AHC/WI: Modern Mexican Empire

What do you guys think Mexico would be like if they kept the monarchy?

How would the country's history and culture evolve?

What would geopolitics be like?

How would history be shaped?

Photos, maps and infoboxes are welcomed.
 
Whichever's more plausible.

Hmm, I believe the first one might be easier to keep. The problem the first empire had was the friction that existed between Iturbide and Congress. Congress considered Iturbide's ascension as a violation of the Treaty of Cordoba, since both the populace and the military demanded his coronation without going through the due process the treaty established. So when Congress began to plot to depose him, Iturbide, who had come to fear precisely that, would go on to arrest people and dissolve Congress. There was also the people trying to spread republicanism among the populace. So when revolts happened to oppose the disolution of Congress, they were fueled with the idea to get rid of the monarchy altoguether.

Having the first empire survive might be plausible if an European monarch accepts the throne, or the people aren't hasty in proping up Iturbide. Though the latter option might still have some of the friction of OTL that led to the Plan of Casa Mata.
 
I would think that like OTL, Conservative and Liberal parties will arise at first. If Republicanism is still around, perhaps a party promoting it might emerge as well, if you have sufficient liberals not minding the monarchy. Outside of that, it will depend on how the country's history go. OTL, the original Conservative Party was disbanded after the Second French Intervention, with their final defeat to take over the country, and the Liberal Party was pretty much taken over by Porfirio Díaz and turned into the Porfirist Party. So future parties are fair game, but the first two are likely to stick around for decades and remain the main parties.
 
What would relations with with US be like?

Not entirely sure. They could be similar to OTL, but there's certianly going to be a bit more tense. One thing for sure is in relation to Texas. Imperial policy was to keep the ban on American immigration the Spanish had, so if something similar to the 1824 Colonization Law still happens, it might not include the Americans in it. Since the area is already desired by the US, you might still see a similar migration pattern, but with a higher ratio of people enter illegaly. Well, it depends on how much more competent the Empire would be in guarding the border and settling it. Maybe they employ the displaced natives like what the Spanish wanted to do, maybe they won't or can't like in OTL. Still, Texas is still going to become a flashpoint of tension between the two countries.
 
As a supporter of the Mexican/Brazilian empires, I think it would be cool to have two stable monarchies (of course, I don't know if Mexico can achieve Brazil's monarchical stability) sitting in the Americas. Brazil, by my understanding, did fairly well under the monarchy and only went to custard afterwards, so, if the Iturbides/whoever can stabilize that region, it'll give the U.S. less of a reason to interfere (and force the U.S. Marines to get a new line for their hymn).
 
Possibly. As part of the New Spain viceroyalty, they can make the claim. Actually enforcing it, is another matter...

They need to come out of the independence war in a much more better position than OTL. To begin with.
 
Do think Mexico would try to claim some of the Spanish speaking islands in the Caribbean?

Unlikely; while Spain might not be able to project sufficient power on the mainland by this point to subdue Mexico, the new Kingdom has FAR too many problems closer to home (Rebel movements for different types of government, both in level of centralization and basic structure, economic fumbles caused by large military expenses and the disruption of revolution, keeping the generals and army loyal, dealing with the natives and Californians to integrate the north, eft.) to risk investing enough to beat the still potentSpanish navy. That's to say nothing of the fact the Cubans are likely to favor the Pro-Slavery Loyalists to keep their economy running and blacks under control.
 
Unlikely; while Spain might not be able to project sufficient power on the mainland by this point to subdue Mexico, the new Kingdom has FAR too many problems closer to home (Rebel movements for different types of government, both in level of centralization and basic structure, economic fumbles caused by large military expenses and the disruption of revolution, keeping the generals and army loyal, dealing with the natives and Californians to integrate the north, eft.) to risk investing enough to beat the still potentSpanish navy. That's to say nothing of the fact the Cubans are likely to favor the Pro-Slavery Loyalists to keep their economy running and blacks under control.
What side would they take in the ACW?
 
What side would they take in the ACW?

You assume they'd even get involved. Off the top of my head, I'd say they'd be pro-Union, due to Southern ambitions to expand further and form their Golden Circle and the general historical trend of Northern politicians to take less overtly anti-Mexican stances (Not to mention the racist attitudes of the South being more pronounced).
 
You assume they'd even get involved. Off the top of my head, I'd say they'd be pro-Union, due to Southern ambitions to expand further and form their Golden Circle and the general historical trend of Northern politicians to take less overtly anti-Mexican stances (Not to mention the racist attitudes of the South being more pronounced).

I'd agree on that. But, well, this all depends on just how things came down to the ACW in this ATL.
Both are good points. Mexico would not take kindly to the CSA wanting to expand southwards. Also I think the Catholic Church was anti-slavery at the time.
 
Would anyone like to do a map?

You looking for something in particular? Specific decisions taken, plausibility, things went mostly well/bad, something or other...?

I kinda have made one before... not quite "modern", since I was thinking "early-mid 20th century" for the time period. How plausible it could be... well, that's up for debate. Lots of them. Even I don't think so 100%, but still. Could make for a good AHC, though.
 

Attachments

  • Map with Names.png
    Map with Names.png
    53.8 KB · Views: 255
You looking for something in particular? Specific decisions taken, plausibility, things went mostly well/bad, something or other...?

I kinda have made one before... not quite "modern", since I was thinking "early-mid 20th century" for the time period. How plausible it could be... well, that's up for debate. Lots of them. Even I don't think so 100%, but still. Could make for a good AHC, though.
Well, maybe a map of 19th Century Mexico, after losing Texas and California. Maybe later the Empire could expand southwards.
 
Top