Basically, like for soccers, it was a social issue at the beginning, with professionalism being at its heart.As of league rugby, I must admit that I'm not that knowledgeable about the history of the gentlemen' sport in our great country. For what I could read, it was fostered by English professionnels who sought to professionalize the French field ; as of the Syndicalists, as they were in a state of isolation until the years preceding the World War, I imagine they would see the rugby of these times as a good sport, especially when it comes to the violent ethos of Georges Sorel's views.
Smith won election thanks to the terrible state of disarray of the Republicans, and he only won re-election in a very heated election, fought against the Progressives and Republicans ; he had to rely upon the Dixiecrats to win, as it's evidenced by taking Hugo Black as his running mate. Nevertheless, the Democratic Party lost its grip out of the South during his second term, and the Democrats would survive only in the Deep South before getting merged into the Conservative Party.Al Smith was a 2-term President and the Democratic Party still collapsed????
I must admit that this timeline has seen extensive worldbuilding but that I didn't think of that ! A reminder is already written for my personal notes, but if you wish to contribute, feel absolutely free.Basically, like for soccers, it was a social issue at the beginning, with professionalism being at its heart.
Like soccer, rugby had come about as a creation by British elites, and when lower classes began participating, particularly workers, the issue of paying players came about because workers couldn't afford missing work hours unlike more wealthy players. And while soccer accepted professionalism in 1885, the rugby union split over it in 1895 between anti professionalism southern English clubs and northern industrial and pro professionalism clubs which went to form the league, and made a number of changes to the rules of the game, notably the number of players being lowered to 15.
France didn't escape this controversy, and after the Great War, the dispute grew out of proportion at the same time as brown amateurism (professionalism in amateur clothing), leading to France being eventually expelled from the Five Nations championship in 1931, and was only readmitted in 1939 but the war delayed the return until 1947. But in the meantime, this had been a near fatal blow and rugby league had been rapidly overtaking rugby union in France as a great number of union rugby most famed players, not to mention clubs, in France defected to league rugby.
It was testamount of how violent the dispute was to see ardent supporters of union rugby which happened to achieve positions of influence within the Vichy regime eventually got the dissolution of the rugby league associations in 1941, and even after the war, the use of rugby as a name would be forbidden; until 1993, it had to be called 'Jeu à Treize' (Game of Thirteen).
This was a fatal blowback, and most of those who had defected to league codes returned to union codes after the war, though brown amateurism continued.
So, with this social and political angle, there might be something to work out in your TL, from the perspective of both the Syndicalist regime and the Third Restauration after the monarchy is restored on the continent (not to be too quick at conclusions and parallels, it doesn't seem rugby acquired a right wing connotation in France until it was politicized by the Vichy regime).
As the creation of the District of Columbia is inscribed into Article 1 of the Constitution, then members of Congress felt that inscribing the statehood for DC had be inscribed into the United States Constitution in order to circumvent any dissent or repeal against their right for statehood.On the 31st amendment, I thought admission to statehood was a process that did only require a bill through Congress and the president's signature. What obstacle did require a constitutional amendment to fix it before DC could be admitted as a state? If you draws the parallel from the OTL 23rd amendment, this was passed to circumvent the fact DC wasn't a state per se and couldn't take part in the electoral college as such.
And on the 28th, it looks to me that a constitutional amendment 'establishing' memberships is quite strong; it does constitutionally binds the US to the organization, way more than a simple treaty would have done. Is it because the administration wanted to bind its successors' hands, knowing how difficult it could be repealing it?
Thanks, but I can't even decide for my own TL where this sociopolitical controversy is going in a context where there is no WW2 to break the momentum; but you can use the ideas talked about in the thread for future updates. On one side, league rugby can pay workers to compensate for lost work hours, but at the same time, some of the socialists and marxists most on the left may find the capitalist component of league rugby undesirable, and might oddly find themselves, while for very different reasons, on the same side as anti professionalism elites controlling rugby union (albeit I may imagine in this instance rugby union being taken over and politicized by syndicalists in a bid to show 'we can be better at this game than anglo saxon bourgeois elites', not unlike ice hockey games between American and Soviet teams during the Cold War ); that's not certain for me, but it looks plausible enough not to consider this perspective.A reminder is already written for my personal notes, but if you wish to contribute, feel absolutely free.
My God, who said that sports aren't an integrant part of social history ? There is some big ideas there, man ! You should definitely axe on an alternate rugby timeline !Thanks, but I can't even decide for my own TL where this sociopolitical controversy is going in a context where there is no WW2 to break the momentum; but you can use the ideas talked about in the thread for future updates. On one side, league rugby can pay workers to compensate for lost work hours, but at the same time, some of the socialists and marxists most on the left may find the capitalist component of league rugby undesirable, and might oddly find themselves, while for very different reasons, on the same side as anti professionalism elites controlling rugby union (albeit I may imagine in this instance rugby union being taken over and politicized by syndicalists in a bid to show 'we can be better at this game than anglo saxon bourgeois elites', not unlike ice hockey games between American and Soviet teams during the Cold War ); that's not certain for me, but it looks plausible enough not to consider this perspective.
Yup, with Junkers and old Prussian values still up, war is still a pretty good option within this European Union. As of Britain, it should be adressed in due time, but the country suffers from widespread political violence, occasional corruption, massive dysfunction in welfare and social agenda, discrimination against some populations...Poor war torn former Belgium. As a whole, Western Europe has had a rather rough Century, including throughout the second half! I’m concerned about what you’ve got for the UK as it is not a top-tier democracy on that awesome democratic health map you created early on.
Politics always make up for strange bedfellows, and it is true of US politics.Al Smith / Hugo Black is an amusing ticket knowing the latter's anti-Catholic baiting in Alabaman politics.
How bad is it? Years of Lead-level bad?widespread political violence
Sort of. In the early 2010s, you could have said Late Weimar Republic-bad.How bad is it? Years of Lead-level bad?
I assume you're talking about the footballer:Hakan Shukur Pasha
The Japanese Revolution is the result of a long process, but it should be adressed in due timeSomething about Japan would be nice too. I'm still impatient to hear how it became a Republic.
He is !I assume you're talking about the footballer:
Hakan Şükür - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org