NationStates Jolt Archive

Which change would affect MODERN history the most? Poll incoming.

By logic, we go back to the American Revolution. It is chronologically the farthest back, and much of what occured in the world would change, invalidating most of the other historical occurances.

In this case...

Without the American Revolution being a success, the French would have taken much longer to reach the revolutionary phase. This would have meant that the Britts walked all over the French during the period of wars following the American Revolution's origional place. Without that, Napoleon would have never had a country to rise to power in, the treaty of Venice would never have been signed, World War One would have either occured earlier, or, alternatively if the pressure that the Napoleonic wars created didn't happen, been prevented by a number of communist or democratic revolutions. In the US, slavery would have only become an issue as Britain liberated (if it ever did), and then might have caused a new revolutionary war. African colonies would never have seen weakened European forces due to the second world war (with no Post-War Germany for hilter to rise to), and those revolutions would not have taken place in the same manner.

Bottom line, everything is connected, so the farther back something is, the more of history it affects.

I say American Revolution. It was the ealiest and if it didn't happen, the effect of the other options would be different or nonexistent.

So, I agree with the post before me.

Bottom line, everything is connected, so the farther back something is, the more of history it affects.

QFT

Not to be nationalistic, but I think that the US revolution had the most effect on world events because it happened before any of the other events. Some of the other events are largely contingent on the US revolution also.

napoleon's empire. it's possible without that the british would not have had such a drive to create an empire of their own covering so much of the globe and consequently they may never have come to control the middle east before ww2 and then would not have been able to facilitate giving israel to the jews and so the middle east may not have become the boiling cauldron of insanity it is now. possibly.

Hitler not taking power.

If Hitler had not taken power, then World War 2 would not have happened. The US would not have had a huge economic boom or not come out of it's depression. Technological advances made from Japanese tourture experiements also would not have had been made(or less of them had been made), China would be more of a center of the worlds population and be much more the super power than it is now.We also would have taken longer to disccover nuclear weapons, which would affect the world dramatically. The World would be way more over populated, there would be a lot more jewish people in the world.

War of 1814? Is that a real war, or some sort of hypothetical war like Britain vs. China?

What is it with NSGs recent fascination with alternate history?

Which Civil War?

David Bowie deciding not to write 'Ziggy Stardust'.

World War One not happening. Without that, Hitler never comes to power, the Ottoman Empire never falls, the anti-Colonial movement is severely weakened, and loads of other things.

It would be extremely inplausible to happen, but World War One, if there really would be large war at that times all.

First, Civil War, 1814, French Revolution and Africa were all local events and are barely worth considering on the international scale.

In XIX century the United States played no more role in the international affairs than other major countries. That's why the Revolution would not be a drastic change. A lot of changes internally, much less externally. WWI increased influence of US, and WWII established US as a superpower.

If Hitler wouldn't take power, someone else would, with similar effect. The nations were all preparing for a war, and wanted Germany to attack their enemy, just to let them 'liberate' him. It actually happened, with an exception that everyone underestimated Germany.
But without WWI there would be no such Germany in which Hitler could take power. And there would even be no power the Europe would consider a common opponent.

However, WWI made a major revolution in the world's power structure. Before, there were independent countries with own goals, making only temporary alliances to attack one another, and a lot of small-scale wars. Starting from WWI countries formed massive long-term blocks and war between them could be about nothing less than the entire world. Before WWI proxy wars were largely unknown; after WWI they became the main way of conflicts, and WWII started after one such in Spain.

First, Civil War, 1814, French Revolution and Africa were all local events and are barely worth considering on the international scale.The French Revolution only local? Are you kidding?

Which Civil War?

...

The French Revolution only local? Are you kidding?
Without Napoleon - yes; and he well could have power without it as well.

Not comparable to WWI.

American Revolution by far.

Without Napoleon - yes; and he well could have power without it as well.

Not comparable to WWI.

with out Napoleon, Bernadotte would of have been Napoleon

Without Napoleon - yes; and he well could have power without it as well.

Not comparable to WWI.Well, only WWII is comparable to WWI, but considering that most of the rest of Europe massed its armies to crush the fledgeling French Republic (before Napoleon, mind you) the event can hardly be construed as "local".