BoJo as PM.

[Densaner]

Not really, because they would have become independent anyway, just like Canada and Australia. The basic reasons for the start of the American revolution were a bit dubious anyway, no taxation without representation, yep, just like everywhere else in the Empire, plus most of Britain, seeing as only a small percentage of the population could vote, what makes Americans so special?

[Chrysanthemum State]

No, Canada wouldn't attack the US, most of the colonies would just become Canadian Provinces coming, as they do, from a common mother country come Confederation rather than their own separate country. My area of Illinois would actually be part of Upper Quebec, just like it was when the British annexed it to Lower Canada in 1774.

If the Thirteen Colonies remained under or returned to British control, it would be strange for an alternative British Dominion to be centred on the St Lawrence River and Gulf of Saint Lawrence, given the French-speaking presence and the area's low population relative to the Thirteen Colonies, rather than the Eastern Seaboard (assuming that all of British North America becomes one country). Of course, an alternative British Empire may have divided North America into multiple dominions (example here). In any case, Upper Canada (current Ontario) and the Great Lakes area would have likely been severed from Quebec to create more English colonies.

[Republic Of Ludwigsburg]

One evil or the other, worse evil?

[Prima Scriptura]

This means little to no religious rights for Catholics and a Protestant monarch

Not at all, Catholic rights in America were growing considerably at that time via the Quebec Act. In truth, we would likely be part of Canada now if we had lost the Revolution in the 1770s.

I think the Quebec situation was very unique, and the earliest English settlers were Protestant. Some colonies outlawed Roman Catholicism. The Quebec Act wasn’t passed because HM’s government all of a sudden supported religious liberty for Catholics, it was avoid a revolution.

If they actually cared about religious liberty and civil rights for Catholics, Ireland would probably still be in the commonwealth.

[Heloin]

Not at all, Catholic rights in America were growing considerably at that time via the Quebec Act. In truth, we would likely be part of Canada now if we had lost the Revolution in the 1770s.

What, Canada attacks the US? I don't see what would provoke them to do such. Realistically, in this scenario, only America's history would be modified, but we can look at it in other angles too if need be, such as Canada also staying as a British colony, but technically speaking, Canada still is IRL. The reason why I say technically, is because Canada does respect the position of the Queen/King Of Britain, in Canada's case, being named the Queen/King Of Canada, and I do believe that in Canada, Queen Elizabeth II is the Head Of State of Canada and is entitled to state protection while in the country.

There was no Canada or US in 1775. The idea of the sole 13 colonies is mythologizing when some colonies united for independence while others stuck it out with Britain. Had the US not existed it’s likely British colonies from Newfoundland to Florida would have been confederated at some point like Canada had been for us.

[The Archregimancy]

What, Canada attacks the US? I don't see what would provoke them to do such. Realistically, in this scenario, only America's history would be modified, but we can look at it in other angles too if need be, such as Canada also staying as a British colony, but technically speaking, Canada still is IRL. The reason why I say technically, is because Canada does respect the position of the Queen/King Of Britain, in Canada's case, being named the Queen/King Of Canada, and I do believe that in Canada, Queen Elizabeth II is the Head Of State of Canada and is entitled to state protection while in the country.

There was no Canada or US in 1775. The idea of the sole 13 colonies is mythologizing when some colonies united for independence while others stuck it out with Britain. Had the US not existed it’s likely British colonies from Newfoundland to Florida would have been confederated at some point like Canada had been for us.

It's also a misconception that the 13 colonies (or the Canadian colonies) were static. It's best to think of the colonies as the 13 colonies that, due to an accident of history, were the 13 colonies in existence at the point they declared independence; which is a bit of a mouthful, but also more accurate.

Borders shifted significantly over time from 1607 through 1776 as colonies were amalgamated and redivided. For 28 years, 'New Jersey' was divided between the provinces of West Jersey and East Jersey. Massachusetts was formed of a union of the Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth colonies. Connecticut was a merger of the Connecticut River, Saybrook, and New Haven colonies. Various attempts were made in the 17th century to merge colonies from modern New Jersey through modern Maine into a single New England dominion / confederation. North and South Carolina were a single colony of Carolina for nearly 50 years after the first settlement charter was issued. Delaware's separate existence as an entity distinct from Pennsylvania was long a fuzzy area legally.

The fact that the 13 colonies were the entities that initiated the Declaration of Independence and then formed the United States has tended to encourage people to think of these entities as the American colonies. But there's no reason to believe that they would have inevitably remained the primary geopolitical units post-1776 if the revolution had never happened - if nothing else, they had some fairly serious boundary disputes between each other that needed resolving.

[Ethel mermania]

There was no Canada or US in 1775. The idea of the sole 13 colonies is mythologizing when some colonies united for independence while others stuck it out with Britain. Had the US not existed it’s likely British colonies from Newfoundland to Florida would have been confederated at some point like Canada had been for us.

It's also a misconception that the 13 colonies (or the Canadian colonies) were static. It's best to think of the colonies as the 13 colonies that, due to an accident of history, were the 13 colonies in existence at the point they declared independence; which is a bit of a mouthful, but also more accurate.

Borders shifted significantly over time from 1607 through 1776 as colonies were amalgamated and redivided. For 28 years, 'New Jersey' was divided between the provinces of West Jersey and East Jersey. Massachusetts was formed of a union of the Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth colonies. Connecticut was a merger of the Connecticut River, Saybrook, and New Haven colonies. Various attempts were made in the 17th century to merge colonies from modern New Jersey through modern Maine into a single New England dominion / confederation. North and South Carolina were a single colony of Carolina for nearly 50 years after the first settlement charter was issued. Delaware's separate existence as an entity distinct from Pennsylvania was long a fuzzy area legally.

The fact that the 13 colonies were the entities that initiated the Declaration of Independence and then formed the United States has tended to encourage people to think of these entities as the American colonies. But there's no reason to believe that they would have inevitably remained the primary geopolitical units post-1776 if the revolution had never happened - if nothing else, they had some fairly serious boundary disputes between each other that needed resolving.

We need to take back vermont, by force if necessary.

And no America would be a much shittier place if we were still a British colony.

[Ifreann]

I've been told a few times on this forum that America's independence simply could not have happened if there had been serious pushback against slavery. That the support of slaveholding colonies, and the wealthy slavers who ran them, was a necessity for throwing off the yoke of the hated British, and therefore there needed to be an acceptance of slavery.

If the movement for independence had failed, perhaps all that agitation for equality and liberty could have been turned towards more useful ends than a tax break for George Washington. Maybe there could have been a successful abolitionist movement in the wake of a fizzled out independence movement.