Inspired by the interesting make-up of the federal subjects of Russia.
Often unrecognized today because it's been going on so long, letting US territories (by and large) enter the nation as full and equal states was a stroke of genius which helped alleviate some of the dissatisfaction and plotting in the west, and which likely prevented similar future issues. As far as the continental US and Alaska and Hawaii go, there's only one non-state area at present: The District of Columbia. But there are other US administrative units which do, or did, exist:
Incorporated territory. This is considered an integral part of the US, with full constitutional rights for the populace. There's a distinction here between Organized and Unorganized, which comes down to a measure of self-rule.
Unincorporated territory. These are "possessions" of the US, and the full rights of the Constitution don't apply. Puerto Rico is an organized unincorporated territory.
Indian Tribes. These operate as "domestic dependent nations" today. Indian tribes are vaguely dealt with in the Constitution, in a manner which seems to indicate they're neither foreign nations nor part of the states, which makes sense. The powers of the tribes have waxed and waned over the years.
So, that was a long introduction. The WI/AHC/Whatever is, what if the US had more forms of territorial status, and (at least semi-)permanently, right from the start? As in, obviously the original states that signed up for the Articles and Constitution were states, but some areas are just not going to get there. These could include Districts (independent cities, whether self-ruled or with appointed or semi-appointed governments), Territories (fully self-ruling, appointed governors, and fully appointed governments), and Indian tribes (perhaps with varying levels of self-rule depending on unique treaties), among others. Whether you want to chalk this up to changes in the Constitution, or an earlier process of having to fumble to find these answers, go ahead. But where could we see such different administrative units, and how would they affect things? For instance, without a promise of statehood, the Spanish Conspiracy might gain more supporters; if the Republic of Texas is admitted as a full state, other parts of Mexican territory during the war might rush to form 'independent' governments (as California did OTL) to ensure admittance as states as well; after the Civil War (or a civil war, anyway, if one happened), the rebelling states might fear the threat of being downgraded to territories; earlier and more permanent establishment of semi-sovereign Indian tribal lands, ruling over themselves and living peacefully under the US framework, changes a lot about US-Indian relations down the road. Etc, etc.
EDIT: Another thought is that freedmen, again presupposing a vaguely similar Civil War, might seek their own autonomous or semi-autonomous administrative unit, with so many existing examples. Maybe the idea, if not granted, will lie dormant for decades before emerging as a much more plausible and more popular version of the "Republic of New Afrika" idea. Or it could be the basis for a different form of the Du Bois/Washington argument - whether to continue as state citizens, or to seek a new semi-autonomous status.
Often unrecognized today because it's been going on so long, letting US territories (by and large) enter the nation as full and equal states was a stroke of genius which helped alleviate some of the dissatisfaction and plotting in the west, and which likely prevented similar future issues. As far as the continental US and Alaska and Hawaii go, there's only one non-state area at present: The District of Columbia. But there are other US administrative units which do, or did, exist:
Incorporated territory. This is considered an integral part of the US, with full constitutional rights for the populace. There's a distinction here between Organized and Unorganized, which comes down to a measure of self-rule.
Unincorporated territory. These are "possessions" of the US, and the full rights of the Constitution don't apply. Puerto Rico is an organized unincorporated territory.
Indian Tribes. These operate as "domestic dependent nations" today. Indian tribes are vaguely dealt with in the Constitution, in a manner which seems to indicate they're neither foreign nations nor part of the states, which makes sense. The powers of the tribes have waxed and waned over the years.
So, that was a long introduction. The WI/AHC/Whatever is, what if the US had more forms of territorial status, and (at least semi-)permanently, right from the start? As in, obviously the original states that signed up for the Articles and Constitution were states, but some areas are just not going to get there. These could include Districts (independent cities, whether self-ruled or with appointed or semi-appointed governments), Territories (fully self-ruling, appointed governors, and fully appointed governments), and Indian tribes (perhaps with varying levels of self-rule depending on unique treaties), among others. Whether you want to chalk this up to changes in the Constitution, or an earlier process of having to fumble to find these answers, go ahead. But where could we see such different administrative units, and how would they affect things? For instance, without a promise of statehood, the Spanish Conspiracy might gain more supporters; if the Republic of Texas is admitted as a full state, other parts of Mexican territory during the war might rush to form 'independent' governments (as California did OTL) to ensure admittance as states as well; after the Civil War (or a civil war, anyway, if one happened), the rebelling states might fear the threat of being downgraded to territories; earlier and more permanent establishment of semi-sovereign Indian tribal lands, ruling over themselves and living peacefully under the US framework, changes a lot about US-Indian relations down the road. Etc, etc.
EDIT: Another thought is that freedmen, again presupposing a vaguely similar Civil War, might seek their own autonomous or semi-autonomous administrative unit, with so many existing examples. Maybe the idea, if not granted, will lie dormant for decades before emerging as a much more plausible and more popular version of the "Republic of New Afrika" idea. Or it could be the basis for a different form of the Du Bois/Washington argument - whether to continue as state citizens, or to seek a new semi-autonomous status.
Last edited:
