What if each colony still existed in some form?

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by IMBY

At one time, the U.S. had an option to buy Cuba from Spain for $10 Million, and back then, that was a big chunk of $$. Instead, we pursued the Philippines which we ruled for decades.

...and to continue to influence with its puppet dictator government, its American military bases, Protestant Evangelical Missionaries, junk food, and beauty contests.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Except the Huguenots. Many Americans with French ancestry, their French ancestors were Huguenots.

this me

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by edale

When are we talking about here? Because Cincinnati was a larger city before St. Louis, and it never had this French connection to Montreal and New Orleans. St. Louis leapfrogged Cincy because it became the new western gateway as the population moved west. They were then eclipsed by Chicago thanks to rail and the NYC financing.

this gets muddied but new orleans and st. louis retained their connections to montreal under spanish rule for decades and then under american rule for decades...centuries even.

regardless, cincinnati i think would stand to benefit were it to be a final western american outpost in a chicagoless north america.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

regardless, cincinnati i think would stand to benefit were it to be a final western american outpost in a chicagoless north america.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the Midwest would have been "Chicagoless" in this alternate history.

A city of some sort was destined to arise somewhere around the bottom of lake michigan, given the bottle neck the 300 mile long lake makes, but it certainly could have ended up for more modest in stature if the cards had been played differently.



Completely off topic: Speaking of the bottom of lake Michigan, we spent the day at Marquette Park beach down in Gary, which is the literal bottom of the lake (it's southernmost extent). It's an absolute gem of a park, and a really nice beach too with a fair bit of sand, even with the record high lake levels.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the Midwest would have been "Chicagoless" in this alternate history.

A city of some sort was destined to arise somewhere around the bottom of lake michigan, given the bottle neck the 300 mile long lake makes, but it certainly could have ended up for more modest in stature if the cards had been played differently.



Completely off topic: Speaking of the bottom of lake Michigan, we spent the day at Marquette Park beach down in Gary, which is the literal bottom of the lake (it's southernmost extent). It's an absolute gem of a park, and a really nice beach too with a fair bit of sand, even with the record high lake levels.

i had a disclaimer earlier then used the word “chicagoless,” which being aware of the 19th century industrial geography of north america that corner of lake michigan would clearly have been in play.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Yeah, Havana certainly wouldn't have been improved, from an urban form perspective, by being Americanized.

But Cuba as a whole, as a US state (most likely in the top 5 in terms of population), it would've been a serious powerhouse.

Cuba would have been speckled with big box stores, suburbs and chubby Americans. We did them a huuuge solid by only taking Gitmo.

[jd3189]

If Cuba was a US state, Haiti and DR would have been swallowed up to. In fact, I recall a point in time when the US did invade Haiti for several years. I wonder why they did it.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by jd3189

In fact, I recall a point in time when the US did invade Haiti for several years. I wonder why they did it.

The US invaded and occupied Haiti for much of the early 20th Century; the occupation didn't end until the 1930s, I think.

The US invaded Haiti again in the 1990s. There's plenty of literature out there in regards to how the US has continued to screw Haiti over.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

this me

I recently learned that many Huguenots settled in South Carolina. Some of them assimilated into Anglo-Protestant culture, and some of them moved to French-speaking areas of North America, and then their descendants converted to Roman Catholicism and assimilated into French-speaking Catholic culture.

[iheartthed]

I think Cuba would be more like Puerto Rico than Hawaii if it were a U.S. territory. The big question mark is whether the Guantanamo base would have ever had more strategic value if the entire island was under U.S. control.

If Cuba was a U.S. territory then the island of Hispaniola would've been the only real option available for the Soviets to establish influence in the Caribbean. If they were successful at that then Cuba would've gotten a LOT of attention from the U.S. government, similar to Hawaii and Guam. If not, then I think it's less likely that Cuba received a lot of attention from Washington, and would probably receive Puerto Rico and USVI treatment.

[Centropolis]

double post

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I recently learned that many Huguenots settled in South Carolina. Some of them assimilated into Anglo-Protestant culture, and some of them moved to French-speaking areas of North America, and then their descendants converted to Roman Catholicism and assimilated into French-speaking Catholic culture.

my family intermarried with a huguenot family in virginia which was another epicenter and were very close apparently for generations...eventually assimilated obviously into british colonial north america and then the us...i mean i don’t speak french lol.

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/...chvirginia.pdf

i’ve tracked my ancestors to Bordeaux and a couple of generations in Paris but i don’t think Paris was the ancestral area.

furthermore if i recall my surnamed ancestors somehow were also related to huguenots that also fled to the british isles and then to virginia so theres multiple layers here..it could all be related in some way i don’t understand.

[TWAK]

CA has had some ownership changes, yet we have always maintained regional differences it seems. The language map is a basic outline of the major metros and some of the modern counties follow the territory held by each tribe. A lot of the tribes have reservations or rancherias in these same areas as opposed to being uprooted.


Source
Source

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think Cuba would be more like Puerto Rico than Hawaii if it were a U.S. territory. The big question mark is whether the Guantanamo base would have ever had more strategic value if the entire island was under U.S. control.

If Cuba was a U.S. territory then the island of Hispaniola would've been the only real option available for the Soviets to establish influence in the Caribbean. If they were successful at that then Cuba would've gotten a LOT of attention from the U.S. government, similar to Hawaii and Guam. If not, then I think it's less likely that Cuba received a lot of attention from Washington, and would probably receive Puerto Rico and USVI treatment.

Who's to say though, that Cuba would not have had an independence movement? The Philippines, for example, did not want to become part of the US. After 400 years of being a Spanish colony, it wanted to finally become independent, and in the first few years of the American occupation, there were very bloody independence movements, with many Filipinos being killed. It wasn't until a very US-friendly "Commonwealth" "territorial" interim government was created and American-interest political system was established that the Philippines was finally granted its independence from the US.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Who's to say though, that Cuba would not have had an independence movement? The Philippines, for example, did not want to become part of the US. After 400 years of being a Spanish colony, it wanted to finally become independent, and in the first few years of the American occupation, there were very bloody independence movements, with many Filipinos being killed. It wasn't until a very US-friendly "Commonwealth" "territorial" interim government was created and American-interest political system was established that the Philippines was finally granted its independence from the US.

Yeah, this is all dependent on Cuba remaining a U.S. territory.

[MolsonExport]

Imagine if Mexico had not lost California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Nevada...


And if the UK had retained the original boundaries of Quebec.


There could be three, relatively equal powerful nations in North America.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by TWAK

CA has had some ownership changes, yet we have always maintained regional differences it seems. The language map is a basic outline of the major metros and some of the modern counties follow the territory held by each tribe. A lot of he tribes have reservations or rancherias in these same areas as opposed to being uprooted.


Source
Source

Many years ago I remember reading that prior to colonization, California was the most ethno-linguistically diverse area of native North Americans. Apparently, California was always diverse.

[Steely Dan]

the original question wasn't about cuba becoming and remaining a USA territory, it was cuba becoming a US State back in the 19th century.

had THAT happened, then i could easily see cuba being florida v2.0 today, over-run with frost-belt retirees and migrants.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Many years ago I remember reading that prior to colonization, California was the most ethno-linguistically diverse area of native North Americans. Apparently, California was always diverse.

California was/is the most linguistically diverse region in the world.

[MolsonExport]

I thought India had something like 800 languages, and that Papua New Guinea has more than a thousand distinct languages.

Ethnologue's 14th edition lists 826 languages of Papua New Guinea and 257 languages of Western New Guinea, total 1073 languages, with 12 languages overlapping. They can be divided into two groups, the Austronesian languages, and all the others, called Papuan languages for convenience. The term Papuan languages refers to an areal grouping, rather than a linguistic one, since so-called Papuan languages comprise hundreds of different languages, most of which are not related.

Is there any proof that California has more diversity in languages than say, Ontario?