How dangerous would a Fascist America be?

How Dangerous would a Fascist America Be?

  • Very Dangerous

    Votes: 192 82.1%
  • Mildly Dangerous

    Votes: 39 16.7%
  • Not Dangerous at all

    Votes: 3 1.3%

  • Total voters
    234
@cpip
THX for this clarification :)
If that isn't obvious, then I fear you're clearly unacquainted with American Culture and don't know what 'America' "is and is about."
Unfortunatly I have to admitt to : YES.
The 'GI-culture' brought to me as THE example of America didn't really taught such things.

Leaves me with another (possible minor ?) question :
how to blend in the german americans, russian americans, scandinavian americans, italian americans, dutch americans (Roosevelts ;-) ), polish americans ... or will they be send-to-camp as well ?
 
@cpip
THXUnfortunatly I have to admitt to : YES.
The 'GI-culture' brought to me as THE example of America didn't really taught such things.

Leaves me with another (possible minor ?) question :
how to blend in the german americans, russian americans, scandinavian americans, italian americans, dutch americans (Roosevelts ;-) ), polish americans ... or will they be send-to-camp as well ?

I suspect it will depend on the people in question. If they're blending into the English-speaking body politic, then it's likely they're Just Fine. They're The Right Kind Of People. Maybe you don't necessarily want your daughter to marry one, may go the saying, but it's okay if they live down the street.

The "hyphenated-Americans", as Roosevelt and Wilson put it -- "Any man who carries a hyphen about with him carries a dagger that he is ready to plunge into the vitals of this Republic whenever he gets ready" -- those are the ones who get looked at suspiciously. The ones who don't speak English well, and the ones who don't speak English at home. The ones who don't "look right", who have some significant deviation from an idealized Northern European look to them... they're at least delegated to second-class citizenship. Not directly, and not obviously, but virulent strains of racism were present in America in 1940 even without the encouragement of fascist leaders in government: it'll be even worse ITTL. I don't think we'd see camps -- that's more specific to Nazism than to fascism as practiced in other locales -- but you will see a rise in eugenics movements, anti-immigrant and anti-foreigner riots, and the like.
 
Why are Fascist governments incompetent? Is there any particular reason that a massively powerful Fascist U.S. be less effective than than OTL U.S.? In theory shouldn't a centralized, strong goverment make running things easier and more efficient? So why is it that when a country goes fascist=incompetentness and weakness?
 
A Fascist-ish (do not expect a carbon copy of Italy, Germany, or Japan. Rather, expect a nationalistic, racist, nativist, pro-business conglomerate.) U.S would be mostly concerned with internal affairs rather than expansion. At the very least we'd see promotion of the KKK and other groups. At worst we could see the expansion of eugenics to genocidal levels.

You have to look at the American far right of this time to get an idea. They would be wildly nativist and concerned with keeping civil rights down. For any regime to be successful, however, they would have to cooperate at least somewhat with business of the time, making them unconcerned with smashing everything about the old order.

As for foreign affairs, don't expect massive expansionist campaigns through North America- nobody's interested. In fact, a fascist America's main event would probably be Japan, and they would destroy them to solidify America's control over the Pacific. Meanwhile, Latin America would slowly adopt governments acceptable to a far right America.

The Soviet Union would remain the big Boogeyman America despises. Assuming Europe goes the same as OTL, they'll try to pressure the Nazis and Britain into making peace, while supporting the Germans against the USSR (similar to how they helped the entente in ww1).

Overall, they'll be concerned primarily with reshaping U.S society into what they want it to be. What this is depends on specifics. Meanwhile, they will strengthen their hold over U.S spheres of influence, including Latin America, the Pacific, and Southeast Asia (including China). They will mostly ignore Europe, except to contain the SU and possibly become friends with Nazi Germany.

It's hard to tell whether the far right's love affair with Nazi Germany would persist ITTL. It probably would, but a fascist U.S would have very little problems with Britain.
 
Last edited:
The most right-wing americans at the time were in favor of staying out of foreign wars after WW1. They were non-interventionists or even isolationist. Chances are you won't see a land lease to the Soviet Union or it will be much less gernous.
Oh please. That's like saying segregationists were for States Rights for the principle of the thing.

The American far-sighted was non-interventionist because they didn't want to intervene against Nazi Germany, whom they adored, or for the Soviet Union, whom they despised.

If there's any sort of land lease here, it's going to Germany when they fight the Soviets.
 
To all this discussion of how a fascist America would effect Germany v.s the USSR, I just have one thing to add: Britain's not gonna be in this thing forever. OTL was hard on Britain with American support. Without it, and with America cozying up to the Nazis, Britain will simply have to throw in the towel at some point. The Americans will be more than willing to help negotiate: Keeping Britain and Germany as two strong powers capable of keeping non-whites and the Soviet Union down as well as balancing each other out is a huge boon to them.
 
That's like saying segregationists were for States Rights for the principle of the thing.

Just to be nitpicky, I point you to Barry Goldwater. ;)

The American far-sighted was non-interventionist because they didn't want to intervene against Nazi Germany, whom they adored, or for the Soviet Union, whom they despised.

If there's any sort of land lease here, it's going to Germany when they fight the Soviets.

No, it's more than that. That might be true for certain individuals who are part of the political establishment, but not the public. Well, excluding any slavic-americans and german-americans at least. Most ordinary people in nearly all countries don't want to go to war when the most they can get out of it is the privilege of returning home with a whole body and sound mind. Wilson got to spread democracy, but I don't think the average american really thought an abstract ideal like that was worth getting involved in foreign affairs at the high cost of life they sustained. Secondly, the policy and prevailing attitude of non-interventionism predates the rise of Nazi Germany. Thirdly, there have been arguments for non-interventionism in the US since its' founding to today so I think the motivations for it can transcend (dis)liking Nazis but (dis)liking Commies.
 
Just to be nitpicky, I point you to Barry Goldwater. ;)



No, it's more than that. That might be true for certain individuals who are part of the political establishment, but not the public. Well, excluding any slavic-americans and german-americans at least. Most ordinary people in nearly all countries don't want to go to war when the most they can get out of it is the privilege of returning home with a whole body and sound mind. Wilson got to spread democracy, but I don't think the average american really thought an abstract ideal like that was worth getting involved in foreign affairs at the high cost of life they sustained. Secondly, the policy and prevailing attitude of non-interventionism predates the rise of Nazi Germany. Thirdly, there have been arguments for non-interventionism in the US since its' founding to today so I think the motivations for it can transcend (dis)liking Nazis but (dis)liking Commies.
It certainly can. I myself am a non-interventionist. Many Americans of the time were committed isolationists, which is what the far right used to gain votes.

However, the far right itself didn't generally care about this principle, unless it helped them get ahead.
 
@Caesar Biden
A fascistish USA you describe, comming to power in the first half of the 30ies, ...
- Could change Hitlers outlook on America, seeing, that its NOT as degenerated by jewish influence as he believed earlier and change his 'looking for a friend' from Britain to USA instead
- Could make Nazi-Germany seek - and probably get - some more favourable economic deals with USA, improving its starting pre-war economy
- Could make the Entente powers (Britain and France) keep away from supporting Poland, Romania etc. WITHOUT the - inofficial - affirmations of support by the Roosevelt administration.

- ? Would this make the Entente more givingly to Stalin ? Giving him the 'influence sphere' they didn't in OTL but Germany did ? (Molotov-Ribbentrop pact)

This would make at least a very different WW 2.
 

Deleted member 1487

@Caesar Biden
A fascistish USA you describe, comming to power in the first half of the 30ies, ...
- Could change Hitlers outlook on America, seeing, that its NOT as degenerated by jewish influence as he believed earlier and change his 'looking for a friend' from Britain to USA instead
- Could make Nazi-Germany seek - and probably get - some more favourable economic deals with USA, improving its starting pre-war economy
- Could make the Entente powers (Britain and France) keep away from supporting Poland, Romania etc. WITHOUT the - inofficial - affirmations of support by the Roosevelt administration.

- ? Would this make the Entente more givingly to Stalin ? Giving him the 'influence sphere' they didn't in OTL but Germany did ? (Molotov-Ribbentrop pact)

This would make at least a very different WW 2.
Of course a Fascist US only interested in its own profits might still see European Fascists as rivals, especially as Hitler is interested in setting up his European empire that shuts out US business interests. Despite common politics, the Darwinian attitudes of both sides could see the other as a rival to be conquered.
 
@Caesar Biden
A fascistish USA you describe, comming to power in the first half of the 30ies, ...
- Could change Hitlers outlook on America, seeing, that its NOT as degenerated by jewish influence as he believed earlier and change his 'looking for a friend' from Britain to USA instead
- Could make Nazi-Germany seek - and probably get - some more favourable economic deals with USA, improving its starting pre-war economy
- Could make the Entente powers (Britain and France) keep away from supporting Poland, Romania etc. WITHOUT the - inofficial - affirmations of support by the Roosevelt administration.

- ? Would this make the Entente more givingly to Stalin ? Giving him the 'influence sphere' they didn't in OTL but Germany did ? (Molotov-Ribbentrop pact)

This would make at least a very different WW 2.
Up to and even after the annexation of Czechoslovakia by Germany, Britain's policy was to try to play Germany and the USSR off against each other, with Hitler being considered the lesser evil. They were willing to let Hitler expand if he could be a counterweight to Stalin. To have such a policy continue despite multiple broken agreements would be interesting, but very unlikely. Regardless of what America's stance on things are, Britain and France will only tolerate so much from Hitler. Them abandoning Poland is simply to much to give up and discredits themselves.

The Germans would absolutely realign its interested abroad. Even IOTL they were friendly with China, ITTL Japan would be thrown completely abandoned in favor of China+America, who coincidentally are well placed to supply Germany and possibly distract the USSR should Japan be defeated.
 
Of course a Fascist US only interested in its own profits might still see European Fascists as rivals, especially as Hitler is interested in setting up his European empire that shuts out US business interests. Despite common politics, the Darwinian attitudes of both sides could see the other as a rival to be conquered.
Thing is, a Fascist U.S would be more concerned with race, religion and order than more traditional fascist ideals like social Darwinism. Of course they'll still be concerned with the latter, but not enough to want to turn against a fellow "Nordic", "Protestant" civilisation. Also, realpolitik could drive the two powers together.
 

Deleted member 1487

Thing is, a Fascist U.S would be more concerned with race, religion and order than more traditional fascist ideals like social Darwinism. Of course they'll still be concerned with the latter, but not enough to want to turn against a fellow "Nordic", "Protestant" civilisation. Also, realpolitik could drive the two powers together.
None of that matters to power and profit. Just like the historical Fascist powers worked together out of desire for reordering Europe to their benefit, which was easier to do as a team rather than fighting separately, its only common interests not ideology that drives them.
 
None of that matters to power and profit. Just like the historical Fascist powers worked together out of desire for reordering Europe to their benefit, which was easier to do as a team rather than fighting separately, its only common interests not ideology that drives them.
And I would argue the U.S and Germany would have many common interests. They both absolutely want the USSR contained and crushed, most importantly. The Nazis are useful to the Americans as a counterbalance to Britain, who could get in the way of their Imperialistic* (influence/control over much of the non-colonized world) interests. Although Nazi control of Europe may hurt some American bankers, this is not uniformly looked on as a bad thing in America, especially a Fascist, likely anti-semetic one.
 

Deleted member 1487

And I would argue the U.S and Germany would have many common interests. They both absolutely want the USSR contained and crushed, most importantly. The Nazis are useful to the Americans as a counterbalance to Britain, who could get in the way of their Imperialistic* (influence/control over much of the non-colonized world) interests. Although Nazi control of Europe may hurt some American bankers, this is not uniformly looked on as a bad thing in America, especially a Fascist, likely anti-semetic one.
Contained sure, but a USSR crushed would mean a Germany that dominates Europe, which would be problematic to US hegemony and trade. Also wouldn't the US just enjoy watching the war from afar, not helping either side and watching them weaken each other while the US gets stronger? I could easily see them selling to both sides to profit off of it.

And in that, power and profit, wouldn't be a Germany
with a seemingly soaring up economy, that has paid regulary its debts from the mixed claims commision of the US.German Peace Treaty of 1921, opposite to France and Britain regarding their war debts
much more interesting for US buisness ?
Not if it means a powerful rival dominating Europe, its trade, and its colonies.
 
Contained sure, but a USSR crushed would mean a Germany that dominates Europe, which would be problematic to US hegemony and trade. Also wouldn't the US just enjoy watching the war from afar, not helping either side and watching them weaken each other while the US gets stronger? I could easily see them selling to both sides to profit off of it.
I think you're underestimating just how anti-USSR the far-right of the U.S was. They probably would sit on the sidelines, but selling to both sides equally is out of the question.
 
Europe ... well, maybe from 1938 onwards the US fascists my smell the rat, yes. But until then they would be happy to make profits with Germany as THE economic power of Europe.

The colonies ... given Hitlers non-interests in them he might be very happy to trade them to the USA, maybe even before he lays hands on their actual owners ;)

Crucially, Hitler would not be able to or want to touch the areas the U.S controls. Britain or the Soviet Union could.
 
I'm taking you mean how bad an aggressively expansionist US would be. I think the answer is obvious. But fascism taking hold in the US seems unlikely, since it'd require strong state control, which is antithetical to the goals of the American right wing.
 
I can't really make an informed decision on this since it really depends on what kind of fascists we're talking about. Is it some Nazi-analogue with an Uber Manifest Destiny ideology? A Business Plot gone mad military coup/dictatorship?

Depending on the fascists it ranges from very dangerous, to not at all dangerous.
 
Top