-No revival of the KKK and less tense race relations - A more interventionist states in the economy - A less strong central government - The Russian revolution is avoided - European colonialism endures It is literally Teddy's meme being liked by all 4 sectors of the political spectrum.
That's because his method of rule was less about ideology than it was about realpolitik and solving problems. He wasn't there to shine anyone's shoes for them, he was a well connected man with good political sense who took reasonably measured approaches to addressing the problems his nation struggled with. If his enemies grew stronger he moved to curtail them. If he saw an opportunity for the US to exert itself as a power, he took it. If he saw big business growing beyond reasonable scale for the rest of the nation, he broke it up. If the European Empires could keep the globe stable, he let them handle it, and maybe sniped a couple colonies off of then when they weren't looking. In all these things it was a pragmatic drive to improve the domestic and international situation of the United States that drove his decisions. He is essentially the idealized vision that the Republican voting base has for America first, and that idea has become so powerful over time that just claiming to follow it has allowed ideologically (or most recently, ethically) different presidents to ride on its coattails to the Republican Ticket. The Democratic party also heavily resembles Wilson to this day in many ways, with their wider focus on domestic racial problems, and their belief that morality rather than pragmatism should be the driver of foreign policy.
Maybe the communist influence would have lessoned but the tsars' position of power would still likely fall. There was just too much going against them. The bigger question is if the Duma would adapt and survive.
Probably the impact of Great Depression would be reduced unlike irl. Also the War in Europe would end in 1916-17 if America intervened in 1914 or 1915 . More Women's rights and representatives in the US as early as 1925 . Stronger US Navy and Naval buildup in 1916 and could probably equal the number of warships the British Navy or at least get close to them. Also the previous point if the US intervened in 1914 in Europe the USN would gather battle experience in Europe against the German Navy, probably few American capital ships took part in Jutland as well.
Not likely as TR would be seen as to Nationalist and as a xenophobic cultural imperialist. Not to say Wilson would get their vote either for obvious reasons.
Well Republicans would most definitely vote for him for those specific reasons, as well as for his strongman personality, whilst liberals could look past that because of his progressive streak.he would also fare very well with all Christians in the nation because of his sincere and genuine piety.
Republicans would see Roosevelt as a strong nationalist figure, while Democrats would see him as a progressive as was the less racist of the two and also an environmentalist.
His progressive streak? You mean his progressive streak of supporting capitalism, utilizing resources, and etc? Progressive then vs now were two very different things. Teddy was a progressive for industry, business, and etc wanting more freedom with not too much regulation. That is still counter-productive to most modern day liberal economic views
Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907. “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American … There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
Well I agree that immigrants shouldn’t be treated any different than non-immigrants, but wiping out someone’s history is bad. So I agree 50% with this quote
Almost all of the immigrants at the time were white so it isn’t like he was talking about people of color, people were generally mean to the Southern European immigrants so he came out and said this, you can’t apply a quote from the early 1900s to modern events and say “look teddy Roosevelt liked the immigrants at the time so he must like the immigrants now”
No destructive Communist revolutions, shorter WW1, no Nazis, probably no atom bomb, no Israeli-Arab military conflict, and an overall stable Middle East? Possibly even no Sykes-Picot and we could see an Israel peacefully coexisting with Arabs as was originally planned? Teddy, man, come back!
Well I'm not that sure - That depends on when the war ends. If in 1917 that might be the case, but probably not before that. Anyway, as an Israeli, I still prefer roosevelt & shorter war, even if it means no Israel.
Oh idk about no nukes. Einstein and most other scientists would remain in Germany and Germany would love to gain an advantage for a future war against France , Britain , america and and even stronger Russia. I think it more likely the bomb would be invented by the end of the 30s .
@@jaojao1768 Colonies besides South Africa are an immense waste of time founded on history's past where it was once fueled by necessity and purpose. With him being an isolationist this particularly tickles my fancy as I believe it's more important to consider long-term what can exponentially increase infrastructure technological/societal development.
He pretty much seems to think so but on the other hand he seems to think everythign would turn out perfect. But I very much doubt it. The only war for an example that Russia could have been kept from just conquering all land up to the Rhine if Germany had been defeated is if Roosevelt would have been willing to actually go to war with Russia.
He might be saying that, but it's not true. He was a progressive. He would have ABSOLUTELY brought about communism, but under a different name. It has a thousand different names. And he was big on giving women the vote, which was the biggest mistake of the 20th century and brought about the welfare state which is not a far cry from communism itself. Things would have been not too different with Teddy there.
@@jon6577 Russia would be way more powerful. No Soviet famines means it would grow about as much as every other Christian nation, which is around 3x after WWI so Russia would have 400 million people
Theodore Roosevelt might have lived to be in his 70s. He wouldn't have taken extensive trips to Africa or South America. He might have been elected to a 4th term, 5th term, etc.
Wilson was horrible...graduated income tax(still violates the 14th amendment imho), Federal Reserve and signatory to the Treaty of Versailles(which violated his own 14 Points). Few Presidents did as much damage as he to his own country...maybe no one else did.
What a shame that the Supreme Court disagrees with you on the income tax (which Roosevelt supported) and the Federal Reserve (also supported.) Finally, he was the worst President? I present James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce and John Tyler.
Woodrow Wilson is the worst president ever. Everything bad in the 20th century is linked to Wilson's anglophilia and the US entering WWI. I like this timeline because it shows that the US could still have intervened in the war and it still wouldn't've been as bad as ours and because Theodore, he hated the name Teddy, Roosevelt is one of the best Americans. He should've been president longer. Japan would still have attacked China, but they wouldn't have attacked the West. Because Nazi Germany was doing a great job at taking out France and the Netherlands, Japan thought they could roll over their Asian colonies. With them still powerful, Japan would've focused on China.
This overlooks James Buchanan, easily the worst in US history. Wilson enacted a series of wide ranging reforms, such as the Keating-Owen Act, the appointment of Louis Brandeis to the Supreme Court, creation of the FTC, and support of labor. He did a lot of good, but people only ever want to focus on the bad.
@Brandon Robinson The only good that Buchanan did was prevent the Civil War from happening 4 years earlier. Actually, come to think of it, Fillmore and Pierce also did their part in that.
Actually, if the US had not entered WW1 Germany would have won. They already had war plans prepared for an invasion of the US, since they recognized the US as the greatest threat to their power. Remember the Zimmerman telegram. If Germany had been allied with a defeated Britain they could have invaded the US from north and south. Wilson correctly realized that Germany had to be defeated and if so it's better to fight the war somewhere besides on your own territory.
Roosevelt should have run for a second term in 1908, and not allowed Taft to become president. then his chance to run for a 3rd term in 1912 probably would have been successful.
He ran for his second term in 1904. Roosevelt's first term started when he was made vice president because it was seen as kind of a powerless trap at the time. So he didn't really want it, but the republican national convention gave it to him unanimously anyway, mostly to get rid of him. Of course the president was assassinated very shortly after so he became president. Still in 1908, it was custom to not run for more than two terms, and stop there as George Washington did. Roosevelt was good friends with Taft, so endorsed him for the 1908 election. It was only after he became president that Roosevelt saw his actions and disagreed with them.
What about the Federal Reserve Act/income tax? Would Teddy Roosevelt have blocked it (which wouldn't have been hard, since it doesn't seem to have been legally ratified)? That was a huge legacy of Wilson, giving control of our money supply to the central bankers, without which things would have turned out much differently.
+Andrew Schutte The gold standard was pointless. They pulled 100 economists on it and not a single one wanted to bring it back, whether they were libertarian or more liberal.
jthedog Sounds peaceful but could have some Very bad consequences.. Imagine a WW2 but with nukes and also affecting the modern world aka we would be at war right now instead of watching youtube.. Or just European living conditions could be cramped and shit
jthedog The USA developed nukes in WW2 almost exclusivly because of the work of Jewish physicists who fled Europe because of the Nazis. In this timeline that doesn't happen. The result is that Germany is likely the first to build nukes. The USA, Britain, Japan, Russia and others develop them years later. Without the examples of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the first use of nukes would likely involve many more being used.
My granddad is named Woodrow, named for the president due to a nice thing Wilson did regarding Native service in the military. He's told the story a few times and I never have the heart to tell him what an absolute cancer Wilson was on the country in a bunch of different ways
Having read nine books dedicated to Theodore Roosevelt (some repeatedly), I offer that this alternate time line is well thought out. Incidentally, Roosevelt would probably have lived much longer than his 60 years, for the 1912 election loss drove him to seek a substantial purpose. This led to a exploration achievement: The discovery of the source of a Brazilian river (thereafter called Rio Roosevelt). The long jungle expedition (over 6 weeks crossing over 600 miles of unchartered territory) cost three lives and nearly killed Roosevelt and his son Kermit. TR suffered malarial difficulties and infections, the site of a bullet still lodged in his chest (from a 1912 assassination attempt) was exacerbated... he eventually lost 50 pounds and begged to be abandoned in order to give the other explorers a better chance of survival. In the end he was carried out, and possibly a decade was shaved off his life.
J K look at the stock market today. We currently have 25% of working able persons on some form of unemployment or welfare. The federal reserves say inflation doesn’t exist but everything is going up. The federal reserves however is now buying corporate bonds and stashing it in the us treasury. When those bonds go bankrupt the us treasury will lose everything. So yes it is good...if you’re part of the 1%
The Man Who Belches jthedog i doubt the part of tha colonial one like india would be far to massive for britain to hold australia and new kiwi jokes aside would probabily whant self governance and america would not acept a british militar entry on neither of them and back to africa most of the nations in the continent whould whant self control like in hour time line and i dont know what political view russia would have but america russia china to a major extent and germany india brazil to a smaller one would push for more influence in the colonies so much that they would be a burden far too heavy for nations the arent that big this not counting military revolts that would be like in our time line far to blody for the general public to agreed so corect me if i am wrong but colonies would be over by the early 2000 forgive my horrible inglish
the thing is without world war 2 and the large nations in europe still in existence and rivals, you might see more wars in europe, while in our timeline the eu makes internal european wars nearly impossible, despite Germany, France and the UK still being great powers. Honestly the differences would be so massive that we can't know whether this alternate timeline would be better or not.
Archangel17 I argue WW2 was only a matter of time, somewhere down the line, someone is going to invade someone else, and the world would be at war once again. You just have to hope it is before Nuclear weapons are developed (likely by Germany, as none of their scientists flee or are captured during WW2, but the US, Russia, and Britian all have a chance to make some too, it's luck really, on who has the idea first)
I never said that ww2 couldn't/wouldn't happen, just that wars would eventually break out and these might be either worse or less worse. Ins case they are less worse it's probable more wars would follow afterwards likely involving nuclear weaponry.
For life's Bleachable moments germany would have won ww1 as the wakness of the russian army was exposed in th j-r war so they created the shliefen plan (go through belgium to france) and then focus on russia, so in contrast , they would have seen an avarage but huge army in the hands of the russians, thus focusing on russia and defending the border with france. This woild have caused great britain to not join the war and ez win for germany by 1916
For a start, Russia doesn't look pathetically weak in the eyes of the other european powers. Meaning Austria-Hungary hesitates to expand into the slavic Balkans (protected by Russia). If they don't eat Bosnia and don't push toward Serbia, no WW1. Or at least it doesn't start in 1914.
I am talking about Germany the reason why they gave the white check to AH was that they thought of russia as a meh AH is also a big meh so they have reasons to fear russia but Germany is great power sooo (sorry if my english is bad)
For life's Bleachable moments Lenin as economics professor and book writer, Stalin as a baptist patriarch, Taiwan as russian territory to this day probably... unless or rather until Germany and/or British would f//ck everyone over once again like they always do.
I like how this channel knows when to say "And now I have no clue going forward." It really makes it appear like there was good and proper research put into the theories and puts it a step above some other equally entertaining but more historical fanfic style videos out there.
I think you missed one elephant in the room. Nuclear weapons. With no Nazi movement, the Jewish physicists in Europe would have stayed there. That would have given Germany in particular a boost in this area. They likely would have detonated the first nuke around 1952. Worse, without the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings as examples of why nuclear war is bad, it's likely that the first moderate war after that would have seen the use of many such weapons.
First Cynic the thing is with no WWII there would be no need to make such a weapon. Therefore that’s one of your reasons done. Second many of the scientists would have been dead in the 1950 so they wouldn’t have a head start it would just be a old pace war like our wwI
Three things: One: Nuclear program. The Nazis didn't have one and, likely, neither would the Kaissereich. The US did and probably still would. Two: Fat Man and Little Boy weren't the result of ignorance, they were dropped knowing full well what kind of effect they'd have. Likewise they wouldn't be dropped willy-nilly on some random Banana republic. Three: There would absolutely be a need to make such a weapon. One because The Pacific war would've still happened and two because there's always a need for better weapons that reduce the likelihood of war through their sheer power to cause fear. In summation, Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably wouldn't avoid their nukings and the state of nukes today would probably more or less the same(potentially with less proliferation given there being no cold war or nuclear race with the Soviets).
@@aphgaming6836 in this timeline the next major war would've been fought against either Japan or Russia. Since Russia in this timeline is an economic powerhouse I would expect they would try to expand their influence further into Europe.
@@britball2388 it’s easy because it’s done a lot of bad shit. But still better than a German or russian dominated world, which were the other 2 possibilities of the 20th century, however if you go further back I can see a passive Ottoman or Revolutionary French dominated world being preferable.
Iྂ vྂoྂtྂeྂ fྂoྂrྂ hྂiྂmྂ I wish we could bring them back from the dead and make him go against Trump in the 2020 elections I guarantee you he would win in America could be truly great again
Thank you this is definitley my favorite election to talk and speculate about. Doesnt matter if its in class or on the internet. The election of 1912 was an important one for the entire world
I really like this because i just learned about WW1 and Teddy Roosevelt in my history class and this video really got my mind working. Thanks for the great video!!
It’s worth mentioning that Teddy was very experienced when it came to corralling the Kaiser (see Venezuela) and had something of a relationship with him. He may have been able to keep things from coming to blows for a while. It’s also likely that he would have gone to war with Mexico around that time.
Not as good as a central powers victory in my option. I believe a strong Europe led by a traditionalist honorable nation like the Kaiser's Germany is better for Western civilization then the more consumerist liberal cultures of the Anglo-Americans.
It's because it's filled with ignoring the terrible stuff and wishful thining. the British empire for an example remains which is glossed over, the british empire has more blood on it's hands than any other empire in history and it just survived.
@Jasta 2 again a societal norm present everywhere else at the time =/= founding principle. (I also edited my previous comment because I thought I could sum it up in just a sentence. Not because I wanted to be sneaky)
I mostly agree but have one or two ideas... 1: If German Poland was given to Russia (which is quite likely) then the Germans would still retain the Corridor- that was a slap in the face to the whole country, having East Prussia cut off from them. 2: Austria (including Bohemia and Croatia) would likely be allowed to federate with Germany if both wanted it, as the ethnic Germans in Austria wanted to be part of one great empire, not just a small European state, and in Germany there would likely be more sympathy for the nation. The Anchluss would take place in the 1920s.
Thanks for the video. TR was my Granddads Colonel. If we had more folks like him today and less like some others that will go un named we'd have not only a firm hold on our own nation and Constitutional freedom, but the world would be a better place as well.
Not much, if not the ottomans the Byzantine 'empire' would've collapsed or just be a very tiny country as the empire was reduced so much and very weak after the crusades. Like other comment: larger native bodies in the south, this also changes on circumstances(did the spanish never arrve, were they fought off or were the spanish for once not major dicks?) For templars: probably more private wealth in france from banks rather than the central monarch banking system.
I think you are forgetting something, Germany WANTED free trade, the UK RESTRICTED US TRADE BREAKING INTERNATIONAL LAW so... if TR is president, the FIRST thing he has to deal with is with the UK RESTRICTED US TRADE WHILE BREAKING INTERNATIONAL LAW! And we have to remember, German actions were a REACTION to UK illegal actions and US complacency. Since TR is a navalist and wouldnt tolerate illegal restrictions on US trade, where the UK unilaterally forbid the US from trading with neutral European countries and illegally stopping and searching US merchant ships, taking them to UK ports and demand THEY prove not to be carrying goods ultimately intended for Germany, upending the burden of proof. Outrageously illegal... So, I think TR would stand up against UK bullying and accelerate naval construction to make a point, basically preventing the illegal blockade of Germany while the US makes bank trading with BOTH sides, never getting involved in the war because he would be protecting US interest and making a huge profit... which was EXACTLY what the Germans wanted. So no Lusitania nor USW, no reason whatsoever to fight Germany. All these "TR gets the US into the war earlier", assumes that he just rolls over when the RN warships starts messing with US trade and impounding US vessels and sailors... yeah, TR allowing foreign warships to stop ships protected by the US flag. He might enter the war, just not on the side you think.
Here's a very big "what if" suggestion. What if Britain had put Operation Vegetarian into operation. For those who have never heard of this, Operation Vegetarian was a deliberate non-secret plan to mass bomb the German and Austrian countryside with hundreds of tons of Anthrax contaminated cattle cakes if Germany started to invade England. As a demonstration of this biological deterrent threat the RAF openly bombed an uninhabited island of the coast of Scotland to demonstrate that the threat was very real. (The island was decontaminated in 1991 and is apparently "safe" to visit). The Germans were very aware of Operation Vegetarian and this was one of the reasons HItler decided not to invade Britain and the Republic of Ireland in 1940. But what if Operation Vegetarian had been carried out. It would have been the world's first massive biological warfare attack on another nation. How many millions of Germans and Austrians would have been killed?? What damage would it have done to German agriculture?? Would the Anthrax spread to neighbouring occupied countries (France, Holland, Denmark) via natural contamination or from the cattle cakes carried by shot down RAF bombers crashing and disgorging their lethal payloads?? What effect would it had on Germany being able to continue fighting the war?? What would it have done to Britain's standing in the eyes of the world?? Would this have been deemed a war crime?? Lot's of questions in this "what if".
What a horrific and barbaric plan. Then again, not too out of the norm for Britain at the time. I have no idea why people consider them to be "the good guys" in WWII. Especially seeing the state the world is in now.
What if Doggerland existed? Perhaps instead of Great Britain drifting northwest it drifts northeast, going closer to Jutland and uplifting the North Sea seabed so that despite rising sea levels due to glaciers from the ice age would sink it.
Same. Teddy would have basically turned the U.S. into the badass it was (and still is) after WW2, but after WW1 (potentially avoid the depression), the German monarchy wouldn't have fallen (which means no Shitler and mass genocide of the Jews), no Communism, and maybe the European nations would have actually been able to modernize Africa and India.
Agree with everything concerning Roosevelt's first term. However, Roosevelt had developed health problems by 1916. Health problems that eventually killed him on January 6th, 1919. I doubt he would have run in 1916 due to his medical issues.
Those health problems where almost certainly due to his trip in South America and had he not taken that which he wouldn't have done if he were president he would have likely been fine.
I very definitely like this outcome much better than any other that I've seen thus far, including our own! Lol. Good job, as always! I've always been a huge fan of TR. He was such an incredible leader. Please keep the outstanding videos coming and God bless you, my friend!
For this timeline to be even more stable the danzig corridor should stay with germany so it wouldn't later have conflicts with poland about seperate east prussia
I like the grim ones it makes me feel like I'm living in the best version of reality. Unfortunately, you and I both have rosy outlooks on the Teddy Roosevelt alt-hist, so there goes that fantasy :P
Not to mention Roosevelt never would have signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act, which would have meant FAR LESS money for warmongers over the last 100 years.
Great Video but a couple of points and a few questions. The British, especially Lloyd George, was against such punishing terms of the treaty of Versailles and was mainly driven by the French. Also if WW1 finished in late 1916/early 1917 Britain would not have had anywhere near as much war debt to the USA and with no WW2 would not have been bankrupted by the additional war debt to the USA for WW2 (the UK did not fully repay the WW2 debt until 2005 and weirdly the WW1 debt until 2014). Also no Washington Naval agreement and therefore the three largest navies in the world would have been the British, USA and probably Japanese with the US and British Navies being of very similar size and seeing 50,000 ton Battleships with 16-18" guns in the 1930's. Very interesting Roosevelts plans for a National Health Service in 1912 which sounds very similar to the National Health Service in the UK formed just after WW2. how would that have shaped future US elections? Secondly - Roosevelts non segregation policies - Would it have advanced the civil rights movement 40 years? Or was the effects of WW2 a major factor in the rise of the civil rights movement? Another thought - without the Ottoman Empire collapsing in WW1 what about Ataturk, the formation of modern Turkey and all the issues regarding Palestine and the forming of the State of Israel? Hard to believe one election having so much influence
My predictions for this timeline are that with The Great War ending at best 2 years earlier than in our timeline Britain's settlers colonies wouldn't have lost their romantic view of the mother country allowing for an attempted revival of the Imperial Federation. This along with Roosevelt making it clear that American foreign policy was moving to mediation of the world over isolationism. As long as the two powers didn't tread on each others toes which is unlikely as Britain was reliant of America for most of its trade, and America wouldn't want to risk a costly war with Britain especially since they where centralising their empire. Germany is hard to determent since the lose of their colonial empire wouldn't be taken well but other than perhaps a government that would want to retake lands lost in Europe but nothing like what the Nazis wanted. With Italy still likely joining the allies with the promises of Austrian lands would be left lacking with a more moderate approach to the peace we would still see the rise of Fascism in Italy. The main thing here is the difference between Fascism and National Socialism, with the latter being an incredibly far from the other with Fascism being broad by design to fit as many countries as possible. National Socialism was an ideology that fit solely to the insane and ever developing beliefs of the party elite. Short version is Germany may become fascist but it would be more in line with Italy and Spain. This would radically change the way any future war would go though it would likely be between an industrialised Russia and Germany trying to reclaim its eastern lands while attempting to carve out a sphere of influence in the region. This war may drag in France though i don't know if it would drag in the US or the British it depends on how the war progresses. Interestingly enough we may see the Latin Block that would be inspired by the Imperial federation though a crisis of leadership would develop if France chooses to join though if they did i can see it not lasting long as French foreign policy would be curtailed by Italian ambitions of an empire in the Balkans which is something the French would likely not want to be involved with though they may if this works as a defence against Russian interference in the region. As for Asia Japan becoming bogged down in China forces them to look outward for more resources to overpower China bringing them into conflict with the other world powers. I cant say who would follow in Roosevelts footsteps since he was dead by this point but the attack on pearl harbour would bring America into the war leading to a quick defeat due down to Roosevelts naval build up. Due to how quick Japan would be pushed back the Japanese this would lead to the problem of Japan being weak at sea but still able to put up the suicidal defence that they did in our timeline. The problem here is that this would lead to America having to sit around blockading Japan waiting for the atomic bomb to be ready or risk an invasion of the home islands. Likely the US emboldened by their rapid victory's would attempt this though the invasion is either a failure due to Japanese resistance or the southern island is taken but the coast makes the US wait until they have the bomb. The war in Asia would leave the Europeans wakened even though victory would be assured with the entrance of the US into the war Japan setting up native run governments in the region spurred on rebellions against European rule for decades after the fact. We would see this though its likely the Europeans would combat this with a combination of force and political reforms. In the end this would be a world where America isn't the preeminent would power as France and Britain as well as either Russia or Germany would still be major world powers but with the dawn of nuclear weapons war would become unlikely between the powers instead sponsoring insurrections by local leaders in each others colonies though all out war would be unlikely. This timeline becomes more and more dominated over who wins the Russo German war or this worlds equivalent of WW2. But the powers would have shifting alliances in response to who was more powerful with the only constant of the US and Britain being far more willing to work together than the other powers.
I think in this timeline, Teddy would have reached a sort of "founding father" status and be revered among the likes of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.
You assume he hasn't in our timeline. What do George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson have in common? Gutzon Borglum, carver of Mount Rushmore.
@@kholdstare1672 I actually didn't know Teddy was on Mount Rushmore. But when you ask some random person on the street who the founding fathers are, you won't get Teddy Roosevelt as nearly as often as George Washington or Lincoln. That's all I was trying to say.
@@French408 That's fair. Honestly, he really isn't considered to be a founding father by most Americans Mt Rushmore is one of the only places where his importance has properly been recognized. Although, technically I wouldn't consider him a Founding Father, nor Lincoln. They're absolutely integral to our nation, but they didn't build the foundation of our nation. They built the first and second floors instead. George Washington founded our nation and gave us a lot of the precedents for how the president should act. Thomas Jefferson was responsible for the Louisiana Purchase, more than doubling the total land of the US. Abraham Lincoln took us through the Civil War and freed the slaves. Last but not least, Teddy prepared us for both world wars and the 20th century as a whole.
@@French408 I'd put both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as builders of the foundation. I'd probably draw the line between the foundation and the first floor of American history after Monroe. Lincoln served as the end of the first floor and the beginning of the second. Theodore Roosevelt would be the first president of the third floor of American history. Foundation: The presidents who were statesmen during the revolutionary war. First floor: Up to the civil war. Second floor: Civil War and Reconstruction era Third floor: America goes global with its influence Fourth floor: Post-WW2 era Fifth floor: 9/11 and the information era
I've only just found this... this is amazing. I've been interested in the field of 'alternate history' for years, and I've never come across the 1912 election as such a possible 'point of departure' before. I'm not sure I go along with all your assumptions. Even if the US had been in the trenches in 1914, there was a massive learning period for all armies, during which time massive casualties would have been suffered. That may well have turned US opinion against Roosevelt. I'm also not sure whether US troops would have been in the field in the numbers required to push Germany back and significantly alter the outcome of the first year of the war. However, you didn't touch on the dramatic deterrent effect that a President Roosevelt might have had on German intentions. They might still have misread the situation, as they (apparently) did over British determination to maintain the independence of Belgium, but it's worth considering. All in all though, this was fascinating. You could summarise this as 'where the 20th century went wrong'. Not sure this was cheerful, more a wistful 'if only'
Grant Scarboro 1. Kennedy would probably not have been assassinated. 2. Vietnam wouldn't have been as much of a military defeat for the Viet Cong. The downside: we wouldn't have Apocalypse Now.
Or... 1. Without Johnson, a Southerner, to help balance out the ticket, Kennedy loses in 1960 to Richard Nixon. No "Best and the Brightest", no "Camelot". No Kennedy assassination (either one). 2. No Moon landing in 1969, and the US continued to lag behind the USSR in the Space Race into the early 1970s. 3. Vietnam stays a low level conflict through much on the 1960s, until with Communist forces approaching Saigon in 1968, the US intervened decisively forcing an end to the war. 4. No Great Society, no Peace Corps, no Voting Rights Act, no Civil Rights Act, but a more gradual repeal of segregation laws and end to discrimination through the 1960s and 1970s. No Martin Luther King assassination, and he continues to lead the Civil Rights Movement well into the 1980s. 5. No Bay of Pigs Invasion. However, tensions between the US and USSR were high through out much of the Nixon administration (1961-1969) and nuclear war was narrowly avoided on multiple occasions. The increased tensions caused the Nixon administration to dramatically increase defense spending during the era, as well as funding for covert operations both abroad and inside the US. 6. "Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll" aren't really a thing, nor is there a Summer of Love in the 60s. Lots of other possibilities. America is probably a much more socially conservative place. Perhaps the social upheaval that came with the 1960s in America is just delayed until the 1970s.
I don’t think that Kennedy wins in 1960 without Johnson on the ticket. Johnson was key in the South especially Texas. This is mostly based on Robert Caro’s writings.
I feel that this timeline is a bit too idealistic. It's a happy outlook for sure but I feel it takes too modern of a view of what happened in the past to predict this alternate history. Communism I think wouldn't be seen as nearly big of a problem is Russia never turned Communist. I feel that the communist uprising could still win in China potentially as others powers care less about that theater of war. Additionally I feel that Japan might not have been taken into conflict with the USA, because it would seem almost suicidal to me to declare war on the United States without anything else going on in the world such as World War 2. Also potentially I could see other nations painting Monarchy as the 'war like' ideology and Wilson's push for democracy would just happen during this worlds World War 2 instead. Potentially Japan, Germany and Russia vs the democratic west. (Not necessarily as one singular war, but likely as a series of wars.) It would be more likely I feel that Japan and China (under any government) would end up siding against an Allied Western Power alliance to carve up all of Asia. Sort of as an extension of the later parts of the Opium Wars.
Alec Shockowitz 'Japan, Germany and Russia vs the democratic west'? Germany's monarchial system was as democratic as Britains. People often wrongly assume pre ww1 Germany was an absolut monarchy, but it was not. The Kaiser only had very limited power.
That's not entirely true, but the power of parliament was growing by the day, since they had decisive power over the budget. Britain started down that road much earlier, I think Queen Anne was the last British monarch to not give royal assent to a law made by parliament.
Gage Daliere my suggestion is that when Germany was trying to unify about early to mid 1800s what if the south German Confederation was formed which wouldve been like the north german confederation which was a union of north german states which I guess you could say joined prussia and maybe the north german confederation and south German Confederation fight for unification i really only suggested it to see how it affects other countries but I don't think that Austria would've joined but I'm no expert
I'd like to imagine that if there was a unification war between North and South Germany the North would still win, because Prussia, and it would end with Austria being excluded from Germany, like it was IRL after the austro-prussian war. If by some miracle though, Austria wins, let's say by sheer numbers and dumb luck, then we'd now have a gargantuan behemoth consisting of what is now Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czechia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, Serbia, Croatia, parts of France and parts of Italy. Stretching all the way from Schleswig in the north, to Venice in the south from Alsace in the west to Memel in the east. It'd effectively be the rebirth of the Holy Roman Empire, ruled by the Habsburg monarchy.
That's actually pretty interesting, having a different Germany on the map would have totally changed the scene in Europe. WW1 would have been completely different, and Napoleon III could have had a chance to retain his power.
You should check out the book "Taft's War". In that book, Teddy was killed in a hunting accident and Taft won against Wilson. I highly recommend that book for any Alt-History fan.
I read a story that after Teddy Roosevelt was denied the Republican nomination for President, he traveled throughout Europe and visited the German Kaiser who admired him greatly. Roosevelt privately told the Kaiser, to knock off his War mongering and blustering as he would start a World War that would destroy Europe. The Kaiser got upset and his lost his admiration for the former President. Unfortunately World War I started, killing 18 million and the Kaiser and the Russian Czar had to abdicate and set the stage for WW2 with 50 million deaths. Roosevelt was an extremely intelligent and prophetic leader. Fyi, Roosevelt’s demonstration of his “Great White Fleet” was a warning made directly at Japan, whom he felt was the greatest threat to the U.S. in the Pacific. He had no thoughts that he had to worry the same way with Britain, France, or Russia.
I think I have to disagree with one thing, I don't think the Germans would have agreed to cede Gdansk to Russia. Depending on the time of peace, Germany had pushed far into Russia, without a huge threat of them being pushed back to the border. I think a Poland would have been created in this timeline aswell. Germany and especially Russia would want a border state, with neither being injured severely enough to not pose a threat. Poland would probably be carved out of Polish Russia, and also having German Gdansk, with no other territorial changes in the east. Just my opinion tho.
The government would not have been desegregated under had TR defeated Wilson. In case you guys didn't know Woodrow Wilson was a KKK member who screened the incredible racist movie "The Birth of a Nation" to his cabinet members
There seems to be one flaw about you Alt-History is that U.S. would have most like have able to send troops to Europe until late 1915 or early 1916 during American not having a large number of troops or weapons, so the U.S. would wait for some time to build up the forces needed to send to Europe.
the only thing both republicans and democrats can agree on is that Teddy Roosevelt was one of the greatest US presidents. shame he isn't talked about much
The EU is more of a very decentralized version of the US, rather than a very centralozed version of the UN. The early stages of the EU (Steel and Coal Community) were only created because France didn't want Germany invading it ever again, and Germany wanted to show the West that they're committed to their (partly forced) alliance with them. With no Soviet bloc, and WWI being over relatively quickly, this would be a very different story: Germany doesn't want to give up sovereignty, or the possibility to invade France again, because they had just "lost" Elsass Lorraine and likely want revenge. Germany will likely want to attack Russia at some point in the future for the same readon that they did the Bresk-Litov Treaty in our timeline: Power, which they'd get by defeating a weak power.
Cheydinal Why did you put "lost" in quotation marks? Alsace-Loraine was always german before Frane stole it in the 17th century. Also the population was almost entirely german speaking.
That was 250 years before WWI, 200 years before the German conquest of Elsass-Lorraine in the Franco-Prussian War. I think those lapse over time, especially when the local population has accepted French language, culture and rule
If by that you mean in Europe, European politics actually is about the states and the local heads of states; whereas in America it's about about federally elected politicians from certain states, then I agree. In the US, until 1913, Senators were chosen by the representatives, much like today in Europe state governments choose ministers for the EU. The top business is done by the heads of governments themselves, they choose the European Commission President via a 2/3 majority (and let the European parliament vote for him, too). Imagine you'd need 2/3 of governors to agree to a Presidential candidate, and then the House gets to vote on whether to put him into office, that's ludicrous, and not very democratic. You'd see open political conflicts between for example California and Texas or whatever, and when the Great Recession hit, California could have held back bailout funds for like Nevada, unless they do certain things they want. Just ridiculous, nobody could possibly think that is a stable system
T Roosevelt is easily one of my favorite presidents and W Wilson is my least favorite. Really is interesting to think about how things may have been different. Love this content thank you
I've rarely heard this analysis of TR and Wilson. Excellent work. It also describes the duality of American democracy, considering your comments near the end re: the League of Nations and UN.
Teddy also would never have instated the federal reserve, meaning the IRS would also have never been instated. The Tax Service would actually manage taxes, and the mint would also still print money and manage it.
-No revival of the KKK and less tense race relations
- A more interventionist states in the economy
- A less strong central government
- The Russian revolution is avoided
- European colonialism endures
It is literally Teddy's meme being liked by all 4 sectors of the political spectrum.
That's because his method of rule was less about ideology than it was about realpolitik and solving problems.
He wasn't there to shine anyone's shoes for them, he was a well connected man with good political sense who took reasonably measured approaches to addressing the problems his nation struggled with.
If his enemies grew stronger he moved to curtail them.
If he saw an opportunity for the US to exert itself as a power, he took it.
If he saw big business growing beyond reasonable scale for the rest of the nation, he broke it up.
If the European Empires could keep the globe stable, he let them handle it, and maybe sniped a couple colonies off of then when they weren't looking.
In all these things it was a pragmatic drive to improve the domestic and international situation of the United States that drove his decisions. He is essentially the idealized vision that the Republican voting base has for America first, and that idea has become so powerful over time that just claiming to follow it has allowed ideologically (or most recently, ethically) different presidents to ride on its coattails to the Republican Ticket.
The Democratic party also heavily resembles Wilson to this day in many ways, with their wider focus on domestic racial problems, and their belief that morality rather than pragmatism should be the driver of foreign policy.
Maybe the communist influence would have lessoned but the tsars' position of power would still likely fall. There was just too much going against them. The bigger question is if the Duma would adapt and survive.
And the US would have entered WW1 much earlier
17th Amendment would also never have passed, which would have ensured the States would hold a very strong check on the Feds.
Probably the impact of Great Depression would be reduced unlike irl.
Also the War in Europe would end in 1916-17 if America intervened in 1914 or 1915 .
More Women's rights and representatives in the US as early as 1925 .
Stronger US Navy and Naval buildup in 1916 and could probably equal the number of warships the British Navy or at least get close to them. Also the previous point if the US intervened in 1914 in Europe the USN would gather battle experience in Europe against the German Navy, probably few American capital ships took part in Jutland as well.
The funny thing is that if it was Roosevelt vs Wilson today, both Democrats and Republicans would probably vote for Roosevelt.
Not likely as TR would be seen as to Nationalist and as a xenophobic cultural imperialist. Not to say Wilson would get their vote either for obvious reasons.
Well Republicans would most definitely vote for him for those specific reasons, as well as for his strongman personality, whilst liberals could look past that because of his progressive streak.he would also fare very well with all Christians in the nation because of his sincere and genuine piety.
Republicans would see Roosevelt as a strong nationalist figure, while Democrats would see him as a progressive as was the less racist of the two and also an environmentalist.
Most people who voted for Trump did so because of his FU personality. Roosevelt also had a similar personality.
His progressive streak? You mean his progressive streak of supporting capitalism, utilizing resources, and etc? Progressive then vs now were two very different things. Teddy was a progressive for industry, business, and etc wanting more freedom with not too much regulation. That is still counter-productive to most modern day liberal economic views
Can we all just together celebrate our hatred of the disgusting man that was Woodrow Wilson?
Virgin Wilson vs Chad Roosevelt
Yes Wilson was just bad
Brad Taft
@@angelmiau8445 Genius
He was a loser
Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.
“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American … There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
This should be the standard now 🥵
No racism, just tough love.
Well I agree that immigrants shouldn’t be treated any different than non-immigrants, but wiping out someone’s history is bad. So I agree 50% with this quote
Timboneio perhaps in assimilating the collective picks up traditions from those who immigrate?
Almost all of the immigrants at the time were white so it isn’t like he was talking about people of color, people were generally mean to the Southern European immigrants so he came out and said this, you can’t apply a quote from the early 1900s to modern events and say “look teddy Roosevelt liked the immigrants at the time so he must like the immigrants now”
ww1 would not be called ww1, but the great war
I think does the britsh still call it the great war
@@shelbycox6332 its called both
@@trn0m961 are you britsh?
@@shelbycox6332 yeah
@@trn0m961 I read a book called the great war it was about the British troops... I do enjoy Brits history
No destructive Communist revolutions, shorter WW1, no Nazis, probably no atom bomb, no Israeli-Arab military conflict, and an overall stable Middle East?
Possibly even no Sykes-Picot and we could see an Israel peacefully coexisting with Arabs as was originally planned?
Teddy, man, come back!
Well I'm not that sure -
That depends on when the war ends.
If in 1917 that might be the case, but probably not before that.
Anyway, as an Israeli, I still prefer roosevelt & shorter war, even if it means no Israel.
@@iddomargalit-friedman3897 The land was never yours in the first place.
Nukes would still he a thing but nuclear power may predate the bombs.
Oh idk about no nukes. Einstein and most other scientists would remain in Germany and Germany would love to gain an advantage for a future war against France , Britain , america and and even stronger Russia. I think it more likely the bomb would be invented by the end of the 30s .
@@internetual7350 are you an atheist?
So, you're saying that Teddy's world is best world?
Kaiser Wilhelm sounds like it
Kaiser Wilhelm it would be worse for colonised people
@@jaojao1768 Colonies besides South Africa are an immense waste of time founded on history's past where it was once fueled by necessity and purpose. With him being an isolationist this particularly tickles my fancy as I believe it's more important to consider long-term what can exponentially increase infrastructure technological/societal development.
He pretty much seems to think so but on the other hand he seems to think everythign would turn out perfect. But I very much doubt it. The only war for an example that Russia could have been kept from just conquering all land up to the Rhine if Germany had been defeated is if Roosevelt would have been willing to actually go to war with Russia.
He might be saying that, but it's not true. He was a progressive. He would have ABSOLUTELY brought about communism, but under a different name. It has a thousand different names. And he was big on giving women the vote, which was the biggest mistake of the 20th century and brought about the welfare state which is not a far cry from communism itself. Things would have been not too different with Teddy there.
Man, this sure is an interesting timeline. Almost as interesting as...
*WHAT IF JAPAN BECAME CATHOLIC IN THE 16TH CENTURY?*
@@jackienation12 good
Mark Freeman YOU GET WHAT YOU FUCKING DESERVE
There'd be a slice of life anime about Jesus in highschool
SAINT HIROHITO!!!!!!
What If Japan Became Animist In The 16TH Century
Every timeline is better than ours.....
Damnit Wilson
There is a heap of wishful thinking in this video.
Depends where it from...western slavs would be screwed....not talking about Africa..
German victory in ww2: Am I a joke to you?
@@jon6577 Russia would be way more powerful. No Soviet famines means it would grow about as much as every other Christian nation, which is around 3x after WWI so Russia would have 400 million people
Wait what DAMN-IT WOULD
Chuck Norris prays to Theodore Roosevelt in exchange for a portion of his power
Yes. Without TR Chuck would be nothing
Maybe Chuck IS Teddy!
Theodore Roosevelt might have lived to be in his 70s. He wouldn't have taken extensive trips to Africa or South America.
He might have been elected to a 4th term, 5th term, etc.
Robert Polityka The exploration to the River of Doubt is definitely what led to his early death.
lil woody yes, Teddy was hale and hearty but that trip to South America and the death of his son in WWI broke him.
His trip to Africa was done prior to his run for a third term.
Teddy wouldn't of ran for a 4th as he said. My first term was from a dead president so only was elected once in his second term
His sons death took more of a toll on him than any of those excursions. He died of a broken heart
I like the saying “world war one is the climax of all history”
Jeb Bushist me too.
Jobere Boucher the most climax of WW1
I always preferred the term "The war to end all wars" but that also has a nice ring to it!
yes it was the climax of history
It truly was
Wilson was horrible...graduated income tax(still violates the 14th amendment imho), Federal Reserve and signatory to the Treaty of Versailles(which violated his own 14 Points). Few Presidents did as much damage as he to his own country...maybe no one else did.
What a shame that the Supreme Court disagrees with you on the income tax (which Roosevelt supported) and the Federal Reserve (also supported.)
Finally, he was the worst President? I present James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce and John Tyler.
@@Brandon210-q4n I feel like Andrew Johnson and Herbert Hoover could make the list too
@@Brandon210-q4n At least they didnt propagate lost cause revisionism
Meh, all US presidents had their ups and downs and it’s hard to pinpoint which was the worst…
Yeah. Hut some are objectively worse than others. Like Wilson. He didn't really have any upside tho
Considering Woodrow Wilson was responsible for the Clan's revival, the US would have been so much better off.
Considering Wilson lead to the rise of the Nazi and the demoralization of the West, the world would have been much better off
This is literally the best thing that could have ever happened in the 20th Century. Wilson getting into power is truly a tragedy.
But for the elite of today, they realized it was a comedy
Holy shit Teddy Roosevelt was incredible.
@maltese 84 Robotnik in a toupee.
That's not a raccoon.... that's a dog!
America: the man
he has a TEDDY BEAR named after him
MIND YOUR LANGUAGE
Woodrow Wilson is the worst president ever. Everything bad in the 20th century is linked to Wilson's anglophilia and the US entering WWI. I like this timeline because it shows that the US could still have intervened in the war and it still wouldn't've been as bad as ours and because Theodore, he hated the name Teddy, Roosevelt is one of the best Americans. He should've been president longer.
Japan would still have attacked China, but they wouldn't have attacked the West. Because Nazi Germany was doing a great job at taking out France and the Netherlands, Japan thought they could roll over their Asian colonies. With them still powerful, Japan would've focused on China.
arch3223 this alternative timeline would be great to live in. Too bad bitch boy wilson fucked the world up.
Let's build a time machine. Change the course of everything.
This overlooks James Buchanan, easily the worst in US history. Wilson enacted a series of wide ranging reforms, such as the Keating-Owen Act, the appointment of Louis Brandeis to the Supreme Court, creation of the FTC, and support of labor.
He did a lot of good, but people only ever want to focus on the bad.
@Brandon Robinson The only good that Buchanan did was prevent the Civil War from happening 4 years earlier. Actually, come to think of it, Fillmore and Pierce also did their part in that.
Actually, if the US had not entered WW1 Germany would have won. They already had war plans prepared for an invasion of the US, since they recognized the US as the greatest threat to their power. Remember the Zimmerman telegram. If Germany had been allied with a defeated Britain they could have invaded the US from north and south. Wilson correctly realized that Germany had to be defeated and if so it's better to fight the war somewhere besides on your own territory.
Now I wish Teddy had won!
aྂsྂ dྂoྂ Iྂ
It wuold have been better
@@thermslusitania1151I saw you at the bottom of the Atlantic before I destroyed London since I’m Godzilla
Roosevelt should have run for a second term in 1908, and not allowed Taft to become president. then his chance to run for a 3rd term in 1912 probably would have been successful.
He ran for his second term in 1904. Roosevelt's first term started when he was made vice president because it was seen as kind of a powerless trap at the time. So he didn't really want it, but the republican national convention gave it to him unanimously anyway, mostly to get rid of him. Of course the president was assassinated very shortly after so he became president. Still in 1908, it was custom to not run for more than two terms, and stop there as George Washington did. Roosevelt was good friends with Taft, so endorsed him for the 1908 election. It was only after he became president that Roosevelt saw his actions and disagreed with them.
What about the Federal Reserve Act/income tax? Would Teddy Roosevelt have blocked it (which wouldn't have been hard, since it doesn't seem to have been legally ratified)? That was a huge legacy of Wilson, giving control of our money supply to the central bankers, without which things would have turned out much differently.
James Barca , we would more than likely still be on the gold and or silver standard, which would be epic. Friggen Wilson.......
As a Wilson, I disavow that Wilson.
+Andrew Schutte The gold standard was pointless. They pulled 100 economists on it and not a single one wanted to bring it back, whether they were libertarian or more liberal.
What if Teddy blocked the creation of the Fed? He would have been assassinated and we would have a more bizarre timeline.
James Barca teddy Roosevelt was a progressive. He would have probably legalized the progressive tax and income tax just like Wilson.
This is the best time line.
jthedog Sounds peaceful but could have some Very bad consequences.. Imagine a WW2 but with nukes and also affecting the modern world aka we would be at war right now instead of watching youtube.. Or just European living conditions could be cramped and shit
jthedog Kinda wish this was the real timeline
jthedog Not quite. What about nuclear weapons?
First Cynic
What about them?
jthedog The USA developed nukes in WW2 almost exclusivly because of the work of Jewish physicists who fled Europe because of the Nazis.
In this timeline that doesn't happen. The result is that Germany is likely the first to build nukes. The USA, Britain, Japan, Russia and others develop them years later.
Without the examples of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the first use of nukes would likely involve many more being used.
My granddad is named Woodrow, named for the president due to a nice thing Wilson did regarding Native service in the military. He's told the story a few times and I never have the heart to tell him what an absolute cancer Wilson was on the country in a bunch of different ways
What if Teddy Roosevelt won in 1912? History would have been totally different from what it is today. He was totally honest and totally uncoruptable.
Having read nine books dedicated to Theodore Roosevelt (some repeatedly), I offer that this alternate time line is well thought out. Incidentally, Roosevelt would probably have lived much longer than his 60 years, for the 1912 election loss drove him to seek a substantial purpose. This led to a exploration achievement: The discovery of the source of a Brazilian river (thereafter called Rio Roosevelt). The long jungle expedition (over 6 weeks crossing over 600 miles of unchartered territory) cost three lives and nearly killed Roosevelt and his son Kermit. TR suffered malarial difficulties and infections, the site of a bullet still lodged in his chest (from a 1912 assassination attempt) was exacerbated... he eventually lost 50 pounds and begged to be abandoned in order to give the other explorers a better chance of survival. In the end he was carried out, and possibly a decade was shaved off his life.
Do I sense a fellow reader of “river if doubt?”
It did not occur to me that Woodrow Wilson was such a lousy president.
Probably because people LOVE to focus on his downsides, while either denying or ignoring the good he did.
Brandon Korner what good? Legit just wondering.
J K he gave the entire us money supply to private bankers with no oversight from congress!
Gary Oakham does that count as good?
J K look at the stock market today. We currently have 25% of working able persons on some form of unemployment or welfare. The federal reserves say inflation doesn’t exist but everything is going up. The federal reserves however is now buying corporate bonds and stashing it in the us treasury. When those bonds go bankrupt the us treasury will lose everything. So yes it is good...if you’re part of the 1%
So in short, everything would be better other than some colonies.
The Man Who Belches jthedog i doubt the part of tha colonial one like india would be far to massive for britain to hold australia and new kiwi jokes aside would probabily whant self governance and america would not acept a british militar entry on neither of them and back to africa most of the nations in the continent whould whant self control like in hour time line and i dont know what political view russia would have but america russia china to a major extent and germany india brazil to a smaller one would push for more influence in the colonies so much that they would be a burden far too heavy for nations the arent that big this not counting military revolts that would be like in our time line far to blody for the general public to agreed so corect me if i am wrong but colonies would be over by the early 2000 forgive my horrible inglish
Yeah all 1 of them
the thing is without world war 2 and the large nations in europe still in existence and rivals, you might see more wars in europe, while in our timeline the eu makes internal european wars nearly impossible, despite Germany, France and the UK still being great powers.
Honestly the differences would be so massive that we can't know whether this alternate timeline would be better or not.
Archangel17 I argue WW2 was only a matter of time, somewhere down the line, someone is going to invade someone else, and the world would be at war once again. You just have to hope it is before Nuclear weapons are developed (likely by Germany, as none of their scientists flee or are captured during WW2, but the US, Russia, and Britian all have a chance to make some too, it's luck really, on who has the idea first)
I never said that ww2 couldn't/wouldn't happen, just that wars would eventually break out and these might be either worse or less worse. Ins case they are less worse it's probable more wars would follow afterwards likely involving nuclear weaponry.
TR is one of my favorite US Presidents. I'm glad I found this video.
What if Russia had won the Russo-Japanese war?
For life's Bleachable moments germany would have won ww1 as the wakness of the russian army was exposed in th j-r war so they created the shliefen plan (go through belgium to france) and then focus on russia, so in contrast , they would have seen an avarage but huge army in the hands of the russians, thus focusing on russia and defending the border with france.
This woild have caused great britain to not join the war and ez win for germany by 1916
Do it!
For a start, Russia doesn't look pathetically weak in the eyes of the other european powers. Meaning Austria-Hungary hesitates to expand into the slavic Balkans (protected by Russia).
If they don't eat Bosnia and don't push toward Serbia, no WW1. Or at least it doesn't start in 1914.
I am talking about Germany
the reason why they gave the white check to AH was that they thought of russia as a meh
AH is also a big meh so they have reasons to fear russia
but Germany is great power sooo
(sorry if my english is bad)
For life's Bleachable moments
Lenin as economics professor and book writer, Stalin as a baptist patriarch, Taiwan as russian territory to this day probably... unless or rather until Germany and/or British would f//ck everyone over once again like they always do.
"Woodrow Wilson, the worst president in US history"
-Alternate History Hub
Up to 45
He says the truth
And from Cypher the Cynical Historian.
I like how this channel knows when to say "And now I have no clue going forward." It really makes it appear like there was good and proper research put into the theories and puts it a step above some other equally entertaining but more historical fanfic style videos out there.
I think you missed one elephant in the room.
Nuclear weapons.
With no Nazi movement, the Jewish physicists in Europe would have stayed there. That would have given Germany in particular a boost in this area. They likely would have detonated the first nuke around 1952.
Worse, without the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings as examples of why nuclear war is bad, it's likely that the first moderate war after that would have seen the use of many such weapons.
First Cynic the thing is with no WWII there would be no need to make such a weapon. Therefore that’s one of your reasons done. Second many of the scientists would have been dead in the 1950 so they wouldn’t have a head start it would just be a old pace war like our wwI
Three things:
One: Nuclear program. The Nazis didn't have one and, likely, neither would the Kaissereich. The US did and probably still would.
Two: Fat Man and Little Boy weren't the result of ignorance, they were dropped knowing full well what kind of effect they'd have. Likewise they wouldn't be dropped willy-nilly on some random Banana republic.
Three: There would absolutely be a need to make such a weapon. One because The Pacific war would've still happened and two because there's always a need for better weapons that reduce the likelihood of war through their sheer power to cause fear.
In summation, Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably wouldn't avoid their nukings and the state of nukes today would probably more or less the same(potentially with less proliferation given there being no cold war or nuclear race with the Soviets).
@@aphgaming6836 in this timeline the next major war would've been fought against either Japan or Russia. Since Russia in this timeline is an economic powerhouse I would expect they would try to expand their influence further into Europe.
@Abraham Tello
How are nukes a "dark weapon"? If anything they're blindingly bright.
@@The_Crimson_Fucker willy-nilly, haha
The Bull Moose
TR will give WC the full deuce!
Teddy Roosevelt would have been awesome in 1912 as president instead of that f---ing bigot Woodrow Wilson and this Country would be a bit better
+Carlos Reid there is no telling what would have happened all you can do is learn from history and not wish it had been different
God, I wish Roosevelt won in 1912!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or had run again in 1908. Followed by Taft the country would be more advanced than we are today.
So what you're saying is that we're living in the "Bad" timeline?
Trust me a lot worse coulda happened
@@britball2388 it’s easy because it’s done a lot of bad shit. But still better than a German or russian dominated world, which were the other 2 possibilities of the 20th century, however if you go further back I can see a passive Ottoman or Revolutionary French dominated world being preferable.
@@jackstoltz330 I think all those possibilities would be superior to the current one... but yeah Roosevelt's is the ideal.
@@jackstoltz330 thats just the cursed timeline
@@Bigzthegreat more like based timeline 😎
Teddy Roosevelt 2020
Iྂ vྂoྂtྂeྂ fྂoྂrྂ hྂiྂmྂ I wish we could bring them back from the dead and make him go against Trump in the 2020 elections I guarantee you he would win in America could be truly great again
Trump is Teddy reincarnated. Don't you people know that.
Roosevelt was very progressive so probably not
@@K.C.-Games only by the era that he lived in not by modern standards.
If TR was running for the Republican seat in 2020, he would demolish Trump and make Bernie Sanders his VP.
Why does this guy sound like the burger king foot lettuce dude.
Fun he doesn't at all.
Memel Klaipeda Yeah, Chills has a deeper pitch.
Number 15 Burg---
He does
No u.
U R gay.
Thank you this is definitley my favorite election to talk and speculate about. Doesnt matter if its in class or on the internet. The election of 1912 was an important one for the entire world
I really like this because i just learned about WW1 and Teddy Roosevelt in my history class and this video really got my mind working. Thanks for the great video!!
It’s worth mentioning that Teddy was very experienced when it came to corralling the Kaiser (see Venezuela) and had something of a relationship with him. He may have been able to keep things from coming to blows for a while. It’s also likely that he would have gone to war with Mexico around that time.
I always did like Teddy, now I like him even more.
Wow a good timeline.
Not as good as a central powers victory in my option. I believe a strong Europe led by a traditionalist honorable nation like the Kaiser's Germany is better for Western civilization then the more consumerist liberal cultures of the Anglo-Americans.
It's because it's filled with ignoring the terrible stuff and wishful thining. the British empire for an example remains which is glossed over, the british empire has more blood on it's hands than any other empire in history and it just survived.
@@DaDunge Jolly good. ruclips.net/video/45qlATQNFyE/видео.html
@Wuanslm They come no where near the British.
@@DaDunge mfw mongol empire
Wilson, a true fascist.
Eh, not really.
More like a racist spudo-socialist
@Jasta 2 how is he a true American when he actively went against the nations founding principles?
@Jasta 2 it really wasn't.
Your conflating a societal norm present essentially everywhere around the globe with a founding principle.
@Jasta 2 again a societal norm present everywhere else at the time =/= founding principle.
(I also edited my previous comment because I thought I could sum it up in just a sentence. Not because I wanted to be sneaky)
I mostly agree but have one or two ideas...
1: If German Poland was given to Russia (which is quite likely) then the Germans would still retain the Corridor- that was a slap in the face to the whole country, having East Prussia cut off from them.
2: Austria (including Bohemia and Croatia) would likely be allowed to federate with Germany if both wanted it, as the ethnic Germans in Austria wanted to be part of one great empire, not just a small European state, and in Germany there would likely be more sympathy for the nation. The Anchluss would take place in the 1920s.
these analytical videos take a great deal of thought and effort (not just a recounting of events) I am glad you are doing them.
Thanks for the video. TR was my Granddads Colonel. If we had more folks like him today and less like some others that will go un named we'd have not only a firm hold on our own nation and Constitutional freedom, but the world would be a better place as well.
What if the Byzantine Empire never collapsed?
What if the Trail of Tears never happened?
What if Knights Templar never fell?
What if Eve never ate the apple?
Not much, if not the ottomans the Byzantine 'empire' would've collapsed or just be a very tiny country as the empire was reduced so much and very weak after the crusades.
Like other comment: larger native bodies in the south, this also changes on circumstances(did the spanish never arrve, were they fought off or were the spanish for once not major dicks?)
For templars: probably more private wealth in france from banks rather than the central monarch banking system.
@@newwordblues3030 Then we go further back. No Fourth Crusade.
No Eu or UN nor communism! Holy cow! Thats so great!
I was so happy when I saw this favorite president
a person with taxation is thefts favorite president is trust busting teddy. funny
Damn this is the best timeline ever!
I think you are forgetting something, Germany WANTED free trade, the UK RESTRICTED US TRADE BREAKING INTERNATIONAL LAW so... if TR is president, the FIRST thing he has to deal with is with the UK RESTRICTED US TRADE WHILE BREAKING INTERNATIONAL LAW! And we have to remember, German actions were a REACTION to UK illegal actions and US complacency.
Since TR is a navalist and wouldnt tolerate illegal restrictions on US trade, where the UK unilaterally forbid the US from trading with neutral European countries and illegally stopping and searching US merchant ships, taking them to UK ports and demand THEY prove not to be carrying goods ultimately intended for Germany, upending the burden of proof.
Outrageously illegal...
So, I think TR would stand up against UK bullying and accelerate naval construction to make a point, basically preventing the illegal blockade of Germany while the US makes bank trading with BOTH sides, never getting involved in the war because he would be protecting US interest and making a huge profit... which was EXACTLY what the Germans wanted.
So no Lusitania nor USW, no reason whatsoever to fight Germany.
All these "TR gets the US into the war earlier", assumes that he just rolls over when the RN warships starts messing with US trade and impounding US vessels and sailors... yeah, TR allowing foreign warships to stop ships protected by the US flag. He might enter the war, just not on the side you think.
Here's a very big "what if" suggestion.
What if Britain had put Operation Vegetarian into operation.
For those who have never heard of this, Operation Vegetarian was a deliberate non-secret plan to mass bomb the German and Austrian countryside with hundreds of tons of Anthrax contaminated cattle cakes if Germany started to invade England. As a demonstration of this biological deterrent threat the RAF openly bombed an uninhabited island of the coast of Scotland to demonstrate that the threat was very real. (The island was decontaminated in 1991 and is apparently "safe" to visit).
The Germans were very aware of Operation Vegetarian and this was one of the reasons HItler decided not to invade Britain and the Republic of Ireland in 1940.
But what if Operation Vegetarian had been carried out. It would have been the world's first massive biological warfare attack on another nation.
How many millions of Germans and Austrians would have been killed??
What damage would it have done to German agriculture??
Would the Anthrax spread to neighbouring occupied countries (France, Holland, Denmark) via natural contamination or from the cattle cakes carried by shot down RAF bombers crashing and disgorging their lethal payloads??
What effect would it had on Germany being able to continue fighting the war??
What would it have done to Britain's standing in the eyes of the world??
Would this have been deemed a war crime??
Lot's of questions in this "what if".
Andy Reid Japanese would still have a biological attack before the British if that happened.
What a horrific and barbaric plan. Then again, not too out of the norm for Britain at the time. I have no idea why people consider them to be "the good guys" in WWII. Especially seeing the state the world is in now.
Very good video, I am a big fan of Teddy and also think things would have been a little better with him as President.
What if Doggerland existed?
Perhaps instead of Great Britain drifting northwest it drifts northeast, going closer to Jutland and uplifting the North Sea seabed so that despite rising sea levels due to glaciers from the ice age would sink it.
After watching this very informative and well made video, its painful knowing that schools dont teach what should and never will.
Teddy roosevelt was a fucking chad.
god i wish i lived in that tiemlien
Same. Teddy would have basically turned the U.S. into the badass it was (and still is) after WW2, but after WW1 (potentially avoid the depression), the German monarchy wouldn't have fallen (which means no Shitler and mass genocide of the Jews), no Communism, and maybe the European nations would have actually been able to modernize Africa and India.
*2 - Fucking Ignorant Ass Fucks!!!*
No one did
I don't think we will ever be able to go back in time, but I will literally build an inter-dementional portal to find this universe
Dude teddy is one of my favorites! He is one the same level as Jefferson in my mind.
Agree with everything concerning Roosevelt's first term. However, Roosevelt had developed health problems by 1916. Health problems that eventually killed him on January 6th, 1919. I doubt he would have run in 1916 due to his medical issues.
Those health problems where almost certainly due to his trip in South America and had he not taken that which he wouldn't have done if he were president he would have likely been fine.
Vote for Roosevelt 1916
Also let’s say Teddy’s son does not die because that broke his heart literally and probably made his health worse
This just makes me sadder, knowing what we've lost...
I very definitely like this outcome much better than any other that I've seen thus far, including our own! Lol. Good job, as always! I've always been a huge fan of TR. He was such an incredible leader. Please keep the outstanding videos coming and God bless you, my friend!
Absolutely no gun control = safer citizens
For this timeline to be even more stable the danzig corridor should stay with germany so it wouldn't later have conflicts with poland about seperate east prussia
I like the grim ones it makes me feel like I'm living in the best version of reality. Unfortunately, you and I both have rosy outlooks on the Teddy Roosevelt alt-hist, so there goes that fantasy :P
Not to mention Roosevelt never would have signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act, which would have meant FAR LESS money for warmongers over the last 100 years.
“I’m an American stud, and you’re the British Elmer Fudd!” Theodore Roosevelt
Great Video but a couple of points and a few questions. The British, especially Lloyd George, was against such punishing terms of the treaty of Versailles and was mainly driven by the French. Also if WW1 finished in late 1916/early 1917 Britain would not have had anywhere near as much war debt to the USA and with no WW2 would not have been bankrupted by the additional war debt to the USA for WW2 (the UK did not fully repay the WW2 debt until 2005 and weirdly the WW1 debt until 2014). Also no Washington Naval agreement and therefore the three largest navies in the world would have been the British, USA and probably Japanese with the US and British Navies being of very similar size and seeing 50,000 ton Battleships with 16-18" guns in the 1930's. Very interesting Roosevelts plans for a National Health Service in 1912 which sounds very similar to the National Health Service in the UK formed just after WW2. how would that have shaped future US elections?
Secondly - Roosevelts non segregation policies - Would it have advanced the civil rights movement 40 years? Or was the effects of WW2 a major factor in the rise of the civil rights movement?
Another thought - without the Ottoman Empire collapsing in WW1 what about Ataturk, the formation of modern Turkey and all the issues regarding Palestine and the forming of the State of Israel?
Hard to believe one election having so much influence
My predictions for this timeline are that with The Great War ending at best 2 years earlier than in our timeline Britain's settlers colonies wouldn't have lost their romantic view of the mother country allowing for an attempted revival of the Imperial Federation. This along with Roosevelt making it clear that American foreign policy was moving to mediation of the world over isolationism. As long as the two powers didn't tread on each others toes which is unlikely as Britain was reliant of America for most of its trade, and America wouldn't want to risk a costly war with Britain especially since they where centralising their empire.
Germany is hard to determent since the lose of their colonial empire wouldn't be taken well but other than perhaps a government that would want to retake lands lost in Europe but nothing like what the Nazis wanted. With Italy still likely joining the allies with the promises of Austrian lands would be left lacking with a more moderate approach to the peace we would still see the rise of Fascism in Italy. The main thing here is the difference between Fascism and National Socialism, with the latter being an incredibly far from the other with Fascism being broad by design to fit as many countries as possible. National Socialism was an ideology that fit solely to the insane and ever developing beliefs of the party elite. Short version is Germany may become fascist but it would be more in line with Italy and Spain.
This would radically change the way any future war would go though it would likely be between an industrialised Russia and Germany trying to reclaim its eastern lands while attempting to carve out a sphere of influence in the region. This war may drag in France though i don't know if it would drag in the US or the British it depends on how the war progresses. Interestingly enough we may see the Latin Block that would be inspired by the Imperial federation though a crisis of leadership would develop if France chooses to join though if they did i can see it not lasting long as French foreign policy would be curtailed by Italian ambitions of an empire in the Balkans which is something the French would likely not want to be involved with though they may if this works as a defence against Russian interference in the region.
As for Asia Japan becoming bogged down in China forces them to look outward for more resources to overpower China bringing them into conflict with the other world powers. I cant say who would follow in Roosevelts footsteps since he was dead by this point but the attack on pearl harbour would bring America into the war leading to a quick defeat due down to Roosevelts naval build up. Due to how quick Japan would be pushed back the Japanese this would lead to the problem of Japan being weak at sea but still able to put up the suicidal defence that they did in our timeline. The problem here is that this would lead to America having to sit around blockading Japan waiting for the atomic bomb to be ready or risk an invasion of the home islands. Likely the US emboldened by their rapid victory's would attempt this though the invasion is either a failure due to Japanese resistance or the southern island is taken but the coast makes the US wait until they have the bomb. The war in Asia would leave the Europeans wakened even though victory would be assured with the entrance of the US into the war Japan setting up native run governments in the region spurred on rebellions against European rule for decades after the fact. We would see this though its likely the Europeans would combat this with a combination of force and political reforms.
In the end this would be a world where America isn't the preeminent would power as France and Britain as well as either Russia or Germany would still be major world powers but with the dawn of nuclear weapons war would become unlikely between the powers instead sponsoring insurrections by local leaders in each others colonies though all out war would be unlikely. This timeline becomes more and more dominated over who wins the Russo German war or this worlds equivalent of WW2. But the powers would have shifting alliances in response to who was more powerful with the only constant of the US and Britain being far more willing to work together than the other powers.
I think in this timeline, Teddy would have reached a sort of "founding father" status and be revered among the likes of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.
You assume he hasn't in our timeline. What do George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson have in common? Gutzon Borglum, carver of Mount Rushmore.
@@kholdstare1672 I actually didn't know Teddy was on Mount Rushmore. But when you ask some random person on the street who the founding fathers are, you won't get Teddy Roosevelt as nearly as often as George Washington or Lincoln. That's all I was trying to say.
@@French408 That's fair. Honestly, he really isn't considered to be a founding father by most Americans Mt Rushmore is one of the only places where his importance has properly been recognized.
Although, technically I wouldn't consider him a Founding Father, nor Lincoln. They're absolutely integral to our nation, but they didn't build the foundation of our nation. They built the first and second floors instead.
George Washington founded our nation and gave us a lot of the precedents for how the president should act. Thomas Jefferson was responsible for the Louisiana Purchase, more than doubling the total land of the US. Abraham Lincoln took us through the Civil War and freed the slaves. Last but not least, Teddy prepared us for both world wars and the 20th century as a whole.
@@kholdstare1672 Extremely well said. Where would you place Jefferson and Roosevelt with regards to the other floors?
@@French408 I'd put both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as builders of the foundation. I'd probably draw the line between the foundation and the first floor of American history after Monroe. Lincoln served as the end of the first floor and the beginning of the second. Theodore Roosevelt would be the first president of the third floor of American history.
Foundation: The presidents who were statesmen during the revolutionary war.
First floor: Up to the civil war.
Second floor: Civil War and Reconstruction era
Third floor: America goes global with its influence
Fourth floor: Post-WW2 era
Fifth floor: 9/11 and the information era
I've only just found this... this is amazing. I've been interested in the field of 'alternate history' for years, and I've never come across the 1912 election as such a possible 'point of departure' before. I'm not sure I go along with all your assumptions. Even if the US had been in the trenches in 1914, there was a massive learning period for all armies, during which time massive casualties would have been suffered. That may well have turned US opinion against Roosevelt. I'm also not sure whether US troops would have been in the field in the numbers required to push Germany back and significantly alter the outcome of the first year of the war. However, you didn't touch on the dramatic deterrent effect that a President Roosevelt might have had on German intentions. They might still have misread the situation, as they (apparently) did over British determination to maintain the independence of Belgium, but it's worth considering. All in all though, this was fascinating. You could summarise this as 'where the 20th century went wrong'. Not sure this was cheerful, more a wistful 'if only'
This was great. Teddy was a beast and is rightfully on Mount Rushmore.
"The nationalists would've won the civil war"
I like it
What if Lyndon Johnson died of his heart attack in 1956?
Grant Scarboro
1. Kennedy would probably not have been assassinated.
2. Vietnam wouldn't have been as much of a military defeat for the Viet Cong. The downside: we wouldn't have Apocalypse Now.
Or...
1. Without Johnson, a Southerner, to help balance out the ticket, Kennedy loses in 1960 to Richard Nixon. No "Best and the Brightest", no "Camelot". No Kennedy assassination (either one).
2. No Moon landing in 1969, and the US continued to lag behind the USSR in the Space Race into the early 1970s.
3. Vietnam stays a low level conflict through much on the 1960s, until with Communist forces approaching Saigon in 1968, the US intervened decisively forcing an end to the war.
4. No Great Society, no Peace Corps, no Voting Rights Act, no Civil Rights Act, but a more gradual repeal of segregation laws and end to discrimination through the 1960s and 1970s. No Martin Luther King assassination, and he continues to lead the Civil Rights Movement well into the 1980s.
5. No Bay of Pigs Invasion. However, tensions between the US and USSR were high through out much of the Nixon administration (1961-1969) and nuclear war was narrowly avoided on multiple occasions. The increased tensions caused the Nixon administration to dramatically increase defense spending during the era, as well as funding for covert operations both abroad and inside the US.
6. "Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll" aren't really a thing, nor is there a Summer of Love in the 60s.
Lots of other possibilities. America is probably a much more socially conservative place. Perhaps the social upheaval that came with the 1960s in America is just delayed until the 1970s.
I doubt that this one will get done, but it is an interesting question
Kennedy would have chosen Stuart Symington as his vp
I don’t think that Kennedy wins in 1960 without Johnson on the ticket. Johnson was key in the South especially Texas. This is mostly based on Robert Caro’s writings.
>he is possibly the greatest American to ever live
Aight this video checks out
Teedy Roosevelt was the first president to be loved by immigrants
All of this is academic conjecture but very well thought out. The author brings up excellent points.
You forgot the real question: Would anime still exist?
I dunno why but your question is brilliant. 🤔😏😆
The war with japan happens so probably yes
I feel that this timeline is a bit too idealistic. It's a happy outlook for sure but I feel it takes too modern of a view of what happened in the past to predict this alternate history.
Communism I think wouldn't be seen as nearly big of a problem is Russia never turned Communist. I feel that the communist uprising could still win in China potentially as others powers care less about that theater of war. Additionally I feel that Japan might not have been taken into conflict with the USA, because it would seem almost suicidal to me to declare war on the United States without anything else going on in the world such as World War 2. Also potentially I could see other nations painting Monarchy as the 'war like' ideology and Wilson's push for democracy would just happen during this worlds World War 2 instead. Potentially Japan, Germany and Russia vs the democratic west. (Not necessarily as one singular war, but likely as a series of wars.)
It would be more likely I feel that Japan and China (under any government) would end up siding against an Allied Western Power alliance to carve up all of Asia. Sort of as an extension of the later parts of the Opium Wars.
Alec Shockowitz 'Japan, Germany and Russia vs the democratic west'? Germany's monarchial system was as democratic as Britains. People often wrongly assume pre ww1 Germany was an absolut monarchy, but it was not. The Kaiser only had very limited power.
That's not entirely true, but the power of parliament was growing by the day, since they had decisive power over the budget. Britain started down that road much earlier, I think Queen Anne was the last British monarch to not give royal assent to a law made by parliament.
Not sure if you take suggestions but what do you think about the idea of a what if the south German Confederation was made
Gage Daliere my suggestion is that when Germany was trying to unify about early to mid 1800s what if the south German Confederation was formed which wouldve been like the north german confederation which was a union of north german states which I guess you could say joined prussia and maybe the north german confederation and south German Confederation fight for unification i really only suggested it to see how it affects other countries but I don't think that Austria would've joined but I'm no expert
I'd like to imagine that if there was a unification war between North and South Germany
the North would still win, because Prussia, and it would end with Austria being excluded from Germany, like it was IRL after the austro-prussian war.
If by some miracle though, Austria wins, let's say by sheer numbers and dumb luck, then we'd now have a gargantuan behemoth consisting of what is now Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czechia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, Serbia, Croatia, parts of France and parts of Italy.
Stretching all the way from Schleswig in the north, to Venice in the south
from Alsace in the west to Memel in the east.
It'd effectively be the rebirth of the Holy Roman Empire, ruled by the Habsburg monarchy.
CommanderShit at least they didn't try to reconquer Spain.
That's actually pretty interesting, having a different Germany on the map would have totally changed the scene in Europe. WW1 would have been completely different, and Napoleon III could have had a chance to retain his power.
Kyle Lindgren , had they retaken Spain, we wouldnt have had to deal with Franco's punk ass
Just finished "The Bully Pulpit" by Doris Kearns Goodwin and I find your arguments spot on Sir.
You should check out the book "Taft's War". In that book, Teddy was killed in a hunting accident and Taft won against Wilson. I highly recommend that book for any Alt-History fan.
There would also be no great depression. How can one be sad when just a couple decades before, Teddy Rick rolled the Kaiser?
Disagree. The Depression was caused by economic factors unrelated to the war.
@@japanpanda2179 but the war added fuel to the fire
Wow that sounds like the best timeline ever too bad that didn't happen
So basically Wilson screws everything up. Good to know I live in the inferior timeline.
Oh shut up
@mike scott no
@mike scott whatever he should here
@mike scott I said for him to shut up
I read a story that after Teddy Roosevelt was denied the Republican nomination for President, he traveled throughout Europe and visited the German Kaiser who admired him greatly. Roosevelt privately told the Kaiser, to knock off his War mongering and blustering as he would start a World War that would destroy Europe. The Kaiser got upset and his lost his admiration for the former President.
Unfortunately World War I started, killing 18 million and the Kaiser and the Russian Czar had to abdicate and set the stage for WW2 with 50 million deaths.
Roosevelt was an extremely intelligent and prophetic leader.
Fyi, Roosevelt’s demonstration of his “Great White Fleet” was a warning made directly at Japan, whom he felt was the greatest threat to the U.S. in the Pacific. He had no thoughts that he had to worry the same way with Britain, France, or Russia.
Enjoyed your report very much and also agree with your conclusions.
I think I have to disagree with one thing, I don't think the Germans would have agreed to cede Gdansk to Russia. Depending on the time of peace, Germany had pushed far into Russia, without a huge threat of them being pushed back to the border. I think a Poland would have been created in this timeline aswell. Germany and especially Russia would want a border state, with neither being injured severely enough to not pose a threat. Poland would probably be carved out of Polish Russia, and also having German Gdansk, with no other territorial changes in the east.
Just my opinion tho.
We say danzig around here sir
The government would not have been desegregated under had TR defeated Wilson.
In case you guys didn't know Woodrow Wilson was a KKK member who screened the incredible racist movie "The Birth of a Nation" to his cabinet members
Yup.
There seems to be one flaw about you Alt-History is that U.S. would have most like have able to send troops to Europe until late 1915 or early 1916 during American not having a large number of troops or weapons, so the U.S. would wait for some time to build up the forces needed to send to Europe.
Still would have gotten there alot sooner than Wilson literally waiting until it was over to do anything
I appreciate your alternative point of view.
the only thing both republicans and democrats can agree on is that Teddy Roosevelt was one of the greatest US presidents. shame he isn't talked about much
Why does every Roosevelt try to stay president for 4 terms man
Because they're Roosevelts!
What war did you fight in Granpa?
THE WAR
The EU is more of a very decentralized version of the US, rather than a very centralozed version of the UN.
The early stages of the EU (Steel and Coal Community) were only created because France didn't want Germany invading it ever again, and Germany wanted to show the West that they're committed to their (partly forced) alliance with them. With no Soviet bloc, and WWI being over relatively quickly, this would be a very different story: Germany doesn't want to give up sovereignty, or the possibility to invade France again, because they had just "lost" Elsass Lorraine and likely want revenge.
Germany will likely want to attack Russia at some point in the future for the same readon that they did the Bresk-Litov Treaty in our timeline: Power, which they'd get by defeating a weak power.
Cheydinal Why did you put "lost" in quotation marks? Alsace-Loraine was always german before Frane stole it in the 17th century. Also the population was almost entirely german speaking.
That was 250 years before WWI, 200 years before the German conquest of Elsass-Lorraine in the Franco-Prussian War. I think those lapse over time, especially when the local population has accepted French language, culture and rule
The EU is more of a Confederation of States
If by that you mean in Europe, European politics actually is about the states and the local heads of states; whereas in America it's about about federally elected politicians from certain states, then I agree.
In the US, until 1913, Senators were chosen by the representatives, much like today in Europe state governments choose ministers for the EU. The top business is done by the heads of governments themselves, they choose the European Commission President via a 2/3 majority (and let the European parliament vote for him, too). Imagine you'd need 2/3 of governors to agree to a Presidential candidate, and then the House gets to vote on whether to put him into office, that's ludicrous, and not very democratic. You'd see open political conflicts between for example California and Texas or whatever, and when the Great Recession hit, California could have held back bailout funds for like Nevada, unless they do certain things they want. Just ridiculous, nobody could possibly think that is a stable system
T Roosevelt is easily one of my favorite presidents and W Wilson is my least favorite. Really is interesting to think about how things may have been different. Love this content thank you
Teddy was the most American man
what if taiping rebellion succeeded
So the world would be better in general
I’ll be back!!!!!!
Second coming of Teddy > Second coming of Christ
I've rarely heard this analysis of TR and Wilson. Excellent work.
It also describes the duality of American democracy, considering your comments near the end re: the League of Nations and UN.
Teddy also would never have instated the federal reserve, meaning the IRS would also have never been instated. The Tax Service would actually manage taxes, and the mint would also still print money and manage it.