What if the British had won?

[angrychair]

Despite the promise of the Declaration of independence, while all men were created equal, some were more equal than others. That slavery did and would continue to exist despite the fight for independence was not lost on many of the still enslaved.
Interesting article that explores the state of slavery in the American colonies and in Great Britain at the time of the revolutionary war and if slavery would have been ended if they had won (reference: https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/172653)

One of the things I admit I was ignorant of was the number of former slaves that escaped to join British forces based on the possibility of being free and the freedom of their brethren. Estimates as high as 50,000 or even 100,000 are likely.

While the article doesn't explore this point, at seeing those numbers, I cant help but wonder out loud what if the Founders had actually meant what they said? That all men and women were created equal and free to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
The British were reinforced with up to ~100,000 committed troops, that had to have a very real impact on forces, supply lines and morale.
How much quicker and with less bloodshed and tears would it have been with hundreds of thousands of newly freed people fighting to protect their new nation?
We will never know but I hope somewhere out there in the multiverse is version of Earth that does.

[Hoyt]

1. Slavery would have ended sooner and we'd have healthcare.

[angrychair]

2. I would like to think so

I really do.

[pandr32]

4. +1

[Nevilledog]

8. And snazzy accents!

[gladium et scutum]

24. Those States

created after the war with Mexico would still be Spanish territory. Those states created from the Louisiana Purchase would still be French territory. Alaska would belong to the Russians. The United States would be about 1/3 its current size.

Plus hundreds of thousands of our citizens would have died in places like Isandlwana, the Somme, Imphal, Tobruk.

[JonLP24]

3. I thought the same things too

With the Revolution the two sides were more alike than they were apart. I think the Confederates are bigger traitors than Benedict Arnold (especially since he wasn't very successful).

[Stuart G]

5. Slavery ended sooner, Maybe no Civil War, Different Constitution but there would be..

a totally independent ..U.S.A. or what ever this country would have been called.

Remember all countries controlled by Great Britain eventually gained independence. Too many to list, but all.
Because of our different geography and those that came here, we would still have a diverse population and many states..(whatever they would be called) ..Hard to know ??
..If we continued to allow immigration from other countries, then the names of states might have been different, but the result probably the same..or very similar.

Side question of little importance? Where did all these people come from????
.......oh, wait a minute...my grandparents came from what is now Ukraine....
..........................All 4 were looking for a new way of life...

[Wounded Bear]

6. One reason Southerners supported the rebellion...

was because there was already an active abolitionist movement in Britain, even as early as the 1770's. They could see the writing on the wall and figured they could protect their "property" easier in a new republic than in the old monarchy/emerging democracy that was England of the time.

Many of the things complained about in the Declaration of Independence was more on Parliament and the East India Company than on the King himself, but he made an easier target for attack.

[whistler162]

7. We would be speaking English instead of American!

DUH!!!!

When did slavery end in Canada/England -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Canada

[spin]

9. Blacks fought on both sides in the American Revolution. ...

African Americans in the Revolutionary War

In the American Revolution, gaining freedom was the strongest motive for Black enslaved people who joined the Patriot or British armies. It is estimated that 20,000 African Americans joined the British cause, which promised freedom to enslaved people, as Black Loyalists. Around 9,000 African Americans became Black Patriots.[1]

As between 200,000 and 250,000 soldiers and militia served the American cause during the revolution in total, that would mean Black soldiers made up approximately four percent of the Patriots' numbers. Of the 9,000 Black soldiers, 5,000 were combat dedicated troops.[2] Notably, the average length of time in service for an African American soldier during the war was four and a half years (due to many serving for the whole eight-year duration), which was eight times longer than the average period for white soldiers. Meaning that while they were only four percent of the manpower base, they comprised around a quarter of the Patriots' strength in terms of man-hours, though this includes supportive roles.[3]

In contrast, about 20,000 escaped enslaved people joined and fought for the British army.[4] Much of this number was seen after Dunmore's Proclamation, and subsequently the Philipsburg Proclamation issued by Sir Henry Clinton.[5] Though between only 800–2,000 people who were enslaved reached Dunmore himself, the publication of both proclamations incentive nearly 100,000 enslaved people to escape across the American Colonies, many lured by the promise of freedom.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_Revolutionary_War

UPDATED:JUN 15, 2020ORIGINAL:FEB 11, 2020
7 Black Heroes of the American Revolution
COLETTE COLEMAN

***snip***

The First Rhode Island Regiment, Integrated Revolutionary Force

The First Rhode Island Regiment, the first Continental Army unit largely comprised of New England blacks, showcased African Americans’ skill as soldiers and commitment to their brethren on the battlefield. In the late 1770s, dwindling manpower forced George Washington to reconsider his original decision to ban blacks from the Continental Army. So in 1778, a Rhode Island legislature declared that both free and enslaved blacks could serve. To attract the latter, the Patriots promised freedom at the end of service.

Though relatively small—only about 130 men—the First Rhode Island Regiment had an outsized impact. Commanding General John Sullivan praised its soldiers for their success against attacks in the Battle of Newport, saying they displayed "desperate valor in repelling three furious Hessian (German) infantry assaults." When the Rhode Islanders journeyed to Virginia, where several thousand other soldiers were assembling, they stood out, according to aFrench military officer there, as “most neatly dressed, the best under arms and the most precise in all their maneuvers."

And one early historian, William Cooper, lauded their fierce loyalty. When their commander Colonel Christopher Greene was cut down during a surprise early-morning attack in May 1781, he wrote, “the sabers of the enemy only reached him through the bodies of his faithful guard of blacks, who hovered over him to protect him, and every one of whom was killed.”

***snip***

James Armistead Lafayette, the Double Agent

During the Revolution, James Armistead’s life changed drastically—from an enslaved person in Virginia to a double agent passing intel, and misinformation, between the two warring sides. When Armistead joined the Patriots’ efforts, they assigned him to infiltrate the enemy. So he pretended to be a runaway slave wanting to serve the crown, and was welcomed by the British with open arms. At first they assigned him menial support tasks, but he soon became a more strategic resource due to his vast knowledge of the local terrain. Armistead’s role got more interesting when the British directed him to spy on the Patriots. Since his loyalty remained with the colonists, he claimed to be bringing the British intel about the Continental Army, but he was actually pushing incorrect information to foil their plans. In the meantime, he was learning details of the British battle plans, which he brought back to his commander, General Marquis de Lafayette.

This served the Americans well. Because of Armistead’s efforts, they got the insight they needed to successfully execute the decisive Siege of Yorktown, which effectively ended the war. Years later, after a testimonial from the French general helped secure Armistead’s freedom, the former slave changed his surname to Lafayette.
https://www.history.com/news/black-heroes-american-revolution

[angrychair]

11. I dont disagree

That some slaves fought on the side of the American colonies but in all actually many more fought on the side of the British and (apon some research) even more fought from within by causing supply chain delays and sabotaging operations as slaves.

[wishstar]

10. British treaties with Native Americans might have been honored longer also

instead of the American militias voiding the treaties and systematically wiping out so many native villages and claiming the land as their rewards for fighting in the Revolutionary War and then the War of 1812.

[spin]

13. This nation has a terrible record of dealing with Native Americans ...

as well as slaves. Definitely not a portion of our history to be proud of.

[roamer65]

17. Very true.

After 1763, Britain restricted immigration of colonists west of the Appalachian Mts. That restriction was one of the reasons for the War for Independence.

https://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/1763-proclamation-of

[liberaltrucker]

12. Gallows throughout the Colonies would've been VERY busy

nt

[Happy Hoosier]

14. We'd probably look like Canada. NT

[roamer65]

16. The northern states would already be a part of a Canada.

The southern ones would be a separate country. The split would have happened without a civil war.

[Dagstead Bumwood]

19. You mean dreamy?

[Raine]

15. I wouldn't exist, I have an ancestor who fought alongside Washington

I'm sure he Brits would've executed him.

[angrychair]

22. The Birtish part was just an intro

To my bigger point.
The "what if British had won" was really just meant as a catalyst to the broader point of "what if we had just meant what we said in the Declaration in the first place" and not gone to war with slaves we should have set free in the first place, ie "all men are created equal"

[Straw Man]

18. Britain abolished slavery in 1833 ...

... but exempted some of the colonies. The interesting question is whether that exemption would have included North America if they had managed to hold onto it.

Counter-factual history is entirely speculative: interesting at best, pointless at worst.

[angrychair]

21. I don't disagree

The "what if British had won" was really just meant as a catalyst to the broader point of "what if we had just meant what we said in the Declaration in the first place" and not gone to war with slaves we should have set free in the first place, ie "all men are created equal"

[anamnua]

20. Quite possibly Canada and the US would have been one country NT

[OnDoutside]

23. If the British had won, you'd be led by a lying, philandering POS. No change then.

[Baclava]

25. Slavery would NOT have ended, there would have been no transcontinental railroad, no automobiles

Half the country would be Native American lands, horses and biggies would still be main transportation. Steel would be an oddity, heavier than air flying machines would be a dream.

Whales would be extinct as baleen corsets would still be in fashion and electricity and electric light a mere parlor game to amuse children.

[edhopper]

26. But America was a Democracy

no matter how flawed, it was the first sustained modern Democracy. Would the ideals enshrined in the Constitution have existed? Would there have been a French Revolution without it? Would there have been the same movement toward Democracy in Europe?
Don't know, but changing this event would have altered history in incalculable ways.

[pecosbob]

27. Britain would have taken the lands Jefferson purchased

California might still be under Mexican control.

*To your broader point, freedom only meant freedom to conduct commerce unimpeded to them.

[MineralMan]

28. You'd better serve your intellect by looking forward, rather than backward.

History cannot be changed. The future can. Think about how to improve the future, I suggest, not how to change the past.

[hunter]

29. Oh, it can be changed. But there is only one past that works for what we are now.

There are plenty of timelines, past and future, where humans extinguish themselves, and even more where humans don't exist for reasons beyond human influence.

For example, the only dinosaurs to survive the big rock were small and feathered. The only mammals to survive the big rock were small, nocturnal, and probably lived in burrows.

But we can't move that rock in our own timeline because we'd no longer exist to move the rock.



It's in our genes, going all the way back to the beginning of life on earth, to avoid the timelines where we don't exist.

Alas, most species of life are extinct, they were unable to avoid timelines where they don't exist.

Whether brains like ours are useful for long term survival is not determined.

But it would be sad, for us humans anyways, if we went extinct because we were too lazy to use our brains in cooperation with one another to discern a clear path forward because we had no clear perception of the path behind us.

[MineralMan]

30. The only timeline we have to work with is the one we are in.

The only universe we can inhabit is the one we inhabit. All other potential universes are unavailable to us, even to observe.

Individually, we get just a brief period of time to exist in and to change that timeline for the future. Mostly, we do not affect it, although a few individuals manage to do so, one way or another.

Will our species become extinct? No doubt it will at some point. Something will change at some point to make our environment deadly to us. We don't know what that will be, or when it will occur. We may evolve into a different species before that happens, or we may just wink out of existence.

None of that matters, though, to us as individuals. Individuals become extinct in just a few decades.

[hunter]

32. The intellect that imagines what might have been is better able to imagine what might be.

Forging on ahead is of no use if you don't know where you have been and you have no idea where you are going.

I'm in constant conversation with my past selves and future selves. It's especially important not to get bogged down in regrets. It is these conversations that bring me to this present. When my conversation is successful the flaws and failures of my past will not be the flaws and failures of my future.

Yet there are flaws and failures throughout. Some of my future selves are bigger assholes than my past selves ever were, but maybe less a danger to themselves and others. This is progress.

Human society could work in a similar fashion. Here in the U.S.A. we don't have realistic conversations with our past and it seems we don't have any clear vision of possible futures.

This present is clearly a dystopian one. Trump blathering on at the foot of a defaced Lakota sacred place, ignoring a virus that is likely to kill more than a million U.S. citizens, has got to be one of the low points in this nation's frequently sordid history.

Damn right I will get out the vote for Biden.

[Polybius]

31. Talking fondly about the Founding Fathers would be severely frowned upon

There most certainly wouldn't be any statues of them.

[area51]

33. Maybe we'd have healthcare as a right. n/t