So in some respects, under this breed of populare, American identity transforms into an imperial identity? One that can absorb and unite peoples of any kind?
I think every corner of the western world will get Caesarism of a variety
Yes, exactly. The reforms of Marius were a final transition in the internal "question of citizenship", and essentially formed the basis for the defeat of the entrenched patricians. Extending citizenship to the socii was certainly controversial, but ultimately the winning move. A generation later, Caesar used the resulting support base to establish his own dominance in politics.
But beyond even that, the Marian reforms laid the foundation for the absorbtion of vassal peoples into the body of the citizenry. It enabled Rome to turn clients into
Romans. As we've discussed, this was the basis of the staggering success that followed, and it's what makes a universal empire different from a national empire. What was once a national identity becomes an imperial identity.
America is facing the same issue. The elite has divided the masses and fostered a great sense of alienation. So-called "minorities" (itself a senseless term) are being bombarded with messaging that aims to make them believe that they are marginalised victims, and
not (treated as) true citizens. This keeps them in a shitty position, and keeps them dependent on the "help" of the Democratic Party. (And as long as the redistribution keeps flowing, and the inner city schools are entirely controlled by Democrat-aligned stooges, this keeps working.) Meanwhile, the white working class is told that the "minorities" are their enemy by default, and this drives them to the current of white nationalism (often in very moderate form, but still). Since that current exists within the emerging populist movement, said movement is handicapped. The masses are divided, and the elite is thus secure.
The money is running out. And alternative channels for information (and thus, self-education) are increasingly prevalent. The game is up, as they say. Or it will be soon. It takes a great man to bring the factions together, but that's a matter of time.
Once that happens, the populist movement becomes one of "American Identity"-- which is then a counterpart, exactly, to what was once
Romanitas. By its very nature, it will be available to others who are assimilated.
Now look at Trump, and the way that "Trumpism", to an extent, was an international phenomenon already. Foreign politicians joined Trump on campaign, at his rallies. Trump became an icon to those sharing his ideas all over the West, not just in America. The struggle of populism against elite is civilisational, not national. The Populares, the Caesarists, will exist everywhere. And the comopolitan establishment, of course, is already trans-national. (Their 'capital' is in Davos!)
So we're looking at a civilisation-wide civil war between these factions. But it's evident that the leading position will be taken by America. Once "Neo-Caesar" triumphs (and he
will), all his compatriots across the West will look to him for leadership. And after that, gradually but ever more so, "American" and "Western" will simply start to mean the
same thing. The European world will be as the Hellenic world in antiquity: pulled into the empire. This is not to suggest that European countries will lose their identities or their languages, but they'll call themselves "American" for quite some time.
(And come, wouldn't it be amusing if around AD 2600 or so, the American Empire collapses in America itself, but a successor state survives in Europe and loudly insists that it's the "
real American Empire, guys-- we're
totally American!")
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In that respect, given that I think every corner of the western world will get Caesarism of a variety, what do you think British Caesarism would look like? I can imagine it being pro-Christian and pro-Monarchy at the very least, but with an ethnic spin to it that America wouldn't have.
In fact, I'd follow that up by asking @Skallagrim what he thinks a "Britain as the Universal Empire!" scenario might've looked like, had the stars aligned by enabling them to retain their pre-existing empire instead of contenting themselves with a loose Commonwealth and ceding that status to America. Not sure they'd be compared as much to Rome in ATL macro-historical context, though per Europe as "Greece", I suspect they'd be more of a "Triumphant Athens!" that outlasted (and probably absorbed) their neighbors — up to and including the US, which presumably wouldn't be the hegemonic superpower it grew into IOTL.
Well, as
@Zyobot knows, I do have many ideas regarding a scenario where it transpires that Britain and Germany end up allied, and handily win the
very brief equivalent to the Great War. There's way more to that scenario, but it involves Germany controlling basically all of continental Europe (including most of European Russia, and also Anatolia), while Britain basically gets "ALL the colonies". Meanwhile, America (which has swerved to the Bourbon Democrats earlier and more thoroughly) has rejected imperial ambitions and is turning into a fairly isolationist country, content to mind its own business and engage in lucrative trade with all.
This eventually leads to Britain divesting itself of its vast array of colonies (in a process
mostly far better organised than what happened in OTL), and forming an Alt-Commonwealth instead, turning it into the world's largest economic bloc. But the core of the Empire is retained, in that England, Scotland, Ireland, Canada (now including Greenland and Iceland), Australia and New Zealand are all kingdoms united under the same King-Emperor. Who also happens to own Panama. And the Straits of Gibraltar (on
both sides). And Malta. And the Suez canal & surroundings. And the other end of the Red Sea. (Plus some other islands here and there.)
Which is not a bad position to be in, and the scenario sees the British Empire and the German
Reichsbund eying each other warily as we get further into the 21st century.
Many outcomes and variations are possible in such a context, but I'm heavily implying that Germany is stagnating, and that the challange it faces is restoring dynamism and vitality. We can easily imagine a version of this setting where that fails, and where Britain ends up dismantling the German
Reichsbund entirely. This would turn Britain into an undisputed hegemon over much of the world.
As for what that would look like... the degree of "uninterrupted continuity" (with the 19th century) that is needed for this very premise to work ensures that in some ways, it feels like the 19th century is allowed to continue naturally, without the pre-war world being violently terminated in a water-shed of a crisis like the World Wars. I imagine it as the natural continuation of the world built by Gladstone. The business of the British Empire is
business. With most of the world's ex-colonies far more stable (due to gradual, well-organised decolonisation) and on good economic terms with the West, there's far less migration of non-Westerners to Europe. With Britain still controlling a sizable empire with its own sizable working class, and with Germany controlling all of Eastern Europe (which can provide plenty of labour), there's no labour migration.
So, yes, unlike the American case (where a multi-ethnic set-up is simply a
feature), the "European world" in this case remains almost entirely white. Any internal struggles to be resolved are social, not so much ethnic.