Texas as Mexico's Quebec

Strategos' Risk

How could an Anglo-dominant Texas have remained as part of Mexico, and what would its relationship be like?

Note that dominant would not require the population demographics of OTL, and could in fact be lower.
 

Kenichiro Harada

Such a relationship would not seem likely,as I can imagine the Mexicans would want full authority over Texas. Not a sort of "limbo-wating until Canadian civil war for Quebec independence" notion like we have in OTL.
 

lothaw

Had the Texan Revolution failed, there likely would've been another one in ten years or so.

Manifest Destiny. You can't stop it.
 

Philip

Donor
Strategos' Risk said:
How could an Anglo-dominant Texas have remained as part of Mexico, and what would its relationship be like?
Click to expand...

Seems unlikely. Texas has an Anglophone neighbor, and Mexico can't prevent American settlers from moving in. Seems to me that the situation would never be like Quebec's.
 

lothaw

Yeah, Texas has a neighboor that's going to share it's interests plus a steady stream of immigration.

Quebec has been on it's own since the French and Indian War.
 
Fenwick

Fenwick

How about instead Mexico pushes for irish catholics to settle in the area? Saint Patrick's brigade to me shows a clear idea of how important catholic faith can unify a region. So instead of an of wasps, who want slaves we have dirt poor irish farmers? They are happy to have the land, and comparing Ireland to Mexico at the time will enjoy more freedoms.
 
Mr.Wigglemunch

Mr.Wigglemunch

Doesn't it raise the problem that Texas claimed a significant amount of land but only controled perhaps a fraction of it with any grip, would mexico persist in claiming that land aswell? Thus more border disputes... or however you could twist it so it gives up a percentage of its claims and therefore gets a solid claim of some of texas leaving the rest to the USA.

Wiggles
 

Gimple

Thing is as a few eluded too, Texas mainly wanted independence from Mexico because Mexico banned slavery. Texas could not have survived as an independent nation without the US. Texas got independence to own slaves. Then joined the Union. Then the US has a civil war, slavery is abolished.
WI Mexico abolishes slavery after the US? WI they had the Irish Emigrants like a few mentioned. Texas would then not be able to survive between the two countries.
I always liked the argument between Bashir and O'Brien on DS9 about the Alamo.
 
Last edited:
Tobit

Tobit

Gimple said:
Thing is as a few eluded too, Texas mainly wanted independence from Mexico because Mexico banned slavery. Texas could not have survived as an independent nation without the US. Texas got independence to own slaves. Then joined the Union. Then the US has a civil war, slavery is abolished.
WI Mexico abolishes slavery after the US? WI they had the Irish Emigrants like a few mentioned. Texas would then not be able to survive between the two countries.
I always liked the argument between Bashir and O'Brien on DS9 about the Alamo.
Click to expand...

Mexico abolishing slavery after the US is very hard to do. Unless you are talking about longterm changes in the Spanish Empire. The fact is that mulattos, slaves, and free blacks quite often served in the Mexican army even prior to indepence. In general race relations were quite different.

The problem with texas breaking away is that many parts of Mexico were breaking away at the same time. Mexico City simply couldn't govern it all. Canada on the other hand was organized like a federation and slowly given independence over time. This allowed different nationalities to be governed very fairly.

If somehow the Spanish with great fore sight decide to create an excellent developed federation, than Texas would be just like Quebec. Personally I don't see this happening due to medieval and materialistic nature of the Spanish Empire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top