>>25 What if the Roman empire didn't import jews?

What are your favorite timelines and points of divergence? My favorite POD is where the Germany WWII, but barely, so there's a three-way cold war between the Allies, the Axis, and the Comintern.

>>28 Thats the easiest to think about really, the others have too far reaching consequences, like, imagien if napoleon had won, too much shit would change.

>>28 I think it's the Kaiserreich one that I really liked where Germany won WW1. IIRC it's the lore for an Hearts of Iron mod.

>>32 Yeah, germany wins WW1, russia gets its revolution but kicks out the commies while france and the UK turn commie, then the USA has a civil war. Also china gets taken over by germany, wich makes japan butthurt.

China had several chances to colonize the shit out of everybody else, their navy was far ahead compared to the rest of the world, they even reached east Africa before the Europeans. There's an island where a Chinese navy run aground that the sailors where isolated, it was found there were Chinese coins and the members of the crew even had native wives since to this day Chinese origin names are found on the place. So, there's an alternative timeline where Australia, the Americas and even Africa was colonized by Chinese migrants. The DoD victoria 2 mod works with the first two alternate history scenarios.

What would have happened if the south won, or atleast reached a peace deal, with the north in the USA civil war?

>>51 There is already one, but it's just weird. It's southern victory, But it ends as ww2 but france and britain are nationalist and south bassically nazis. https://www.deviantart.com/vexiphile/gallery/65238764/shipbucket-au-southern-victory

>>52 But those are just fanarts it's written by harry trutledove.

>>52 >>53 I will never understand this obsesion with making the southern states nazis, i would understand if they just say they joined the axis due to political or strategic stuff.

>>25 Why do people fixate so much on borders but always ignore culture or ideologies? Any time you see Aut histories it's just map painting HoI4/Vicky junk, but like a non-English colonist culture is never explored. Take China for instance, everyone jacks off to the thought of the Commies losing, but no one bothers to think about what it would mean for the common people under Nationalist rule. Or the culture of a Neo Confederacy that survives into the 1900s. Or the dismantling of class structures in a prolonged British Raj and what it would mean to the commoners.

>>51 According to whatifalthist and a bunch of other breadtubers, the general consensus is that as technology progressed and the plantation economy got shafted which is the entire reason why the South went to war in the first place the South would slowly lose its original identity, since keeping slaves would be really expensive and the North historically was already on its way to industrialization. Basically the South would be a richer but really unstable version of what it's today and would keep manifesting destiny while being played geopolitically by European powers until the Yankees would be so industrially superior that the eventual clash between the two (authistorians claim it's in WWI but it may as well be earlier or later) the South would just be annexed back and with it all the extra clay.

>>56 Seems completely reasonable, the south always had less manpower and industry, and history went to show that industrialization beats the fuck out of slave plantations.

>>55 Borders are easier to change than ideology and culture. A small example I've wondered about is how computers would come about in a Nazi German victory. Would the German computers be considered only scientific and industrial tools? Would there be a home computer market and a German/Axis-only internet? Would there be smuggling from outside? Would vidya even exist, or would it be considered a waste of time and resources?

>>58 Id say it would depend on how the german economy is run post war. If they go the socialist route, then no, it would be used only for matters that benefit the state like in the soviet union. If they had liberalized te economy, then probably vidya would have come about eventually since theres a consumer market.

>>59 >If they had liberalized te economy, then probably vidya would have come about eventually since theres a consumer market. This reminds me of something

>>55 >what it would mean for the common people under Nationalist rule. To be honest I dont think they would be that different. The chinese are really patriotic for better or worse and I cant see that changing with a nationalist victory.

>>60 Well yeah, but its a real thing to think about, natsocs were socialists, would they have gone down the centralized, planned economy or stop being a bunch of autists and let people trade and do business in peace? >>63 I always thought the outcome of a nationalist victory wouldnt realyl be internal but external, the entire cold war would have been vastly different, atleast in asia.

>>64 >or stop being a bunch of autists and let people trade and do business in peace? They already did this. This is the problem with people being unable, or unwilling to actually read about their economy. It was a mixed economy with a large private sector, with the biggest elements of the private sector in large corporations being pit against each other by the government for competitive contracts. Small and middle class businesses existed already and grew after the Weimar spending fuckups were dealt with. Frankly, National Socialism is a mostly philosophical kind of ideology that could be applied to different power and economic structures. They hated democracy, but they weren't really economic ideologues on anything that didn't pertain to usury and self-sufficiency (Autarky) of their own country. Would have been in a lot better position to reform wherever they needed to as a result. >>55 >Take China for instance Well the way it, we would mostly be wondering how China deals with territory it claimed like Xinjiang (Xigur territory), Tibet, and Mongolia. It's likely that because of Mongolia's connection to the USSR that China would pragmatically back off that claim. They may have negotiated a deal with Tibet either involving autonomy or independence depending on what the Chinese thought were in their best interests. Internally, I mean we saw how Taiwan developed. Highly likely that they liberalize to a high degree, after about a few decades of dictatorship like Taiwan and the ROK. Maybe there would be less incentive for this with China being more or less intact, but it's far more likely in this timeline than in PRC takeover. >>56 >spoiler Leaving out the bit about internal trade tariffs and unfavorable taxes on Southern trade that only benefited Northern industrialists. South would have definitely dropped slaves in the long run and industrialized more in order to remain competitive going into the late 19th and early 20th century. >the South would slowly lose its original identity Their identity wouldn't go anywhere, Southern culture still survives today. A change of economic policies doesn't really change this, especially since it would still largely be an agrarian economy even with further industrialization. The big question with the South is how it would compete with what remained of the US, and like mentioned, whether the World Wars would spill over into the Americas and drag us into the retarded slaughter of millions of the best people the Western world had.