& you'll know. The wipeout is proceeding apace.

... there would have been a revolution.

would a revolution have produced? It is easy to argue revolution, just don't do so without thinking about the unintended consequences.

I believe there were more socialists/communists then. Personally, I think there would have been a civil war and a partitioning of the USA. Either that or the Nazis would have strolled in and picked up the pieces.

That's why revolutions are so risky. They create a void in leadership that will be filled by somebody, but you never quite know who ahead of time.

PB

Oh, wait a minute, that's what I see now.

After that, we would have conquered the Americas, parts of Africa, the Middle East, and the Indian subcontinant, and ruled over them until we rotted from within and collapsed the world economy.



Or, we would have collapsed, been unable to help Britain and France when Hitler got frisky, and 20 years later been nuked and invaded by the Greater Germain Reich, then ethnically purified.

The installation of a patriotic American fascist dictator,allied with Germany, and equally repulsed by anyone not of pure WASP origin. I'm afraid that would all too likely include death camps for Jewish Americans (who were still scapegoated virtually everywhere ... probably more in the US than in far more cosmopolitan and educated Germany at least into the early '30's). As for African and Hispanic Americans, slavery under SS style military control for the young and strong.

I'm sickened by how terribly likely this scenario would have been sans FDR. Anybody else see a more likely result?