What if, against all precedent, King George had made a royal progress of the American Colonies c. 1770, giving Washington a Colonelcy in the Guards, making Franklin Lord Warden of the Royal P***pot, appointing more Americans as colonial governors? Would that have done it?
As to the T-word, bear in mind that the average British tax-payer paid more than £1 a year, whereas the average American paid about 1 shilling. Of course, Americans were not directly represented in Parliament - but neither were the majority of Englishmen.
What might the consequences have been? I think Americans would still have taken the Louisiana Purchase, without paying for it, during the Napoleonic Wars. At the same time they could have annexed the Mexican territories when England was at war with Spain, and forgotten to give them back later. Slaves would have been emancipated in 1834 with compensation to their former masters, so no Civil War, sorry.
By 1840 at the latest, America would have been the first self-governing Dominion of the Empire, ahead of Canada and Australia, with Sir Andrew Jackson as Governor General. Fast forward to 19**. With the English-speaking world united, and the Royal Navy and the Royal American Navy ruling everywhere that a ship could float, would there have been - in anything like the same form - WWI, Bolshevism, Nazism, WWII? Who knows?
Now what about the downside ...
Recent discussions in the History forum
AnnouncementAmazon Discussions Feedback Forum
|440||16 days ago|
|The Zulu War, and other colonial wars||0||2 hours ago|
|JFK Assassination Part VI||1886||3 hours ago|
|Trump assassination I||202||4 hours ago|
|notoriously incompetent international butchery||85||4 hours ago|
|Will America go metric?||91||6 hours ago|
|David Cameron Falls On His Sword||10||10 hours ago|
|A Place For Pro-Israel Posters IV||754||13 hours ago|
|Explaining Hitler||252||14 hours ago|
|History of the Palestinian Nation (Part IV)||7804||18 hours ago|
|Masada||101||20 hours ago|
|Snata Anna Dead||1||1 day ago|