Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer: bit.ly/AlternateHistoryHub2

Ain'tHappenin'Hub strikes again

"What do you mean, China and Russia won't unite to invade America?" -Every Call of Duty dev ever

Being totally honest, the scenario where the dual invasions of England result in two separate English kingdoms (with the north being aligned with Norway and the south being aligned with Normandy) sounds more interesting than "England has vikings now".

I have an alt-hist where Rome industrialized, but I literally had to bring in an undead time-traveler with the book "How to invent Everything. A survival guide for the stranded time traveler." to even make that happen.

The fact Nazi Germany handicapped themselves by being antisemitic towards nuclear fission never fails to kill me 😂

The Mongolian-Yugoslav-Confederate States-Carthage Entente is, sadly, not a viable competitor to BRICS.

I did my bachelor's paper on the German bomb and boy howdy the story is even sillier than people realize. On top of what Cody said, we have: Discounting uranium as a viable atomic energy source. Insisting that more Neptunium (their alternative) than actually physically existed would be needed to get anything done with atomic energy. Backtracking everything in the 60s and insisting that they knew all of Einstein's stuff all along and that they were "this close" to completing a functional bomb before the German surrender. It was wild.

As someone into Mesoamerican history/archeology: While obviously Sunset Invasion is impossible, the "mindset of warfare" point isn't really true. Firstly, grouping in the Inca and Maya here just doesn't work: The Inca are an Andean civilization, the Maya, Aztec etc are Mesoamerican. The two regions had very little contact and are as far apart as London is from Baghdad: They don't share cultural practices much. Even for the Aztec specifically, captive taking, while a part of their warfare, was not the primary goal, and Flower Wars are heavily misunderstood/not normal warfare. To clarify on the Aztec: Their main goal in expansionism was getting economic resources and goods like gold, cacao, jade, fine feathers, obsidian, etc by forcing city-states and kingdoms into relatively hands off tax-paying arrangements. Asia isn't my area, but from what I understand about the Mongols, it's sorta similar to that where if you cough up taxes, you mostly got left alone to self-manage, but if you didn't, you'd get invaded. Even when a city did refuse/resist though, or even when subjects stopped paying taxes, the Aztec response was (usually) not instant escalation to razing, massacres, and mass enslavement: They did that stuff sometimes (especially if a city incited OTHERS to also stop paying taxes), but usually just demanded steeper and steeper taxes the more a city resisted prior to it finally surrendering, and even in those cases still usually left local rulers and laws and infrastructure in place, though sometimes they did place military governors onto subjects or soldiers in garrisons to dissuade rebellions. The goal was to get economic goods, but specifically without them needing to assert hands on administrative effort and manpower to do so: Mesoamerican did not have draft animals, and the terrain is basically mostly either inland arid to temperate valleys and mountain ranges, or lowland and costal jungles and swamps. Long distance administration and military campaigns were difficult, you really could not directly govern a wide empire easily: it's more efficient to be hands off and leave local power in place and coerce it, then to order things in a top down manner. But if you're razing cities, burning fields, enslaving or sacrificing whole populations, how are they gonna cough up the cacao, gold, etc? You'd be expending valuable political and military force to trek, on foot with no draft animals, across that terrain just to annihilate the place you're trying to take advantage of and then have to rebuild or repopulate it. If what they cared about was mostly collecting captives for sacrifice, then that wouldn't be a concern. But the primary goal was economics (not just for the sake of it, but also because having a big economic network was part of courting alliances/political marriages and getting voluntarily vassals: Constant expansion also flexed military power and kept subjects in line: Since their political model was hands off, nothing was actually stopping subjects/vassals from seceding other then these forms of influence), and we see the Aztec specifically target city-states and kingdoms with rich economic resources during their expansion, not just areas with people to capture: A fantastic example of this is Soconusco/Xoconusco, which is all the way down in Chiapas, almost in Guatemala, which was secured as subject province as a source of Cacao. Demanding captives/slaves as taxes tribute wasn't common either: It only shows up ONCE in the Codex Mendoza compared to the dozens and hundreds of listings for tax demands of the other economic resources i've mentioned, for example, and the one time it does come up in the Mendoza, it's for some towns in the province of Tepeacac, where they're not being told to give up their own people as taxes/tribute, but rather the demand is that they supply captured soldiers taken from Tlaxcala, Huextozinco, Cholula etc: States the Aztec were enemies with: This was an indirect demand to help the Aztec besiege those states. (That being said, slaves/captives of noncombants were often given, in addition to soldiers captured in the battle, as part of offer by a state when it surrendered after losing to an invasion: It's just regular payments of captives as annual taxes after that point was rare) Okay, so what IS the deal with taking captives? It was certainly a common and important practice in warfare, to be clear, but at least for the Aztec, the consensus is now that it was secondary to actual tactical military objectives and goals. In general, these were organized armies with proper unit divisions and ranks, who had actual armor (this channel yet again shows Aztec soldiers wearing Jaguar pelts like cave men, when they had padded gambeson and then thick warsuits and tunics worn over that just made to look like jaguar spots and other patterns via via a mosaic of differently colored feathers), bespoke weapons (swords/macuahuitl, different kinds of clubs, maces, axes, spears, glaives, pikes, bows, atlatl, slings etc) and we have records of complex tactics like pincer formations, feigned retreats, ambushes, and so on. Captive taking seems to have primarily happened after enemy lines broke as a "mop-up" thing, and you probably wouldn't have seen soldiers going out of their way to avoid killing during the middle of a battle. The fact that captive taking was so important to rank advancement itself suggests that it was a rare/impressive feat, rather than it being the norm instead of killing an enemy: We actually know that different Aztec kings would give decrees where captured soldiers from different states would then be "worth" more or less in terms of granting rank promotions, based on how strong or how much of a desired military target they were perceived to be. Finally, Flower Wars: As I alluded to before, not all wars were Flower wars. In fact, they seem to not even be that particularly common: While i've read some contradictorily information on this, the Mexica seemingly only regularly employed them against Tlaxcala, Huextozinco, etc in an offensive capacity. They were sometimes done between the Mexica and existing subjects, but sources assert these were mutually agreed on in special circumstances like to cement alliances (though this fact allegedly was kept secret from commoners, so they wouldn't know their lives were being spent on political pageantry). Next, these were not just ritual conflicts about getting captives (in fact I've seen some assertions that they did involve killing in battle too, or that captives were released, etc), but also had pragmatic military utility. As applied against enemy states, Flower Wars were a way to dip your toes into the water with lower intensity warfare, which could then escalate into full normal warfare, or could be called off: We see this with the wars against Chalco which gradually evolved from Flower Wars to become increasingly pragmatic and serious over time. Inversely, their smaller scale meant they could be waged year round (unlike normal wars) or longer, and therefore could be used as a sort of extended siege to wear enemy states down (Traditional siege warfare wasn't as much a thing in Mesoamerica, tho this is debated somewhat). Flower wars also kept soldiers trained and fit when they might otherwise not have been in the field, and provided opportunities to collect captives and to keep soldiers invested in a military career as a result. Actually, some researchers even believe the entire idea of Aztec flower wars against Tlaxcala etc was just revisionism by Aztec sources to justify when they could never conquer the state(s)! There's more I could say, and again, there is some details around how Flower Wars functioned or what I said with sieges/garrsions that are debated by different researchers or there's inconsistent information on, and to be clear, again, captive taking WAS still important and there were ritual elements to it/warfare in Mesoamerica (some researchers have argued that the view currently common by Aztec historians which is that Aztec warfare was mostly pragmatic, which my comment is based on, has overcorrected prior literature and now ritualism is downplayed too much vs before where it was overemphasized/pragmatism was downplayed) but tactical and economic pragmatism was also important too, is my point, and certainly the overall objective in Aztec expansionism was primarily economic and political.

As an Italian, trust me, you would have more luck convincing a fish to fly than us to join Austria in WW1

Alternate History Hub: Here's a list of the most unrealistic alternate history scenarios Wolfenstein:

I think the Hadrada scenario could work if the change is that he lands in England later, so that he fights the Harold's army after the battle of Hastings rather than before. This way he doesn't have to defeat both armies consecutively, but rather only the now weakened victor of the William and Harold.

Harald Hadrada won multiple victories for the Byzantines, he would have been familiar with the concept of heavy cavalry as the Byzantines had cataphracts.

The anarchists weren’t even “with” the republicans, they considered themselves a separate faction that was fighting alongside the enemy of their enemy

To be good at Alternate History is to be great at History in the first place. So many new people creating alternate history "scenarios" who have little knowledge of history makes the wildest and most out-of-character events ever.

Now we need 10 real historical scenarios that would probably be on this video in an alternate timeline in which they were considered too dumb to happen.

19:06 the fact that Panama and its canal aren't even mentioned in this world where the entirety of Africa and Latin America are divided between imperial powers is pretty stunning.

I read somewhere that the Roman writer Pliny wrote one of the first althistories wondering if Alexander invaded Rome. Being a good Roman, he said he would lose.

Hardrada conquering England, to my understanding, is more typically justified by Godwinson fighting William first, winning, then getting defeated by Hardrada

That more "realistic" Man in the High Castle idea about America becoming fascist after an Axis victory would be an interesting concept for a video for your channel

These scenarios seem pretty likely when compared to a multi-book series based around a race of alien lizards arriving during WW2.

What if Hitler was betrayed by Kami and trapped in the Hyperbolic Time Chamber

The whole "Rome industrializing" thing really ticks me off every time I see it, because it took a mega-uber-nerd named Whitworth to finally establish the principles of close-tolerance-manufacturing needed to properly ramp up production, and even then it was the final hurdle in centuries of iterative changes in manufacturing techniques. Everything before then, even close-tolerance machining for complex machines like clocks and steam engines were each bespoke projects hand-fitted to purpose and incredibly precious and irreplacable (at least not exactly 1-to-1 replacable).

The timeline is kinda skewed in the downfall scenario. The Soviet invasion came in between attacks not after Nagasaki, yet the council vote to not surrender. So I don’t find it compelling for a surrender reason

This video reminds me of a book series I read once called The Clash of Eagles. Romans have conquered Europe and have remained stable so they sail across the Atlantic and start trying to conquer the Indigenous American people. It’s absolutely crazy, especially when the Mongols get involved because they went across the Pacific, so it felt right in line with everything else in this video.

*Fun fact:* Speaking of Alexander, there's a cancelled a tv show in which the macedonian was played by William Shatner. Only the pilot was made and can be found on KZfaq. It's pure 60's style

I've heard this guy talk about Roland Emmerich movies so much it's weird hearing him actually talk about alternate history.

I think Hadrada could be more plausible with a different PoD, the normans were delayed about a month by storms, if that didn’t happen, the would put the battle of Hastings before Hadrada’s arrival, leaving the victor worn down, and possibly defeatable.

Also addendum on the impossibility of Ming Dynasty in America: To note it's not that China doesn't have any interest in other places overall, as most dynasties pre-1200s were highly engaged with other countries, but by Ming dynasty it definitely reached a point where there wasn't as much of a significant interest anymore, couple with the Ming dynasty having no real adversaries that could feasibly overtake it so there's also less priority to compete with neighbours, though obviously trade and diplomatic relations were still upheld and frequent.

This video should be called "10 Alternate History Scenarios Cody is TOO SCARED To Consider For Videos"

Kinda surprised Operation Sealion didn't make the list, talking about military operations where step one is "three miracles happen in close succession."

I usually don't do this, but do you have some sources on Japan being ready to give up? Even in books about WW2 & classes in college, I've been taught that Japan's supreme council were unwilling to surrender until the emperor himself decided to intervene (post Okinawa). To this end, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria & the atom bombs both act as significant factors influencing a Japanese unconditional surrender. Are there any sources from the Japanese supreme war council that demonstrate an unwillingness to conduct a Downfall-esque defense of Japan? Further, are there any that can point to the Soviet invasion alone being substantial enough to force Japanese surrender?

Fun fact: The Germans DID try to make a nuclear bomb, but when the Allies invaded the facilities they found that it looked more like a garage than an industrial laboratory. When the war ended, they put all the German scientists in a house with hidden microphones and played radios that gave the news of the bombings in Iroshima and Nagasaki, to which one of the Germans responded: "How did the Americans get 200 tons of plutonium just for one bomb?" It's not just that they weren't interested, it's that when they tried it they didn't even know how to make one.

You forget to mention the scenario where my parents start loving me 😢

I always laugh out loud when I see scenarions that involve an actual invasion of the US. The sheer magnitude of the logistics and support required is mind boggling. We'd be talking of something that would make _Downfall_ look small. And yet, we still get these ideas thrown around...

I think Rome Industrializing is a great alternate scenario EXACTLY because of what you stated. Its idea captures the student as the teacher leads them through the concept of history not being linear and the conditions for the industrial revolution to actually happen. This should be taught in schools!

So the alternate history I want to see is this: during the US Civil War the king of Siam offered Lincoln a bunch of war elephants for the campaign. I want the movie mostly historically accurate until like Antietam, and then suddenly Elephants.

Thank you for debunking the "Man in High Castle" thesis. The number of people who in the 21st century still cry the "WE'D ALL BE SPEAKING GERMAN!!!" hysteria is truly astonishing.

So about the Viking one, why couldn’t the point of divergence just be the weather of the English Channel meaning that William would be the one fighting first and Harold would land mostly unopposed?

Alt history idea: all of these in the same time line.

Lovely video, the operation downfall part has a few inaccuracies though 1. The soviet invasion of Manchuria did not play a role in the surrender of Japan, this is for a few reasons. The Japanese were aware of a soviet plan to invade. This is corroborated by a diary entry from one of the big six (supreme war council), stating that the soviets invaded earlier than expected, or something along those lines anyways. Many Manchurian forces were moved to southern Kyushu to bolster forces for the Olympic invasions, which meant the forces still remaining were ordered to do a fighting retreat into northern Korea. You are right that Manchuria supplied a lot of food to the Japanese mainland, but that was before the American naval blockade stopped any trade with Japan way before the soviet entry into the war. 2. Easing up on the terms was a very unlikely option considering Truman was against it, he believed unconditional surrender would not be victory, and repeat the mistakes of the end of WWI. It’s true that the calculations of the troops on southern Kyushu were inaccurate in early stages of the planning, which was discovered soon before the end of the war. This would mean a reconsideration of the plan. General MacArthur was still trying to get the operation going for the glory of commanding the largest naval invasion of the war, but especially the navy was against the plan. George Marshall was looking at using up to 9 nukes in Kyushu and then going in with marines. The navy was in favour of a continued naval blockade and bombing. This would’ve meant the death of possibly millions more in the Japanse co-prosperity sphere and would starve Japanese civilians. The reality is that the nuke posed the idea that a decisive battle in the homeland might not take place, which was the hope of Japanese leaders, because that would mean that they could inflict as much casualties as possible to ease up the surrender terms. Access to a nuke meant that they could destroy entire cities at a distance, with a single b29 bomber. That’s why Japan would’ve ultimately surrendered.

Do what if the plane crash that killed Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, and the Big Booper didn't happen?

I find it hilarious how you said “it’s like overanalyzing blade runner as not being realistic.” Philip K. Dick wrote the book that inspired blade runner

You can make a decent argument that the Japanese would have surrendered without the nukes, but putting operation downfall-a real plan that was scheduled to take place-on the same list as susnet invasion and man in the high castle is just absurd

Luckily my recommendation for if the Sino-Soviet Split never happened or was patched up wasn't shat on.

Reminds of that cancelled alternate history show for HBO called “Confederate” that was gonna be about the confederacy winning the American Civil War and surviving all the way to the 21st century, still practicing slavery…somehow???

imagine us living in one of these weird timelines, where alternatehistory in another timeline tells us "what if alexander lived the longest. i know, weird as hell. we all knew he died of a random arrow at deladonin when he was 12 years old"

The WW1 Italy in the Central powers scenario could work, if Germany had convinced Austria somehow to give up the territories Italy wanted

8:13 "Everyone shall be interested in our conveniently priced dishware!"- The Emperor 🤣🤣🤣🤣

I do think the Hadrada scenario could still be different. Maybe he doesn't take all of England, but beds down around York, fortifying while William deals with local revolts, leading to England being split in two long-term.

EU4 having China colonize America has always been one of my favorite memes and ways to show just how cursed the world had become

This is why I started liking more and more your channel over other alt-hist. There are so many factors that made history turn into what it is today, that alternate history is almost preposterous. There are plenty of moments where a single decision could have changed history, but they are still insignificant to the huge amount of factors, conditions, resources, ideology, social development, and other things that I can't imagine that set the course of events as we know them. I am not sure if the future can be predicted, but it does have a huge element of determinism.

Cody are you okay man. What happened to your personal Twitter.

we do actually in the alternate timeline where alexander the great actually defeated persia and didn't die on some godforsaken battlefield trying to be achilles at age 14

What if Cody did a list of his favorite fictional settings in media that he likes and talks about the factions and characters that are featured?

I’m glad I found this channel, you teach more history (ACCURATELY) than my entire history portfolio in school

This is the most interesting video I’ve seen in quite a while. Please do more :)

Our own timeline had Samuraïs vs Conquistadors in 1582 so we're already stranger than fiction. We had so many weird events and plot armored/ASB conquerors. Could you predict the mongol empire if it wasn't in History ? Could you predict Napoléon ?

Anyone who thinks you can just "invade" USA has played too many Paradox games and has no idea how logistics work. The US troops landing in Europe worked, because they have this slightly industrialized island nation just a swimming distance from the mainland away as an ally. Even then operation Overlord was a huge mess. Same issues would've popped up with any actual invasion of Japan to be fair, the supply lines would have been very taxed and any troops on land would've most likely spent more time building infrastructure and logistics than actually fighting the Japanese.

"What if the aztecs tried to conquer Spain?" They would be turned into swiss cheese in the first battle

0:03 my mango

i wanna note, i think there is a strong chance that Operration Downfall could have happend, but not in the way we think. The nuclear bomb played a pivitol role in convincing the Japanese populace and civilian goverment to give up, the military was convinced by the Manchurian invasion I think that there was a real possibility that, if the atomic bomb was not developed the Japanese as a whole would not surrender until US troops were on Japanese Soil. I dont think it'd be thousands of loyal japanese citizens kamakaziing themselves, but a short battle in the south, a beachhead being made and then a surrender from the japanese citizen goverment and the Emperor telling his subjects to stop.

Devil's advocate: scenario 3: What if Hadrada landed in England after the Normans? Part of what delayed William was the unfavorable wind that kept him anchored in Normandy. What if instead the wind was favorable to William but bad for Hadrada which meaning he would land after the other 2 parties exhausted themselves?

On the Spanish Civil War I am sort of surprised you even mention Franco by name as he was like number 3-5 on the list of potential leaders, but iirc his superiors kept crashing they planes (there is a joke about them being overloaded with weight being the cause, as they were stacked with victory medals). However, there is a scenario for a different result in the Spanish Civil War, but it depends much on France, as it is a French intervention. France was balancing significant support for communism in the interwar period and either through France becoming communist, or by France appeasing communists, then you could see full intervention by France. Now the point of divergence is tricky, because likely this would require another French Revolution, which might also have lead to a French civil war, where you might see Germany intervening. You need a scenario, where communists take over in France, without civil war or intervention, and then well, it stop being about the Spanish Civil War, and instead about a completely new scenario for WW2. So while I agree that the Spanish Civil War is very unlikely to change much in any way, then it could be the trigger for the radicals in France to attempt a takeover, and then you have a butterfly effect from that. Sometimes it is funny how you get these circles back to our timeline, when you are trying to change something.

I have a dumb alternate scenario aswel: what if Belgium joint the central powers when Germany wanted to get to France through Belgium.

For the timeline where Harald Hardrada conquers England: What if Harold Godwinson just meets the Normans in battle first, defeats them (like he almost did) and is then defeated by the Norwegians? Hardrada doesn’t have to meet the superior Normans and might actually stand a chance against the Anglo-Saxons. Bob‘s your uncle

Harold Godwinson defeating the Normans sounds like a pretty fascinating alt-history to be honestly. The Battle that changes the world

I recognize that you were just glossing it over and weren't going into detail, but there is a common misconception many people have about Japanese Manchuria that I hope wouldn't be inadvertently reinforced by what you said. - Firstly, the Japanese didn't care about Manchuria as such. I mean, they did, but with Allied naval supremacy by that point, they could hardly make any use of its resources (at that point). The loss of the territory was not a serious factor. -They clearly didn't care about loss of the army there; they had lost hundreds of thousands of men along with their materiel in many battles up to that point without considering surrender. -The idea of any Japanese concern about Soviet invasion of the home islands is also absurd; they had neither the materiel nor the experience, and everyone knew it. BUT, the Japanese had been hoping to broker a negotiated peace through the Soviets. The important effect of the Soviet invasion was to dash that hope. That, along WITH the atomic bombs, pushed the Japanese to surrender. I liken it to if the US had invaded, say, Venezuela, and made use of its resources for a decade. Then Brazil (through whom the US was negotiating with its enemies) invades Venezuela, and separately, Columbus, GA and Norfolk, VA get nuked. While the loss of Venezuela isn't nothing, it would be absurd to say that the nukes had no effect on the decision to surrender. (Yes, a ridiculous scenario, but I hope it helps people understand that the weight of the Soviet invasion was diplomatic, not strategic.) Again, not that you were making those assertions, but I wouldn't want others to think you were implying them. Whatever the morality of the use or threat of atomic bombs, it does not have to be related to their effectiveness as a tool of persuasion. Terrorism can be effective, for example, but it is still evil. We do ourselves a disservice when we twist historical realities to support a particular moral narrative.

You need to make a second video like that, it's so entertaining

With Hadrada conquering England, a much easier way to make it possible would be if Godwinson defeats William at Hastings *first* and then has to fight the Norwegians with an exhausted army, none of the three armies present could beat the other two back-to-back.

When I heard your Harald Hadrada scenario, I thought, "Stamford Bridge is not the correct point of divergence." William the Conqueror was ready to cross as early as August 12. If the wind had been favorable, he might have. King Harold would not yet have dismissed his militia, which means Hastings becomes a much harder battle for William. In turn, this leads to possible scenarios: Suppose King Harold actually wins, but has fewer troops once he still dismisses the militia on September 8. Does Harold still win Stamford Bridge with a diminished force? Suppose William still wins, but again, has fewer troops. In our timeline, it took William over two months to stabilize his position enough to even be crowned. He would have six weeks before he would have to respond to Hadrada. Does he still have it then?

No industrial age without the potato.

16:31 So Cody is basically saying that the nuclear bombs weren’t the reason for Japans surrender, and instead it was the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. This is a somewhat controversial topic among historians but I’m just going to say that Cody is cherry picking here. The reason for Japanese surrender was because of the atomic bombs *and* the invasion of Manchuria. There is usually not one single reason for a country to surrender and that statement is the same in the case of Japan.

In the CK2 version of Sunset Invasion, the idea was actually that the Aztecs (and generally Mesoamerica) somehow teched up faster than in real history; so they actually discovered Europe BEFORE Columbus and were on par with them technologically. If you import a CK2 save with the invasion enabled to EU4, you actually find a big, advanced Aztec Empire in America that has tech on par with Europe. Which y'know, also probably not very realistic, but "what if Mesoamerica had technology on par with Europe when it was discovered?" is a fun scenario to consider too.

Your idea about Alexander already getting as close to a perfect outcome as one can in our timeline is really fascinating to me. Makes me wonder what history would look like if people like Alexander the Great never lived up to their full potential. Like the inverse of the (outdated) Great Men Theory of history, where history is dominated not by the achievements of great men, but by their utter mediocrity. A timeline where Alexander failed his conquests, where Caesar never became dictator for Life, where Napoleon flunked out of officers school, etc.

I just found this account, this would help SO much for my anime because I do have alternate history and culture ideas that are kinda bizarre but I would hope it would make sense! 😭😭 anyways these videos are awesome!

About the Sunset Invasion, there is an uchrony that uses that point but with a twist: Columbus dies when returning to Spain, leaving some people in America. They teach all they know about weapons, sailing, sea faring, ... and decades later comes the invasion. And without the resources from America and being at war on Europe, the outcome is not nice for the European countries. The saga is called "Chronicles of the Feathered Snake", from Edgardo Civalledo.

Fun fact, you made the "Chinese name for Los Angeles" but that IS the actual Chinese name for the city. 洛杉磯 (Luò-shān-jī) Basically, the Chinese language can and will use it's own name for you and/or your city/country rather than whatever you came up with. Perhaps the most "well known" historical example is when Marco Polo asked the Chinese what that island off their coast was called, they said it was named the land of the rising sun, or "Ja-pon", despite the locals of the island calling it "Ni-hon" instead.

Putting Downfall and a Republican victory in Spain in the same list as fucking Sunset Invasion and Man in the High Castle is a bruh moment, even for you

canada still existing for some reason in high castle is the funniest thing ive seen all day

19:06 that line through Northern South America will never not be funny

Cody walking back Operation Downfall is wild

The fuck you mean Rome didn't find the connection between physics math and engineering? That's a requirement for having monumental architecture that isn't just a big pile of rocks. Or was it done through trial and error?

Now do a video where you try to salvage all of these scenarios

That whole _Civil War_ (2024) movie premise of California and Texas joining together.

What if there is a Cody in another universe saying that our history couldn't happen in his timeline? AltAlthistory

10:30 Additionally, the Atzteks would even lose their advantage of numbers they still had back at home.

21:29 -- I don't know why I never thought of this before, but what would happen with Canada and the European Caribbean territories if the Axis managed to conquer and control Europe?

"Apart from being centuries off" that's a DISTANT second.

18:12 " they never anticipated that the allies and commies would work together" - that's a silly statement by Cody. The Allies had worked with the USSR for years by the time the USSR invaded Japanese territories. If anybody wants a better take on WWII, go watch the World War Two channel.

Your analysis of the Ming Dynasty trip to the West Coast is spot-on. During the Eastern Han Dynasty, about 200 A.D., a group of Buddhist monks sailed north around what is now Russia and followed the Aleutian Islands to the North American mainland and south along the coast to Monterey Bay in what is now California. They drew detailed maps, contacted the natives, found nothing of interest, and sailed back the same way.

I was watching some random videos from this channel, then at the end of one i saw a familiar staircase, then a familiar character. And then "starting a new channel about everything". And it hit me: "HOLY DUCK! it IS the same guy!"

Making Alt history scenarios without mentioning germany winning ww2 Challenge impossible

I still think Operation Downfall isn't completely implausible. If you consider a more complex scenario involving the Kyujo incident succeeding, American leadership refusing to allow the emperor to remain, etc. While improbable (like most althistory), i wouldnt say it is nearly as impossible as the Sunset Invasion, Man in the High Castle, or most of the others on this list

A quick correction The first surrender was because of the bomb. The Emperor himself broke the gridlock specifically because of the bomb and in their surrender speech they said it was because of the bomb. The reason I said first was because the army kept fighting the Soviets and they made a second speech to the army citing the soviets as why they should lay their arms down.

MyHeritage's photo animation is freakin' NIGHTMARE FUEL.

How to make High Castle the perfect alt-hist show: 1. Dump the universe meditation transfer shit. This isn't Fringe, we don't need that in a Nazi show 2. Get rid of the BCR in its entirety. If you think for one second that Hitler would allow a group of non-German Communists to exist anywhere near the Reich's borders, I have a collapsed bridge to sell you in Baltimore 3. Kill Juliana in the first season and base the rest of the show around John Smith and his family 4. REWRITE THAT ENDING. I would prefer an ending where Smith, after gaining control of all of North America, reinstates the United States and a cold war begins against the newly freed America's and the old Reich in Europe, but I'll take literally anything except an ending where a portal to our reality opens up for Time Tourists

New idea for an alt history: What if you did one of these scenarios?

The one thing I always thought was neat about Operation Downfall was that the initial bombardment prior to the landing would be led with the ship-based launch of a thousand Republic-Ford JB-2's, an American reverse-engineered copy of the German V1 Flying Bomb

Almost all of these are him just saying "nuh-uh cuz in real life it didn't happen"